Are supercars reliable??
Discussion
After much browsing and scouring of posts that have been made to this forum and others like it, I've come to the conclusion that people seem to think that un-reliability goes with the supercar turf. Most of you even seem to accept it.
Is this correct?
If I myself, has purchased a car worth over £50k, I would expect to be able to drive it everyday, without ever crossing my fingers before turning the key in the ignition.
Now I know some of you would say, go and buy a Porka. But now Porshce has the image of no longer being a supercar, but an everyday sportscar.
So whats the difference? And is this myth true??
Is this correct?
If I myself, has purchased a car worth over £50k, I would expect to be able to drive it everyday, without ever crossing my fingers before turning the key in the ignition.
Now I know some of you would say, go and buy a Porka. But now Porshce has the image of no longer being a supercar, but an everyday sportscar.
So whats the difference? And is this myth true??
A lot is rubbish,one of the problems with all forums like this is NOBODY is going to start a thread saying "my car didn't break down this week"
The only threads WILL be along the lines of "i've this problem with the car"
This is in total disregard to quantity of cars sold,example tvradict owns a Ford Orion (by no means a sports car) it keeps on breaking down and we here about it,but there are loads that dont but we dont here about them
Having said that the more you stress components the more likely the chances of failure
Edited to say by NOBODY i mean very few people as mrsd will testify
>> Edited by Pies on Saturday 19th July 22:33
The only threads WILL be along the lines of "i've this problem with the car"
This is in total disregard to quantity of cars sold,example tvradict owns a Ford Orion (by no means a sports car) it keeps on breaking down and we here about it,but there are loads that dont but we dont here about them
Having said that the more you stress components the more likely the chances of failure
Edited to say by NOBODY i mean very few people as mrsd will testify
>> Edited by Pies on Saturday 19th July 22:33
Raks said:
Now I know some of you would say, go and buy a Porka. But now Porsche has the image of no longer being a supercar, but an everyday sportscar.
Are you looking for a
I suggest a course of re-education. Get your arse to Bruntingthorpe at the next Graigw organised max out session as my and Derestrictor's guest to experience gut wrenching power slides and accelleration. Medication for the feint hearted is recommended.
DAZ
(I'll run off back to th porker forum now)
Raks said:
After much browsing and scouring of posts that have been made to this forum and others like it, I've come to the conclusion that people seem to think that un-reliability goes with the supercar turf. Most of you even seem to accept it.
Is this correct?
If I myself, has purchased a car worth over £50k, I would expect to be able to drive it everyday, without ever crossing my fingers before turning the key in the ignition.
Now I know some of you would say, go and buy a Porka. But now Porshce has the image of no longer being a supercar, but an everyday sportscar.
So whats the difference? And is this myth true??
Sounds like a man that needs a Honda NSX!
I second dazren's suggestion 
I think my Porker still qualifies ?
What you need to take into account is that many 'supercars' are hand-built in tiny numbers and, as a result, have detail problems that mass production cars simply don't get.
That being said the average Porsche is as (more) reliable than pretty much anything-obviously there are bad cars out there, but this tends to be the result of abuse, rather than being characteristic of the marque.
Moving on to Ferrari. They're Italian, stuff breaks, on a £6000 Seicento, a £30000 Alfa and a £150000+ Ferrari. The modern cars don't often fail to proceed, it's more that things like the windows stop working, or that (owing to their complexity) a minor job on most cars becomes horribly costly-which people tend to complain about. The other problem with Ferrari is that people either want them, or they don't, tending to make the dealers a little complacent.
TVR. Difficult one (speaking as a wannabe, but never was, owner). There are problems with the engines that, for me, would be unacceptable. But people accept them, together with the other 'quirks', because they're getting an experience of performance, character and style that other manufacturers only come close to replicating at twice the price.
Even NSXs (New Sportscar eXperimental after all) are built in tiny numbers and can have their idiocyncracies.
So yes, there are problems with a lot of supercars, but not as severe as you would expect based on some threads as, as Pies says, only the worst problems get flagged up and the years of satisfaction are seldom commented upon.
I think my Porker still qualifies ? What you need to take into account is that many 'supercars' are hand-built in tiny numbers and, as a result, have detail problems that mass production cars simply don't get.
That being said the average Porsche is as (more) reliable than pretty much anything-obviously there are bad cars out there, but this tends to be the result of abuse, rather than being characteristic of the marque.
Moving on to Ferrari. They're Italian, stuff breaks, on a £6000 Seicento, a £30000 Alfa and a £150000+ Ferrari. The modern cars don't often fail to proceed, it's more that things like the windows stop working, or that (owing to their complexity) a minor job on most cars becomes horribly costly-which people tend to complain about. The other problem with Ferrari is that people either want them, or they don't, tending to make the dealers a little complacent.
TVR. Difficult one (speaking as a wannabe, but never was, owner). There are problems with the engines that, for me, would be unacceptable. But people accept them, together with the other 'quirks', because they're getting an experience of performance, character and style that other manufacturers only come close to replicating at twice the price.
Even NSXs (New Sportscar eXperimental after all) are built in tiny numbers and can have their idiocyncracies.
So yes, there are problems with a lot of supercars, but not as severe as you would expect based on some threads as, as Pies says, only the worst problems get flagged up and the years of satisfaction are seldom commented upon.
mrsd said:
TVR. Difficult one (speaking as a wannabe, but never was, owner). There are problems with the engines that, for me, would be unacceptable. But people accept them, together with the other 'quirks', because they're getting an experience of performance, character and style that other manufacturers only come close to replicating at twice the price.
Dad has an AJPV8 Cerb that became his everyday car, its comfy, has air con and isnt much worse on petrol than his old second car. The more its used the better it gets, infact, its more reliable as its used each day IMHO. Its now done some 40k miles - thats commuting weekdays, then sprints/hillclimbs/trackdays at weekends.
Its being used how it should be used, there have been NO engine problems (V8
) and anything that does go wrong (not often at all) is usually solved by changing a fuse. Its what I guess might be considered the cheap and cheerful supercar (ours is worth a fair bit less than 22k). I agree about the Porkers, anything that is that quick - (straights and corners) is definately a supercar. It has all the right porportions, looks, power and (if set free) they dont sound too bad either!
mrsd said:
I second dazren's suggestion
A big
to that one. If you wish to take the porker out for some legal high speed exercise through Englands green and pleasant land, you'd be most welcome to join the usual motley crew of PH hoonatics at Craigw's next Bruntingthorpe session (Date yet to be confirmed) DAZ
Low production volumes coupled with highly stressed components is never going to be a receipe for reliability.
My esprit has cost a lot to run, but then again its not really possible to compare my experience with other super cars unless you can find someone who's done 30k miles in two years in all weathers - ie daily usage. I'm talking ferrari, lambo, nsx here by the way - Daz's 996TT is probably the exception!
Cheers
Rob
Edited to say: Also depends what you mean by "reliable". The esprit has never actually stranded me.. it just costs a lot to maintain.
>> Edited by rob.e on Monday 21st July 12:06
My esprit has cost a lot to run, but then again its not really possible to compare my experience with other super cars unless you can find someone who's done 30k miles in two years in all weathers - ie daily usage. I'm talking ferrari, lambo, nsx here by the way - Daz's 996TT is probably the exception!
Cheers
Rob
Edited to say: Also depends what you mean by "reliable". The esprit has never actually stranded me.. it just costs a lot to maintain.
>> Edited by rob.e on Monday 21st July 12:06
They do different things and both do them very well.
Supercar - earth shattering performance, looks to die for, handling like nothing else and have the ability to put a smile on your face every time you get in it (regardless of whether it starts or not !).
'Normal' Car - starts every time, economical, practical, relatively cheap to run and probably won't put a smile on your face whether it starts or not.
Never the twain shall meet.
>> Edited by pdavison on Monday 21st July 12:47
Supercar - earth shattering performance, looks to die for, handling like nothing else and have the ability to put a smile on your face every time you get in it (regardless of whether it starts or not !).
'Normal' Car - starts every time, economical, practical, relatively cheap to run and probably won't put a smile on your face whether it starts or not.
Never the twain shall meet.
>> Edited by pdavison on Monday 21st July 12:47
You have an interesting problem here.
By using that emotive word supercar - you take yourself down a road where in order to qualify a car for supercar status, it is, by definition, NOT going to be a standard car.
Look at the definition of super..
super-
pref.
Above; over; upon: superimpose.
Superior in size, quality, number, or degree: superfine.
Exceeding a norm: supersaturate.
Excessive in degree or intensity: supersubtle.
Containing a specified ingredient in an unusually high proportion: superphosphate.
More inclusive than a specified category: superorder.
A supercar would tend to fall into the "Superior in degree" catagory IMHO.
Now - how do manufacturers get that "higher degree"? Well, they either design it that way from the ground up, or take a "normal" car and make serious changes to it.
Its the changes that are needed that have the obvious effect of changing the reliability curve for the product as a whole. To quote an often used F1 saying "if the engine lasted for n races you would be n seconds per lap down" - namely that longevity and performance are diametrically opposed goals.
So - can supercars be reliable - yes - of course they can. You simply ensure that the engineering put into the product for the performance ensures that the components are not stressed to a high degree.
Porsche have had 40 years of doing that, and have spent €billions doing so - that is why the 911 TT X50 is one of *the* finest pieces of machines on the planet. Supercar - absolutly - given that a 911TTX50 compared to a "normal" 911 is as different as a Noble M12 is to a Mondeo ST220!
Ferrari are the same - years and years of development. However - their engineering is one of performance, looks and package, not of minimising servicing costs - so if something goes big time then you can expect to pay a lot. If you want engineering to minimise service costs though - buy a mini.
When you look at the smaller manufactuers (TVR, Noble, Marcos etc.) you have to accept that their engineering priorities are different than Porsche's. Conseuqently, they haven't been tested in 6 different continents over 2 years over 100's of different road surfaces - and as such you get a product that is designed to be reliable, rather than designed, tested, modified, retested, redesigned, tested etc. etc.
It's this lack of feedback loop that can sometimes create issues.
However - the Noble has been one of the reliable machines I have had (apart from my own generated 'ahem' issues) - and given its price vs performance point it suits me.
J
By using that emotive word supercar - you take yourself down a road where in order to qualify a car for supercar status, it is, by definition, NOT going to be a standard car.
Look at the definition of super..
super-
pref.
Above; over; upon: superimpose.
Superior in size, quality, number, or degree: superfine.
Exceeding a norm: supersaturate.
Excessive in degree or intensity: supersubtle.
Containing a specified ingredient in an unusually high proportion: superphosphate.
More inclusive than a specified category: superorder.
A supercar would tend to fall into the "Superior in degree" catagory IMHO.
Now - how do manufacturers get that "higher degree"? Well, they either design it that way from the ground up, or take a "normal" car and make serious changes to it.
Its the changes that are needed that have the obvious effect of changing the reliability curve for the product as a whole. To quote an often used F1 saying "if the engine lasted for n races you would be n seconds per lap down" - namely that longevity and performance are diametrically opposed goals.
So - can supercars be reliable - yes - of course they can. You simply ensure that the engineering put into the product for the performance ensures that the components are not stressed to a high degree.
Porsche have had 40 years of doing that, and have spent €billions doing so - that is why the 911 TT X50 is one of *the* finest pieces of machines on the planet. Supercar - absolutly - given that a 911TTX50 compared to a "normal" 911 is as different as a Noble M12 is to a Mondeo ST220!
Ferrari are the same - years and years of development. However - their engineering is one of performance, looks and package, not of minimising servicing costs - so if something goes big time then you can expect to pay a lot. If you want engineering to minimise service costs though - buy a mini.
When you look at the smaller manufactuers (TVR, Noble, Marcos etc.) you have to accept that their engineering priorities are different than Porsche's. Conseuqently, they haven't been tested in 6 different continents over 2 years over 100's of different road surfaces - and as such you get a product that is designed to be reliable, rather than designed, tested, modified, retested, redesigned, tested etc. etc.
It's this lack of feedback loop that can sometimes create issues.
However - the Noble has been one of the reliable machines I have had (apart from my own generated 'ahem' issues
) - and given its price vs performance point it suits me. J
lotusnobles said:
After much browsing and scouring of posts that have been made to this forum and others like it, I've come to the conclusion that people seem to think that un-reliability goes with the supercar turf. Most of you even seem to accept it.
Is this correct?
If I myself, has purchased a car worth over £50k, I would expect to be able to drive it everyday, without ever crossing my fingers before turning the key in the ignition.
Now I know some of you would say, go and buy a Porka. But now Porshce has the image of no longer being a supercar, but an everyday sportscar.
So whats the difference? And is this myth true??
Sounds like a man that needs a Honda NSX!
Hmmmm... Honda NSX
I'm with Mr. Ellis on this one.
The Esprit is expensive to repair, but it's never left me stranded. And as far as reliability goes, every single one of my daily driver crapolamobiles has been by far more unreliable. Granted, they were all driven much more than the Esprit, but I didn't buy the Esprit for the same purposes.
I think the proper answer is, you expect the car to be expensive to maintain, but you definately don't expect it to strand you. I think you'd find in most cases, when someone gets stranded in a supercar it's do to something the owner neglected.
Mike
The Esprit is expensive to repair, but it's never left me stranded. And as far as reliability goes, every single one of my daily driver crapolamobiles has been by far more unreliable. Granted, they were all driven much more than the Esprit, but I didn't buy the Esprit for the same purposes.
I think the proper answer is, you expect the car to be expensive to maintain, but you definately don't expect it to strand you. I think you'd find in most cases, when someone gets stranded in a supercar it's do to something the owner neglected.
Mike
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff