Specialist Sports Cars & The Average Punter

[otolith]

I was reading the TVR threads and was reminded of two attitudes that seem to pop up whenever low(er) volume sports cars are mentioned on here;

1. The average man on the street wouldn't like that, it isn't just like his Golf, it would be better if it were more conventional.

2. That looks expensive compared to a car which is just like a Golf.

(in this context you can take "Golf" to mean "any generic mass produced car")

If I popped up on the wine thread and said that everything would be better if it tasted more like Jacob's Creek, because that's what most people like, or on the whisky thread to say that Talisker would be much better if it tasted like Bells, because lots of people find a peaty whisky clashes with Coke, or on the watch forum to point out that some chronometer made in small numbers by hand should be priced against a Swatch... Well, I'd just look like a berk.

Recession or not, I find it very hard to believe that in a global marketplace with more car consumers than ever before there are so few people who want something a bit special that there is no room to manufacture something a bit different and turn a profit doing so. It used to be possible from a much smaller pool of consumers.

Is it really the case that everything has to be compromised to make it acceptable to the average punter?

[V88Dicky]

To the average punter, their white VAG diesel S-Line is something special.

[Codswallop]

I doubt there is any other product that has to pander to quite as many disparate laws, regulations, local fashion/ design cultures, and is quite so expensive to design and produce as a car intended for a global market, hence it is often difficult to get economies of scale even across a wide potential market.

Furthermore, I highly doubt that all of the people who buy Porsches, M-Power cars etc are driving enthusiasts, but rather make those purchases as a status symbol, and for such punters a specialist niche product is no good in all likelyhood.

[Chrisw666]

Fashion is about having what everyone else has.

A £10-30k mass produced fashion car has much more chance of succeeding than a £50k bespoke sports car.

Looking at what enthusiasts think of auto or clutchless gearboxes versus the number of new super cars sold with such gearboxes it's clear that more cars are bought new by those who want to be seen in it than those who want to really drive it.

[otolith]

Codswallop said:

Furthermore, I highly doubt that all of the people who buy Porsches, M-Power cars etc are driving enthusiast, but rather make those purchases as a status symbol, and for such punters a specialist niche product is no good in all likelyhood.

Which is fine, most people will buy mainstream cars, that's why they're called mainstream. There were 60 million cars sold worldwide last year, though. Surely out of that many sales there is room for a handful of manufacturers selling a couple of thousand niche cars each?

[icetea]

Chrisw666 said:

Looking at what enthusiasts think of auto or clutchless gearboxes versus the number of new super cars sold with such gearboxes it's clear that more cars are bought new by those who want to be seen in it than those who want to really drive it.

Absolute nonsense.

I will only buy auto mode super cars as I actually want to be able to drive them every day... not leave them stuck in the garage when I go into the city or go somewhere I know there will be a traffic jam.

[kambites]

Welcome to the PH of 2012.

With the number of accounts on PH these days, I think it's inevitable that it becomes much more mainstream, and in practice that means filling up with the S-line/M-sport brigade.

[Ozzie Osmond]

otolith said:

I find it very hard to believe that in a global marketplace with more car consumers than ever before there are so few people who want something a bit special that there is no room to manufacture something a bit different and turn a profit doing so.

I think the problem is this - we all want something a bit special but also properly designed, engineered and built. It is impossible to deliver this at a low volume of sales because the R&D costs more than can be spread over the small number of vehicles sold whilst retaining a sensible price point. Pagani and Bugatti don't care because they can charge a high enough price to a small handful of super-rich customers.

The people trying hardest have been Lotus, and regrettably we can see the amount of trouble it's given them. Even when they were building the Lotus Carlton as part of GM they had to start with a complete Carlton from a real factory and then dismantle it so cost was astranomical.

Today cars like the 911, Z4 and MX-5 set benchmarks which make any specialist sportscar venture almost suicidal.

[Chrisw666]

icetea said:

Absolute nonsense.

I will only buy auto mode super cars as I actually want to be able to drive them every day... not leave them stuck in the garage when I go into the city or go somewhere I know there will be a traffic jam.

Where I'd want to swear at the clutch for being heavy and awkward (I also don't live in a part of the world where heavy traffic is something I encounter daily).

I should be criticising you for having more than one when you can only drive one at a time, you should be helping the needy by lending one to people with normal cars

[daemonoid]

I love different cars, it's always one of my buying criteria - "must not be many around".

TVR have a problem in that they're not cars for rich people as they're too cheap to show off to your rich mates. But, they're too expensive for the average punter to run. Plus, top gear said they're unreliable so no one will want one as a daily driver.

Slightly away from the sports, but in the affordable different range the problem is that as soon as something different becomes popular it's no longer different. The new Fiat 500 was different for a while until absolutely everyone in the world bought one. The Ka went the same way. If it doesn't become popular then it's considered a massive failure.

Car manufacturers know they can produce a "me too" vehicle and can predict sales very easily. If they go for unusual it's a massive risk, they could have a fiat 500 level success, but they could easily have a multipla. It takes a brave exec to gamble with their job like that.

[GT03ROB]

otolith said:

Is it really the case that everything has to be compromised to make it acceptable to the average punter?

The average punter couldn't give 2 hoots. They want something simple, that goes from A-B, cheaply, reliably without fuss.

Most people remember buy wine as red or white and pick the cheapest!

[otolith]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Today cars like the 911, Z4 and MX-5 set benchmarks which make any specialist sportscar venture almost suicidal.

I was sitting in the TVR Tuscan on the Mer stand at Goodwood the other week, and it felt massively more special than any of those. Those cars (especially the 911), excellent as they are, major on being painless to commute in and not too wacky to scare the shy and retiring, and it takes away the theatre.

[hairykrishna]

Chrisw666 said:

Looking at what enthusiasts think of auto or clutchless gearboxes versus the number of new super cars sold with such gearboxes it's clear that more cars are bought new by those who want to be seen in it than those who want to really drive it.

What a daft comment. Do they fit clutchless boxes to racing cars so the drivers can pose? Just because someone prefers different things to you, it doesn't make them any less of a car enthusiast.

[BrewsterBear]

With regard to double clutch supercars I've been converted. They're a revelation and actually allow you to have more fun than a manual. If you're pressing on into a long corner you can't dip the clutch and select another gear as you'll lose traction. With, say, a PDK you can upshift mid-corner with no loss of propulsion and really fly out of it.

I hear what people say about it being less involving - hell, I own a 30 year old 911 - but in modern machinery it makes no sense to have a manual gearbox anymore. I suppose that means I'm not a true petrolhead now?

[kambites]

BrewsterBear said:

I hear what people say about it being less involving - hell, I own a 30 year old 911 - but in modern machinery it makes no sense to have a manual gearbox anymore. I suppose that means I'm not a true petrolhead now?

Nah, it probably just means you'e getting old and want things to be as easy as possible.

Can't stand automated gearboxes in sports cars, but it's fast getting to the point where there is no other choice.

[hairykrishna]

doogz said:

What racing cars don't have clutches?

I assume he meant clutchless in the sense of not having a clutch pedal. There aren't many supercars without a clutch either.

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

hairykrishna said:

...Just because someone prefers different things to you, it doesn't make them any less of a car enthusiast.

That's true - there are enthusiasts who enjoy the interaction with the mechanics of the vehicle, and lots of people who seem to care about the number of milliseconds a gearchange takes.