Tuesday 5th March 2019

Ginetta Akula: Geneva 2019

It's the Russian word for 'shark' if you were wondering. And it's £340,000 in the UK

---

Ginetta's new 583hp supercar has been unveiled at the Geneva show. Alongside confirmation that the all-new model will cost £340,000 in Britain, chairman Lawrence Tomlinson also revealed that it will be called Akula - the Russian word for 'shark'. Appropriately for a machine that shares its name with a class of attack submarines, the show car appeared in Typhoon Black. Set to make production in 2020, and 'designed from a blank sheet of paper' it is intended to deliver 'an utterly capable supercar' based on the lessons learnt in the firm's extensive racing experience.

Its maker claims that every aspect of the car has been optimised thanks to the no-compromise approach. The dry-sumped, 90-degree V8 is constructed from a single aluminium billet block, features bespoke throttle bodies and is said to be mounted much further back than in 'conventional supercars'. It is mated to a six-speed sequential gearbox, and delivers 525lb ft of torque to the rear wheels.

A bespoke carbon tub provides the car with its backbone, which comes attached to double wishbone front suspension and pushrod-operated double wishbone rear. There are Alcon ceramic discs and the tyres, which are wrapped around 19-inch front and 20-inch rear wheels, are Michelin Pilot Sport 4s. This rubber was chosen for its effectiveness on road, suggesting that the car's extreme appearance might not be accompanied by a scary demeanour.

That being said, it comes wrapped in a rather exotic carbon body shaped by Ginetta's racing expertise. Indeed it's claimed that the new model makes 376kg of downforce at 100mph, or just five per cent less than the brand's LMP3 car. All in it weighs just 1,150kg, giving it a power-to-weight ratio of over 550hp per tonne, while distribution of mass is said to be 49% front and 51% rear. No need to explain the potential of those numbers on PH.

Additional points of interest include hydraulic steering (operated via a carbon wheel), an adjustable pedal box and scope for "balancing the car on the throttle" that "requires no electronic aids." Although there is traction control, ABS, parking sensors, a reversing camera, wireless phone charging and, somewhat incredibly, a 675-litre boot.

Tomlinson commented: "I have felt for a long time there was a gap in the market at around the £400k price point for a genuinely low production number supercar, with proper craftsmanship and true race derived know-how and technology." The closest alternative that comes to mind at the moment is the Noble M600, also boasting a heck of a lot of power and not much weight, albeit without the motorsport influence. All other suggestions are more than welcome...

Speaking at the show, Tomlinson added: "The concept behind the Akula was to build something truly individual, something that other brands cannot do due to corporate constraints. Designed to cut through the air like a shark through water, the car unquestionably means business, and I'm proud to be manufacturing a car of such significance in the UK." Owners will be fitted to a seat for their car, invited to track tests and taken through "a bespoke specification programme with myriad configuration options available." Ginetta confirmed to PH that 14 examples of the 20-car allocation are already spoken for.

---

[RacerMike]

Well it's certainly different.....

[RacerMike]

BigChiefmuffinAgain said:

I've often wondered, when it comes to "challenging" car designs, whether the people launching it already knew it was a bit "alternative" or whether they are genuinely surprised by negative reaction.

Is it like "Gosh - I hadn't really thought of that before ?" or have they all been sitting in various design meetings, all holding doubts but no one has been willing to speak up and say "You know guys, I think we may have taken a bit of a wrong turn here..."

I suspect it's sometimes a lack of experience and/or experienced people. You often find that companies that have come from a racing background (i.e. managed by engineers) don't understand the importance of aesthetics over function. A good car design has to be a compromise between engineering and design and knowing how to balance this takes a lot of experience, and some strong leadership. I suspect it's why McLaren have a long standing struggle with aesthetics. They are too heavily biased towards engineering and as such things like the Senna exist. Some senior people will have sat in a meeting and said....yes we could have that looking a bit nicer but we'll lose 2% of the aero efficiency and that's unacceptable. The reality is of course no one that owns the car would ever notice the 2% difference to the aero, but they will notice the goping hole in the side of it.

It's always a balancing act. If design had their way, the car would have no doors, 33in wheels and 8 exhausts that exit onto the windscreen and melt the wiper blades. But that's where the experience comes in. At the long established car companies, there's a good balance of leadership that knows how to balance the design/engineering and marketing requirements.

[RacerMike]

Maldini35 said:

RacerMike said:

BigChiefmuffinAgain said:

I've often wondered, when it comes to "challenging" car designs, whether the people launching it already knew it was a bit "alternative" or whether they are genuinely surprised by negative reaction.

Is it like "Gosh - I hadn't really thought of that before ?" or have they all been sitting in various design meetings, all holding doubts but no one has been willing to speak up and say "You know guys, I think we may have taken a bit of a wrong turn here..."

I suspect it's sometimes a lack of experience and/or experienced people. You often find that companies that have come from a racing background (i.e. managed by engineers) don't understand the importance of aesthetics over function. A good car design has to be a compromise between engineering and design and knowing how to balance this takes a lot of experience, and some strong leadership. I suspect it's why McLaren have a long standing struggle with aesthetics. They are too heavily biased towards engineering and as such things like the Senna exist. Some senior people will have sat in a meeting and said....yes we could have that looking a bit nicer but we'll lose 2% of the aero efficiency and that's unacceptable. The reality is of course no one that owns the car would ever notice the 2% difference to the aero, but they will notice the goping hole in the side of .

Nice theory....but total BS

Care to elaborate why you think it's BS? I work for an OEM by the way. You may well do too, but I'm never a fan of one sentence replies like this. If you have an alternative viewpoint, express it. If you don't, why bother commenting!

[RacerMike]

isaldiri said:

Maldini35 said:

Nice theory....but total BS

You 2 need to get a room, one inevitably has a pop at Mclaren and one very swiftly appears to defend Mclaren against anything

Ah. Have I had a similar argument with him before? I very rarely look at usernames, and could probably only name 2 or 3 that I see regularly :S

[RacerMike]

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

Because absolutely every car sale ever involved marketing of some description. People buy the idea of a brand/looks of a car/lifestyle/perceived image. Whether they admit it or not.

Do any of the things you mention also really make it a great car? Who knows? But cars are complicated things that are rarely bought for entirely objective reasons.

The items you’ve listed are the perfect PistonHeads car. But here lies proof that if you made the perfect PistonHeads car, no one would buy it. They just think they would when they pick apart everything else (but secretly buy an auto 135i because it had a great PCP deal they couldn’t ignore)