[ssrock64]

Still unofficial and not announced, but the Koenigsegg One just completed the Nordschleife in 6:45.91 on street legal rubber, expecting a press conference soon. How that for throwing down a gauntlet? Bugger, that thing has to be biblically fast, like driving an exploding powder keg.

That's a second and a half faster than the Zonda R; if it's confirmed it'll be a new production-car record.

 

[veyrongatti]

  You could argue the opposite in modern times, though. Mercedes-Benzes are some of the most common cars on German roads, making up the majority of Germany's taxis and commercial vehicles. They're also much more common as personal cars than Americans assume, since they're marketed purely as luxury cars here.
 
Meanwhile, Volkswagen's whole strategy today is focused on fiercely expanding into new markets. The current-gen Jetta is famous for having gotten worse over the last generation as efforts were made to cheapen and Americanize the car. Most of VW's project development money goes into models for developing countries, whereas MB focuses on creating high-quality cars across multiple segments and price points. And that's the German way.
 
 

VW is just making the same mistake MB did a decade ago, The American made M class and the South African made C class was highly notoriously unreliable. In fact we can compare the Jetta to the Last gen C class or the current gen M Class. All brands have a black sheep in their range. 
 
Even Toyota made the same mistake by growing too fast and did not relise this until a couple of years ago (hence the recalls), this is called "growing pains" and one cannot discount a brand as ungerman simply because they are attempting to expand quickly. These are simply business approaches between 2 different Geman companies and we cannot call them ungerman for choosing to expand rapidly. In fact one can question what is the German Way? There are many answers to that questing and your idea of the German way can differ from mine. 

 Anyways VW doesn't make any exciting car of note but they do make some solid and boring cars....... 

 

[Magick Man]

The LFA and GTR simply have no soul - they are fast and technically great cars - but they don't stir my loins like a Porsche, Ferarri, Lambo, McLaren, etc. And, truth be told, I'm not really a big fan of the typical modern supercar styling that looks like it escaped from a new episode of Battlestar Galactica (eg, Pagani). I can appreciate them, but I don't really love them. It's the same reason I think modern F1 cars are horribly ugly. I keep thinking the engineering design still isn't optimized on those cars, because an optimal design simply shouldn't be that butt ugly...

Of course, when you think about it, those designs really are NOT optimal - they have to be compromised for "safety" rules...

That comes around to the supercar debate, and what constitutes one. It's not just bombing down the road or track at 150+mph, there's a presence (that "soul"), a sense of theater that goes along with it. The GTR and LFA are sports cars, albeit very fast ones, but they aren't striking and/or crazy. The 458, 12C, Gallardo, R8, and 911 Turbo are exotic sports cars, but aren't supercars either. There's a level of exclusivity required and those are all mass produced. To me the prototypical supercar, in terms of modern cars, is the Aventador. Cars that are relatively easy to use as daily drivers don't count, on a certain level you have to conform to a supercar and learn its ways, and flaws, then celebrate them. I've mentioned it before, but there's no way I'd want to drive an Aventador in traffic every day, I'd go crazy. It isn't made to do that and subsequently it does it poorly. However, on a rural highway it's an dramatic event and is more fun than almost anything else out there.

 

[Hutnicks]

That comes around to the supercar debate, and what constitutes one. It's not just bombing down the road or track at 150+mph, there's a presence (that "soul"), a sense of theater that goes along with it. The GTR and LFA are sports cars, albeit very fast ones, but they aren't striking and/or crazy. The 458, 12C, Gallardo, R8, and 911 Turbo are exotic sports cars, but aren't supercars either. There's a level of exclusivity required and those are all mass produced. To me the prototypical supercar, in terms of modern cars, is the Aventador. Cars that are relatively easy to use as daily drivers don't count, on a certain level you have to conform to a supercar and learn its ways, and flaws, then celebrate them. I've mentioned it before, but there's no way I'd want to drive an Aventador in traffic every day, I'd go crazy. It isn't made to do that and subsequently it does it poorly. However, on a rural highway it's an dramatic event and is more fun than almost anything else out there.

In that case I think there are actually a few vehicles masquerading as supercars which are more in what could be called the super GT class. Conforming to the supercar charter you outlined above but far to "well behaved" or lacking road personality. If the drivers relationship with the car requires no symbiosis can it really be super?
I really am coming to grips with my biases herethough. I've never considered the 911 Turbo an exotic

 

[ssrock64]

That comes around to the supercar debate, and what constitutes one. It's not just bombing down the road or track at 150+mph, there's a presence (that "soul"), a sense of theater that goes along with it. The GTR and LFA are sports cars, albeit very fast ones, but they aren't striking and/or crazy. The 458, 12C, Gallardo, R8, and 911 Turbo are exotic sports cars, but aren't supercars either. There's a level of exclusivity required and those are all mass produced. To me the prototypical supercar, in terms of modern cars, is the Aventador. Cars that are relatively easy to use as daily drivers don't count, on a certain level you have to conform to a supercar and learn its ways, and flaws, then celebrate them. I've mentioned it before, but there's no way I'd want to drive an Aventador in traffic every day, I'd go crazy. It isn't made to do that and subsequently it does it poorly. However, on a rural highway it's an dramatic event and is more fun than almost anything else out there.

I have a broader definition of a supercar, but I do understand where you're coming from. In my opinion, production numbers and daily-driving capabilities don't really matter when it comes to the classification. I do agree that the GTR and LFA lack the emotion to be called supercars, but I'd call anything that stirs the soul, goes fast, and looks the part a supercar, regardless of how many exist or whether you can drive it on regular roads without displeasure.

 

[billybob_jcv]

I guess I would ask the question in reverse, how is the 911 Turbo *not* an exotic sportscar? Go back to the introduction of the 911 Turbo in 1975. The engine was in the back, it was turbocharged when very few cars used turbos, it had the whale tail and bulging fenders before all the me-too! cars, and it was very, very quick.

I have said before that a car should be judged based on it's introduction, not against current cars. But in the above paragraph, I was talking about the 1975 911 Turbo/930.

Now consider the 991 Turbo - I might agree the "exotic" tag could get dropped, if you only consider looks and horsepower. However, the technology underneath the car is still pretty darn exotic - active rear steering, 7-speed manual gearbox and more computer power than the KITT.

All it's missing is the red strobe light...

 

[Hutnicks]

I guess I would ask the question in reverse, how is the 911 Turbo *not* an exotic sportscar? Go back to the introduction of the 911 Turbo in 1975. The engine was in the back, it was turbocharged when very few cars used turbos, it had the whale tail and bulging fenders before all the me-too! cars, and it was very, very quick.

I have said before that a car should be judged based on it's introduction, not against current cars. But in the above paragraph, I was talking about the 1975 911 Turbo/930.

Now consider the 991 Turbo - I might agree the "exotic" tag could get dropped, if you only consider looks and horsepower. However, the technology underneath the car is still pretty darn exotic - active rear steering, 7-speed manual gearbox and more computer power than the KITT.

Hey i told you I was prejudiced

 
I've just always viewed the turbo as exactly that, a 911 with turbochargers. It was evolutionary rather than revolutionary so I view it as sitting in the same stable as the other 911 variants. I really don't want to turn this into a Stuart hates VAP thread though. Someone might have IBS or something

 

[Magick Man]

I have a broader definition of a supercar, but I do understand where you're coming from. In my opinion, production numbers and daily-driving capabilities don't really matter when it comes to the classification. I do agree that the GTR and LFA lack the emotion to be called supercars, but I'd call anything that stirs the soul, goes fast, and looks the part a supercar, regardless of how many exist or whether you can drive it on regular roads without displeasure.

I can go with that, to me it's "poster material", or what stirs the blood, then you add heaps of insane performance. It doesn't have to be "beautiful", but it must be unforgettable, striking. Hell, an Enzo isn't even attractive in a traditional sense, in fact at certain angles it's rather ugly (much like the personality of the man it's named for), but it always leaves a lasting impression and a sense of awe. It's like how Lady Gaga isn't pretty but still exudes metric tonnes of sex appeal. One car I want, I'm waiting for depreciation to take it down a little more, is the RR Phantom coupe. Like the Brooklands, it isn't a sports car but it IS a supercar, it's the modern automotive summit for those who are crazy for Dick Tracy and art deco.

I guess I would ask the question in reverse, how is the 911 Turbo *not* an exotic sportscar? Go back to the introduction of the 911 Turbo in 1975. The engine was in the back, it was turbocharged when very few cars used turbos, it had the whale tail and bulging fenders before all the me-too! cars, and it was very, very quick.

I have said before that a car should be judged based on it's introduction, not against current cars. But in the above paragraph, I was talking about the 1975 911 Turbo/930.

Now consider the 991 Turbo - I might agree the "exotic" tag could get dropped, if you only consider looks and horsepower. However, the technology underneath the car is still pretty darn exotic - active rear steering, 7-speed manual gearbox and more computer power than the KITT.

All it's missing is the red strobe light...

Hey i told you I was prejudiced

I've just always viewed the turbo as exactly that, a 911 with turbochargers. It was evolutionary rather than revolutionary so I view it as sitting in the same stable as the other 911 variants. I really don't want to turn this into a Stuart hates VAP thread though. Someone might have IBS or something

There are major differences; body dimensions (the Turbo has a substantially wider track), the powertrain itself is hand-built (balanced and blueprinted), and the internals of the engine are all designed specifically with forced induction in mind (even down to the slightly concave pistons), the transmission and diff(s) are much more durable, larger brakes, more aggressive engine management, and all the added aero that actually works. All of those things, but when you switch it from Track to Road it's just as calm as a stock Carrera. Correct that, it's noticeably more supple and comfortable than an NA 911. Few cars change character so dramatically when you change modes, it's a different car, the 12C is another as is the R8, some you can't notice much at all until you flog them, like the 458 or Carrera GT's chrono (just subtly changes engine timing and throttle response).

The 997 Turbo is the peak of what Porsche could do in analog, and the 997>991 was another transition, much like the 993>996 before. They've cut out the critical piece of driver involvement with the 991 and that's a sad thing, and I'm not just talking about the overbearing ESC system and lack of a MT, though those are a large part of it. Like the 12C and GTR, it's more Xbox than car, and while it's faster it quickly becomes boring. :confused_face: We've discussed swapping the 7-spd MT in my 991 Carrera S with a Getrag 6, but frankly that's just the tip of the iceberg and not worth the effort. It's better to just accept that it's really not a sports car anymore. My wife has claimed it anyway, and it's a safe car for her as is. Maybe the GT3 RS or GT2 will recapture some of what's been lost, I don't know.

 

[Hutnicks]

I can go with that, to me it's "poster material", or what stirs the blood, then you add heaps of insane performance. It doesn't have to be "beautiful", but it must be unforgettable, striking. Hell, an Enzo isn't even attractive in a traditional sense, in fact at certain angles it's rather ugly (much like the personality of the man it's named for), but it always leaves a lasting impression and a sense of awe. It's like how Lady Gaga isn't pretty but still exudes metric tonnes of sex appeal. One car I want, I'm waiting for depreciation to take it down a little more, is the RR Phantom coupe. Like the Brooklands, it isn't a sports car but it IS a supercar, it's the modern automotive summit for those who are crazy for Dick Tracy and art deco.

There are major differences; body dimensions (the Turbo has a substantially wider track), the powertrain itself is hand-built (balanced and blueprinted), and the internals of the engine are all designed specifically with forced induction in mind (even down to the slightly concave pistons), the transmission and diff(s) are much more durable, larger brakes, more aggressive engine management, and all the added aero that actually works. All of those things, but when you switch it from Track to Road it's just as calm as a stock Carrera. Correct that, it's noticeably more supple and comfortable than an NA 911. Few cars change character so dramatically when you change modes, it's a different car, the 12C is another as is the R8, some you can't notice much at all until you flog them, like the 458 or Carrera GT's chrono (just subtly changes engine timing and throttle response).

The 997 Turbo is the peak of what Porsche could do in analog, and the 997>991 was another transition, much like the 993>996 before. They've cut out the critical piece of driver involvement with the 991 and that's a sad thing, and I'm not just talking about the overbearing ESC system and lack of a MT, though those are a large part of it. Like the 12C and GTR, it's more Xbox than car, and while it's faster it quickly becomes boring.

We've discussed swapping the 7-spd MT in my 991 Carrera S with a Getrag 6, but frankly that's just the tip of the iceberg and not worth the effort. It's better to just accept that it's really not a sports car anymore. My wife has claimed it anyway, and it's a safe car for her as is. Maybe the GT3 RS or GT2 will recapture some of what's been lost, I don't know.

I am kinda familiar with the turbo. Yes it had upgraded braking and suspension work etc. Still, it's just the last evolution of the 911 type. Is it exotic? I don't see it. I saw it for what it was, a filter down of racing technology distilled for the street by  a company who's commercial success was so tied to the identification of that particular body style that they became trapped by it.
For a company that produced vehicles of such stunning beauty as the 904 and 908 to get tied to the bug shape bewilders me to this very day.
A 904 with that turbo motor and some modern updating would truly have been exotic.

 

[Magick Man]

From a performance standpoint the 911 Turbo is quite exotic, anything with a 0-60 that tickles 3 seconds is well beyond the norm. In appearance it turns heads as well, though not like an Aston Martin or Ferrari. It's more about degrees, but I'd call a 911 Turbo an exotic sports car, but not a supercar, much like a Lotus Exige.

Speaking of, today I ordered an Exige S V6, because I heard that they're soon going to leave the US market (again), and possibly stop selling it all-together. I know that buying one car is a whole lot of "too little, too late" but aside from wanting one for a long time now, I want them to know how much I appreciate them as a car company and what they've done for the whole industry. I'm not sure if this marks the last days of them as a production car builder and turning their focus to only making race cars, but it wouldn't be a great stretch to think so. Anyhow, I meant to do this earlier but I've had things to do.

 

[HideousPride]

Hey Magick and Co.!

Long time lurker, very occasional poster. Have a car question and thought this would be the place to ask. About 2 years out of college now and have enough saved up to where I'd like to buy something I wouldn't be worried to take on long distance drives.

Looking for something in the high teens, low twenties that is fun to drive and has affordable maintenance costs/doesn't break down as long as you get routine check ups. Totally open to the idea of used cars as well if that makes a difference. I've been looking at a Mazda 3 because I enjoyed a recent test drive immensely, but wanted to ask a more knowledgable crowd about other options that I might have missed.

 

[ssrock64]

Mazda was a good place to start, especially if you liked your test drive. Recent reports have shown that cost of ownership is lowest among Mazda models in the United States than among any other brand. However, as with any small brand, you want to make sure that your local dealer is moving enough stock to still be in business five years from now. We had a Mazda dealer shut down locally two years ago, and anybody who bought a car from them has to go over an hour out of their way if they want a dealership service.

 

[ag8908]

Any prius people in this thread? My prius can beat a lot of european sports cars from the 60s/70s in 0-60.

 

[ssrock64]

  Any prius people in this thread? My prius can pretty much smoke an european sports car from the 60s/70s, except for lambos/ferraris (not some dinos though I can beat some of those) and porsches.

As much as that might objectively be true to a certain extent, I don't think you're going to get any love here.
 
I'd much rather be going full-blast 90MPH in an AC Ace than in a Prius. One is just so boring, and I bet you can guess which one it is.

 

[ag8908]

no prius people in this thread at all?
 
actually i was wrong about the dino; it's not as bad as I thought it was, although I hear it's still really bad.