Are today's Supercars "SOFT"?

[crayzayjay]

Ferrucio Lamborghini brought us the Miura. Ferrucio Lamborghini was no dumbass

Im with you on the difference between raw and 'sloppy', as you put it, but i disagree with you that the Enzo and Carrera GT aren't "real supercars". It doesnt get much more real than those two.

[Neutrino]

Well lets not forget that poeple in charge of the companies are mainly accountants. And the vast majority of supercars will go to filthy rich people that just want to show up on TV shows or magazines like People driving them. They could not care less about performance.


On the other hand exotics like GT3 or a Noble, are accesible to upper end middle class(in highly dev contries of course) which are much higher in number that the filthy rich and among them the number of true enthusiasths will be much higher creating a demand for raw cars. So I guess this might be an explanation for the move of "raw" cars into the cheaper category as noted by Layla.

[crayzayjay]

I know what you're trying to say, but who buys a car doesn't change what the the car is.

There has always been some availability of pure drivers' cars at the lower end of the market. Think Caterham - cars dont get any more focused than that. Though the number on offer is increasing ever-rapidly, which can only be a good thing

[Neutrino]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

I know what you're trying to say, but who buys a car doesn't change what the the car is.

There has always been some availability of pure drivers' cars at the lower end of the market. Think Caterham - cars dont get any more focused than that. Though the number on offer is increasing ever-rapidly, which can only be a good thing

no i was not bashing the cars, not even the car manufacturers i was just trying to offer a reason why often the performance is not the 1 one concern with the companies.

as a bussiness major I understand them very well. You build what the market demands even if its a 500K supercar that handles like a trabant

And sadly enought among the super rich there are not enough purists to warrant a raw supercar. On the other hand in the lower price brakets there seems to be more room for such cars.

[juzo1]

interesting thread. the other day i was driving my r33 gtr and came unstuck. it has 285's front and back, and as you all know 4wd, 4ws, lsd, etc etc. it just goes to show even with all its electronic devices it is still very much a drivers car and can bite you in the but if you dont treat it with respect. ps great thread.

[crayzayjay]

Let’s get the definition of a raw supercar straight. My general definition - and you may well disagree with me - is: excessive bhp/ton, ability to switch off TC (or no TC altogether), RWD & manual gearchange. Nowhere within this does drivability at low speeds come into it. Anyone can handle a car at 30, does it make you more of a man if you can put up with lack of comfort?

Back to the debate. Yes, car companies must build what the market wants. There’s no doubt about it. Porsche & Ferrari built the 996 and 360 Modena because they knew the demand would be there. Which it was. But companies like these can't stop there. Their competition is capable of building rival products, which the market also wants, products that may be slightly better or worse. Example: an M3 is capable of competing with a 996. So why the premium on the Carrera? Because it’s a Porsche, and the M3 isn’t. Ferrari and Porsche need to maintain their image, the crucial premium. And that's why they make cars such as the Enzo and Carrera GT. These flagship models are intended to highlight this traditional superiority. Don’t forget, we’re the best. This is what keeps these brands (and their margins) at the top of the automotive pile, a critical factor when even new cars like the Noble M12 are more than capable of living with a GT3 or Challenge Stradale. Desirability. Mystique.

Are the Enzo and Carrera GT based on what the marked demanded? Were investment bankers consulted in the design process? Is Jay Kay to blame for the paddle shift? Come on... Rich fatties buy an Enzo because it's the most expensive, outrageous Ferrari there is. If they had a say in the design process, it wouldn’t have looked like such a monstrosity. But its hideous looks are key to its performance, which is the absolute #1 concern for Ferrari. The Enzo is their vision of the ultimate supercar.
When it comes to the flagship model, Ferrari and Porsche don’t ask the market what it wants, they build what they want to build and produce as many as it suits them to sell. The tycoons of this world may not want a raw supercar, but Ferrari / Porsche will build it, and it’ll sell regardless. Most customers may not drive it like it was intended to be driven, but that’s irrelevant. When it's tested against its rivals, it must come out on top. It can't be too soft, with Ferrari saying "yeah well, that's what the fatties wanted. we could have made it better if we wanted to".

So, in conclusion, Ferrari and Porsche need to build the Enzo and Carrera GT to set the standard, to show off their engineering prowess. But this isn’t quite enough. These cars are accessible to too few. There’s no point in boasting a capability to build a phenomenal car but only offer it to the ludicrously rich. That’s where the GT3, 360 CS come in. These cars are within the reach of many more people, meet the true enthusiasts’ requirements, and maintain the desirability and premium for all Porsches & Ferraris.

[Mr Payne]

Let's not kid ourselves. Both the Carrera GT and the Enzo make concessions to their buyers. It's called leather seating. It's called reasonable interior appointments. It's called engines that last longer than 1000km, or 10000km. No major manufacturer can choose to ignore these demands. The F40 is probably the last true "raw" car built by a major manufacturer. While now the Mosler MT900 Photon would probably be the best description of a "raw" car.

[freakonaleash1187]

like crayzayjay said, it doesnt matter if a car is comfortable or not that makes it raw, its how hard you have to drive the car that makes it raw. (at least thats what i got out of his definition). so if a car has leather seating, the doesnt make it un-raw. what do you want, to sit on plastic seats. but thats just what i think.

[Mr Payne]

How much bhp/ton does it take to meet your definition? Is a Z06 a raw car?

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by Mr Payne

Let's not kid ourselves. Both the Carrera GT and the Enzo make concessions to their buyers. It's called leather seating. It's called reasonable interior appointments. It's called engines that last longer than 1000km, or 10000km. No major manufacturer can choose to ignore these demands. The F40 is probably the last true "raw" car built by a major manufacturer. While now the Mosler MT900 Photon would probably be the best description of a "raw" car.

You're right, let's not kid ourselves! These concessions are inline with what's expected for road-going supercars and fairly insignificant when you consider that an Enzo still develops 485bhp/ton and a Carrera GT 445bhp/ton. Much more power than that simply isnt usable. Schumacher supposedly couldnt lap faster with TC switched off on the Enzo than when it was switched on due to insane wheelspin. Engines that last 1,000km? Are you kidding me!?! What else do you want? A pit crew?
"The F40 is the last raw car built by a manufacturer?" An F50's not raw? A 964 RS isnt raw? A 993 GT2's not raw? The GT3 RS isnt raw? The 360 A Carrera GT isn't raw? The paddle-shift may dent the Enzo's purity of design but the car's dynamics are still focused and pretty damned raw.

To answer your last post, for me anything over 300bhp/ton is very potent though it's really the behaviour and setup of a car that makes it "raw",and not how much power it has. I dont know enough about the Z06 to tell you whether i think it's raw or not.
But I think we have a fairly similar definition of the term except that you're a little more extreme. I'll allow a leather interior on my Carrera GT, knowing that the marginal extra weight it puts on is pretty insignificant. It doesnt change the car's character and as long as i'm not lapping Silverstone against a field of 20 other Carrera GT's, i couldnt care less.

[Mr Payne]

Yes, I want a pit crew!

[moslerporschefreak]

I would agree with what has been said earlier by some of the longer posting members. Porsches have always been more tame than Ferraris and no matter how good a driver you think you are, the Enzo can still scare even Dario. Furthermore, there is a plethora of other car companies that offer no frill rides. My favorite of these as you can tell by the name is Mosler. But as previously stated there is TVR, Noble, ultima, etc. And if you still aren't convinced that the Enzo could anyways own you, there will soon be the 6000GT.

So if you think the Euro aristocracy of cars is becoming soft, then either look for a smaller production car or look for homologation cars (liek the 600GT and Mosler).

If you still want something more, and if you have the money, every once in a while you'll see a R8 for sale, or you could buy a 5-6 year old F1 car and as Clarkson said "a strand of Schumacher's DNA"

I can only hope that I someday become a good enough driver to call a 200k+ Ferrari "soft"

Still, again, a good thread.