Modern Supercars are Boring.

"JGrabowMSt" (jgrabowmst) 01/10/2015 at 19:45 • Filed to: supercars, getoffmylawn

9

20

With the Zora finally reaching a point where we are seeing prototypes and test mules, I think it's time to step back and find out what happened.

The automotive industry has been a wild roller coaster ride of ups and downs with designs and horsepower, colors and shapes, and fantasy fighting with fiction. Many years ago Infiniti had a poster (which I have made sure to keep in a very safe place) that has always poked at the current industry.

Now, in a sense, I find it ironic, because Infiniti is not known for making cars that really stand out or are exceptionally special. They don't make a supercar, they hardly even have a sports car (is the G37x even really a sports car?), so it certainly took some gonads from their marketing people to make this poster.

It starts with a pretty simple question:

Where are the cars that we were promised?

Infiniti put this out at a time when they were releasing the i30. Now, the i30 was no looker, performer or anything worth swooning over.

It was an i30. It was the car you bought because buying a Toyota made you look poor, cheap or both. Plenty of people drive used examples today, and when one drives past you, you pay about as much attention to it as most other econoboxes.

But lets not make this about the i30, this is a question about where are the cars we were promised.

The concept cars that promised futures of exciting cars ended up being so very different from what we were actually given.

Does this mean I'm disappointed by cars like the Zora concept, or other mid engined supercars? No, even my girlfriend swoons over the McLaren P1. She wants it in white with black accents because it just looks so good. Mid engined super cars are nothing new, we've had them since the Miura. And if we're being honest, anyone who wouldn't have a go in a Miura and be smiling ear to ear is someone who shouldn't be allowed to be around one. My problem is not with super cars, nor is it with the Zora. My problem is with things we try and call "traditional."

"Traditional super car buyers." I'm not even okay with that statement, but not because I disagree. I'm not okay with it because there shouldn't be a "traditional super car buyer." That makes the foolish assumption that super cars are a dime a dozen, or there's a formula for them. There isn't. There can't be. There should never be.

People have tastes. I'm certainly not the biggest fan of every car that shows up at my local Cars & Coffee, and by all accounts, that should be the biggest collection of super cars you could ever put together. Not necessarily my local one specifically, but just in general. There are people I'm familiar with that I get along great with, and our only connection is appreciating the cars, and there's plenty of people who I don't really get along with. Not because they're bad people, but because we have different tastes in cars.

In a way that couldn't possibly be shown any better, a photographer showed how !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . Should they? What's exciting about about the best, fastest and most exciting race cars anymore if they all look almost the same?

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The super car world needs a shakedown. Not because the cars aren't fast, and not because the cars don't look good, but because the cars aren't unique anymore. As the owner of an R129 Mercedes SL600, I can certainly and firmly say that it's definitely not the most exciting car to see driving by. It is however, one of the most jaw dropping cars at some shows when I sneak up to park with the other fancy super cars. I couldn't walk away from it easily last October when I managed to park up with the really ritzy people, because it stood out. The engine was in the front . It was a V12 . It didn't fit in with all the other cars, it was one of the only Mercedes cars there, it was one of only a couple V12 cars, but it was older. It was late 1980's and early 1990's styling. It's boxy, and it certainly doesn't look nearly as good next to a GT-R as it does compared to say another 1990's styled car, but what was more exciting was that people noticed it because it was different.

With so many so called "super cars" sticking the engine in the back, having a low slung, short front end, super wide rear tires, and a side profile look that you could draw blindfolded a million times in a row, it means something isn't going right. These cars need something different. Of course we want our cars designed as efficiently as possible, but some rules need to be broken. They need to be broken soon .

The Lexus LFA has a V10 up front, rear wheel drive, and side view mirrors that help channel the air exactly where it needs to go around the car. The Camaro ZL1 has the "flow-tie" front badge, and vented hood with some of the largest tires on all four corners of any car out there. The new Corvette Z06 has the horsepower of the previous generation ZR1 in a stiffer, more aggressive package, with a new 7 speed manual transmission. All of these cars are extremely fast, quite special in their own right, and most importantly, the engine is in the front. No one disputes how well these cars do, and they certainly don't suffer for a minute on the track. The convertible 2015 Corvette Z06 is stiffer without a roof than the ZR1 is with it's roof. No one is arguing over that for a second.

So why change the whole car to put the engine in the back? This isn't questioning change, because change got us to where we are now, this is a question about why make the change simply because "everyone else is doing it." Clearly, they're not. The Dodge Hellcat models certainly aren't suffering from having an engine in the front, nor did anyone question the Lexus LFA as to why the engine was put in the front. So why does the Corvette have to switch everything around? "Traditional super car buyers?"

Old men that rub their Ferraris in diapers, preserving the very essence of a car that was meant to be driven often and driven hard so they can sell it for the highest amount to the next guy with an unopened 24 pack of Pampers Supreme? I once met a GT-R owner who wouldn't even tell me he bought it used. It was obvious he did, because after I got him talking a little he said "I bought it a couple years old." Who cares? Just say you bought it used. I'm not fooling anyone in my R129. I'm the third owner. I'm proud to be the third owner. I'm proud to say I get to roll it over 100,000 miles soon, because it's a beautiful and very super car that has lots of meaning to me.

I don't want to let "traditional super car buyers" be an okay thing. Rich people that drive like assholes because they could afford their cars? People that wont even talk to you about their cars because you may ask to sit in it, or you might infect their rich lifestyle with your halitosis? No. Not in my lifetime. You can keep the Zora concept as just a concept, because if you're looking for these people to sell more cars, you're targeting the wrong audience. These aren't the people that should be allowed to determine the future of the Corvette based solely on their current garages and willingness to plunk down the money for a new one because it's just like everything else in their garage.

Super cars need new designs. They need to be radical again. They need to be different. The 300SL Gullwign, the Countach, the Murcielago, the Vector W8, the Glickenhaus P4/5, the Lancia Stratos, the Dodge Viper. These are the cars that you can't forget. They're radical, they're unique and they pushed the boundaries of design. They deserve a successor. They need a successor. Something just as radical for the time. Something that holds your attention more than the formulaic makeup of it's aerodynamic design and all-motor-no-trunk rear view. Maybe it wont drive well, maybe it wont lap the Nordshleife in 6 minutes flat. Maybe that's what we need.

We need another car you need to sit on the door sill in order to back up. We need another car that doesn't give a fuck about your pathetic human existence. We need a car that forces you to drive it. We need a car that doesn't even want you thinking about that SnapChat from your Tinder booty-call from last week. A car that makes you forget about your phone altogether.

It will re-define what it means to be super. That's what we need instead of a mid-engined Corvette.

Drive free or die. Or get off my lawn. Actually, both.

G_Body_Man: Sponsored by the number 3 > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 19:50

0

Agreed. Give this man a cookie.

Axial > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 19:57

0

All the cookies. You get them:

K-Roll-PorscheTamer > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 19:58

0

As awesome as that may or could be, it's simply not gonna happen.

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 19:59

4

I don't want mid engined Corvette, the new Z06 is what I want. What's wrong with that? If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

SonorousSpeedJoe > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 20:12

0

Great write-up!

I have a hard time believing they'd switch to an MR layout for the Corvette. I'm in the camp (however small it may be - perhaps it's just me) that thinks the "C8 Zora" mule would be a Cadillac (positioned as an R8 rival, maybe) if it ever goes into production.

El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! > norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback 01/10/2015 at 20:14

0

Kaizen, you not are.

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/10/2015 at 20:16

0

What?

JGrabowMSt > SonorousSpeedJoe 01/10/2015 at 20:19

1

Knowing that Cadillac has had success in the past with cars like the XLR (I'm going to say success because you do still see them once in a while), I think it would be great to see them put out a car that could compete with the R8. It's less about the performance and more about the luxury in that regard, which GM is making very steady progress on with their cars. It certainly wouldn't hurt the Corvette to have something like that from Cadillac.

JGrabowMSt > K-Roll-PorscheTamer 01/10/2015 at 20:19

0

Good sir, I demand to borrow your time machine.

Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 20:28

0

I feel like we see about one of these posts a month. At least. And they will continue as long as humans and cars co-exist. When cars like the Countach came out, there were people there to call them stupid and boring and useless and whatever other adjective you'd like.

If your fucking head isn't blown right off by a Huayra or an Aventador or an SLS or a 918...I have a sneaking suspicion it's not because they're not "cool" enough (highly subjective) but are simply not interested because you can't afford one. Which is fine. But usually this argument devolves (many times as-intended) into "Yeah! Totally! Who needs these fancy, expensive, dual clutch 700 hp hypercars! Give me 350 hp, a manual transmission, and no driver aids!!!!111"

These cars already exist. They're all over Auto Trader. Supercars aren't supposed to suck, or be intently backwards. They're supposed to be cutting edge, fast as fuck, and visually stunning. All current "supercars" as such fit these requirements.

El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! > norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback 01/10/2015 at 20:46

0

Kaizen - constantly improving yourself. I was trying a little Yoda dialect.

Seriously, that saying you used, is stupid, as there's always room for improvement.

NJAnon > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 20:47

0

I haven't seen this concept you're referring too. But as a concept or "test car" I can say that's all they are. In the aspect of design, I think there are still unique supercars. Some get less exposure than others and maybe there are more "common" styles around but thats just the malaise we are in at the moment.

There are many ways to look at it, but we are getting what they promised; cars. lol unfortunately, what you saw in the old magazines was the far fetched examples.

JGrabowMSt > Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment 01/10/2015 at 20:48

0

I think you've missed the point.

I never once said a thing about not liking cars like the Huayra, Aventador or SLS (I quite like the SLS a lot). I also never said they weren't cool, or that I wasn't interested in them. In fact, I was talking about how we define super cars.

A car can be cutting edge, "fast as fuck," and visually stunning, while still pulling a slow as molasses 'ring time. Part of the problem is that we have that accepted standard over lap times and this that and the other, but cars today are becoming too visually similar. That is my point.

Would you agree that the Countach is a super car? Should we send one out to the 'ring to determine whether it can remain a member of that club? More importantly, should we judge future cars on that standard we haven't even judged all past and present cars on?

The question is not about decreasing power or removing technology from cars. I never once even mentioned that as an option. I feel like you read the title and figured that you knew all of what I had to say already, and you're wrong. The question is not about taking a step backwards and resisting change, the question is why not take a step forward and actually be the change. The deeper question I'm asking is if going to a mid-engine layout will be the correct change, because I don't believe it is. Don't do what everyone else is doing, actually do something different. With a chassis so well developed as the C7, why scrap it and start all over?

Mercedes had the 300SL Gullwing and made an excellent successor in the form of the SLS. Modern design, much faster, the hallmark gullwing doors, and the engine still worked just fine being put in the front. The only thing it didn't get was the 300SL or SL300 name. To abandon the Corvette's 62 years of design (and the Corvette has seen a huge amount of change over the years) thinking it now has to be like all the other super cars is just like saying "if you can't beat them, join them."

The problem with that is that the Corvette is beating them. They don't have any reason to join them. When the Original GT40 was made, it was down to "if you can't buy them, beat them in their own back yard." The original Corvette was a straight 6 engine, for two years! For the past 60 years, the Corvette has been front engined, rear wheel drive, and absolutely identifiable around the world. Why hit the reset button now? People didn't like the brake lights? I think they're great! I'm not scared of change, and you're wrong if you think that's what this post is about. This is about doing something more than what's currently out there, not joining the ranks because that's what everyone thinks works best.

The Mustang just finished celebrating 50 years, and has had everything from a turbo 4 banger to a V8, with a straight 6 in the mix as well. Should the Mustang make the change just because of the Aventador and the Huayra as well? I'm sure plenty of die-hard Mustang enthusiasts are still swearing away at switch to IRS.

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/10/2015 at 20:48

0

I know, but I'm not hot about the mid engine Corvette. And who says they can't further improve the current set up?

El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! > norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback 01/10/2015 at 21:09

0

GM? MR configuration is simply more focused. Z06? That's already faster and cheaper than the ZR1, and apparently, almost as much as the platform can take, without going MR or dramatically increasing the price.

And nobody said the FR Corvette is going away. In fact, since the Chevrolet brand failed in Europe, GM is thinking to build a whole family of Corvette branded sporty cars, that can be sold everywhere(including places like Europe and Australia), without being dragged down by the Chevrolet brand.

briannutter1 > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 21:35

0

At the end of the day.....everyone wants to be special. About 1 out of 100 car enthusiasts have driven a rear engine car. about 1 out of 100 of those have driven it hard. About 1 of 100 of those know enough to describe anything over 54% rear weight distribution to be a power-on-understeer fucking pig. Goes safely around the track round and round...goes safely around the track...round and round....Goes safely around the track round and round...all through the town.

JGrabowMSt > briannutter1 01/10/2015 at 21:38

0

What is left to be special when every one is the same?

Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 22:07

0

I admit I maybe didn't address your main complaint with the Corvette, but it also sounded like you were lodging a general complaint with supercars in general.

I'm not saying older cars aren't supercars...it's a relative term. If a car is equal parts fast, outrageous, and special, relative to the cars of its time, then it's a supercar. Obviously as time goes on, things like a Countach are no longer superior performance-wise, but they still retain the uniqueness, and of course, they're still fast as hell compared to the cars of their time. So you won't find any disagreement with me there.

The reason I assumed you were wanting that is because you made some references to wanting cars to be more about driving and not about posing, if I read correctly.

Again, I realize you were targeting this at the Corvette per se, but I just feel like at some point, some things just work. The reason mid-engine cars are preferable for ultimate performance is because it's just superior. If the Corvette goes in this direction, you can bet that it's because they need to, as a performance consideration. Not because it's the cool thing to do. Mid-engine cars aren't mid-engine because it sells (although it is seen as "exotic") but because it's the best way to make a car that's designed for ultimate, total performance. If Chevy sees this as the way forward for the Corvette, I have no problem with it.

briannutter1 > JGrabowMSt 01/10/2015 at 22:26

0

I just don't think it's something that can be purchased. What is special if "anyone" can buy it.....regardless of money or skill.

JGrabowMSt > Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment 01/10/2015 at 23:15

0

But what makes mid-engine superior? Because there's no driveshaft?

I think Larry Larson would have some things to say about mid-engined layouts being the ultimate, total performance.