- 4,264
- New Zealand
- SkylineObsession
- Mangosaurus
Okay, this is something that has bugged me for a while, and there is plenty of evidence to show that i'm right in making that statement.
Firstly, i have done a search and there was no definition of hypercars, hence the creation of this topic.
As LoudMusic said in one of the topics i linked to above, supercars are on a sliding scale. Theres no set borders (HP, top speed, design, price etc) between becoming a sports car or a nonexistant 'hypercar'.
This graph shows exactly what i mean (source):
1894 | Benz Velo | 12 mph (19 km/h)
1949 | Jaguar XK120 | 124.6 mph (201 km/h)
1955 | Mercedes-Benz 300SL | 140 mph (225 km/h)
1958 | Aston Martin DB4 | 141 mph (227 km/h)
1959 | Aston Martin DB4 GT | 152 mph (245 km/h)
1963 | Iso Rivolta Grifo A3/L 327 | 161 mph (259 km/h)
1967 | Lamborghini Miura P400 | 171 mph (275 km/h)
1968 | Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona | 174 mph (280 km/h)
1984 | Ferrari 288 GTO | 188 mph (303 km/h)
1986 | Porsche 959 | 195 mph (314 km/h)
1987 | Ferrari F40 | 202.687 mph (326.193 km/h)
1991 | Bugatti EB110 GT | 209 mph (336 km/h)
1992 | Jaguar XJ220 | 213 mph (343 km/h)
1993 | McLaren F1 | 231 mph (372 km/h)
2005 | Bugatti Veyron 16.4 | 253.81 mph (408.47 km/h)
2010 | Bugatti Veyron Super Sport | 257.87 mph (415.00 km/h)
I'd fathom a guess that in the day, all of these cars would have been classed as supercars (maybe not using that word in the earlier days since cars were quite new).
Look at how much the top speed has changed over the past 100+ years.
But obviously its not just top speed that defines a supercar, nor does it mean it has to have the fastest speed (just look at all the supercars that came out between the McLaren F1 and Veyron that didn't get higher speeds).
I have three main performance car classes, and hyper car isn't one of them.
SPORTS CARS (anything on a reasonably high production run/common)
MX-5, RX8, RX-7, GTO, EVO, WRX, non GT-R Skylines, GT-R Skylines, NSX?, S2000, lesser Mustang/Corvette/Camaro/Firebird/Challenger/Chargers (mainly class them as muscle cars though), BMW M sports, Lotus Esprit/Elise and so on
SUPER SPORTS CARS (generally more expensive and not as many models produced)
Corvette ZR-1 (etc), Shelby Mustang GT500s, Viper, Nissan GT-R, All Aston Martins (excluding One-77), All Porsches (excluding 959, Carrera GT etc), BMW M3/5/6 etc, Most Ferraris (excluding GTO, F40, F50, Enzo etc), Lamborghini Gallardo, Audi R8/RS4/RS6 etc, Most TVRs (excluding Speed 12s), McLaren MP4-12C and so on
SUPERCARS (usually very expensive, limited production runs, usually low/wide/visually different etc)
Ferrari 288 GTO F40, F50, Enzo, LaFerrari etc, Lamborghini Miura, Countach, Diablo, Murcielago, Aventador etc, Porsche 959, Carrera GT etc, Aston Martin One-77, Vector M12/W8, All Pagani, All Koenigsegg, SSC, Bugatti EB110, Veyron, McLaren F1/P1 and so on.
It's hard for me to try describe all this but it basically boils down to this. Supercars have always been the ultimate car, and over time they haven't really changed their pattern much. They are still very eye catching, still very fast, still sound great and still basically are distinguishable from other cars. You can usually tell that you're looking at something quite different.
Introducing the hypercar category makes no sense. All that has done has put a 'barrier' on the supercar category, which it has never had before. What this means is that when a car does a certain speed, costs a ridiculous amount and so on, its instantly pushed into the hypercar category.
Why wasn't the McLaren F1 deemed a hypercar back in the day? It was so much more faster than anything else at the time. Or the 288 GTO?
Look at the games industry for a comparison. Yes, they do do a lot more things than just gaming these days, but gaming is still the main purpose.
- The 1980's Ataris etc don't perform as well as the 1990s PlayStations/Saturns.
- The 1990s PS1s etc aren't as great as the 2000's PS2s/Xboxs.
- Ditto for the latter 2000s PS3s/360s.
- And again with the PS4 and One.
Should the PS4/Xbox One be classed as super consoles? Or still game consoles/home entertainment systems.
This is a very long winded post i know, but i'm trying to get you all to REALLY think about the hypercar category actually being irrelevant, and merely just another generation of supercars. They didn't die off after the McLaren F1 and before the Veyron. The Enzo, Murci, Zonda and heaps more are all supercars. The F1 just set a really high top speed which no-one probably saw any need to challenge, at least for a while.
If i was better with words i might have done more convincing argument about this, but hopefully i've at least got you to think about it.
Apart from the Hypercars bit at the bottom (unless i misinterpreted it), this Jalopnik article sums it up well.
Hypercars (in my strong opinion) are just a myth. The end.
Firstly, i have done a search and there was no definition of hypercars, hence the creation of this topic.
As LoudMusic said in one of the topics i linked to above, supercars are on a sliding scale. Theres no set borders (HP, top speed, design, price etc) between becoming a sports car or a nonexistant 'hypercar'.
This graph shows exactly what i mean (source):
1894 | Benz Velo | 12 mph (19 km/h)
1949 | Jaguar XK120 | 124.6 mph (201 km/h)
1955 | Mercedes-Benz 300SL | 140 mph (225 km/h)
1958 | Aston Martin DB4 | 141 mph (227 km/h)
1959 | Aston Martin DB4 GT | 152 mph (245 km/h)
1963 | Iso Rivolta Grifo A3/L 327 | 161 mph (259 km/h)
1967 | Lamborghini Miura P400 | 171 mph (275 km/h)
1968 | Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona | 174 mph (280 km/h)
1984 | Ferrari 288 GTO | 188 mph (303 km/h)
1986 | Porsche 959 | 195 mph (314 km/h)
1987 | Ferrari F40 | 202.687 mph (326.193 km/h)
1991 | Bugatti EB110 GT | 209 mph (336 km/h)
1992 | Jaguar XJ220 | 213 mph (343 km/h)
1993 | McLaren F1 | 231 mph (372 km/h)
2005 | Bugatti Veyron 16.4 | 253.81 mph (408.47 km/h)
2010 | Bugatti Veyron Super Sport | 257.87 mph (415.00 km/h)
I'd fathom a guess that in the day, all of these cars would have been classed as supercars (maybe not using that word in the earlier days since cars were quite new).
Look at how much the top speed has changed over the past 100+ years.
But obviously its not just top speed that defines a supercar, nor does it mean it has to have the fastest speed (just look at all the supercars that came out between the McLaren F1 and Veyron that didn't get higher speeds).
I have three main performance car classes, and hyper car isn't one of them.
SPORTS CARS (anything on a reasonably high production run/common)
MX-5, RX8, RX-7, GTO, EVO, WRX, non GT-R Skylines, GT-R Skylines, NSX?, S2000, lesser Mustang/Corvette/Camaro/Firebird/Challenger/Chargers (mainly class them as muscle cars though), BMW M sports, Lotus Esprit/Elise and so on
SUPER SPORTS CARS (generally more expensive and not as many models produced)
Corvette ZR-1 (etc), Shelby Mustang GT500s, Viper, Nissan GT-R, All Aston Martins (excluding One-77), All Porsches (excluding 959, Carrera GT etc), BMW M3/5/6 etc, Most Ferraris (excluding GTO, F40, F50, Enzo etc), Lamborghini Gallardo, Audi R8/RS4/RS6 etc, Most TVRs (excluding Speed 12s), McLaren MP4-12C and so on
SUPERCARS (usually very expensive, limited production runs, usually low/wide/visually different etc)
Ferrari 288 GTO F40, F50, Enzo, LaFerrari etc, Lamborghini Miura, Countach, Diablo, Murcielago, Aventador etc, Porsche 959, Carrera GT etc, Aston Martin One-77, Vector M12/W8, All Pagani, All Koenigsegg, SSC, Bugatti EB110, Veyron, McLaren F1/P1 and so on.
It's hard for me to try describe all this but it basically boils down to this. Supercars have always been the ultimate car, and over time they haven't really changed their pattern much. They are still very eye catching, still very fast, still sound great and still basically are distinguishable from other cars. You can usually tell that you're looking at something quite different.
Introducing the hypercar category makes no sense. All that has done has put a 'barrier' on the supercar category, which it has never had before. What this means is that when a car does a certain speed, costs a ridiculous amount and so on, its instantly pushed into the hypercar category.
Why wasn't the McLaren F1 deemed a hypercar back in the day? It was so much more faster than anything else at the time. Or the 288 GTO?
Look at the games industry for a comparison. Yes, they do do a lot more things than just gaming these days, but gaming is still the main purpose.
- The 1980's Ataris etc don't perform as well as the 1990s PlayStations/Saturns.
- The 1990s PS1s etc aren't as great as the 2000's PS2s/Xboxs.
- Ditto for the latter 2000s PS3s/360s.
- And again with the PS4 and One.
Should the PS4/Xbox One be classed as super consoles? Or still game consoles/home entertainment systems.
This is a very long winded post i know, but i'm trying to get you all to REALLY think about the hypercar category actually being irrelevant, and merely just another generation of supercars. They didn't die off after the McLaren F1 and before the Veyron. The Enzo, Murci, Zonda and heaps more are all supercars. The F1 just set a really high top speed which no-one probably saw any need to challenge, at least for a while.
If i was better with words i might have done more convincing argument about this, but hopefully i've at least got you to think about it.
Apart from the Hypercars bit at the bottom (unless i misinterpreted it), this Jalopnik article sums it up well.
Hypercars (in my strong opinion) are just a myth. The end.