When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It transforms the car completely. With the Cup 2, you get 30-40% more grip, better feel under braking, better turn-in.
It's almost too easy, because of the Cup 2 and the AWD system, you just smash the throttle and it shoots out of the corner. Turbo S with Cup2 on Decker will be extremely hard to beat.
It's too heavy and still sounds like a vacuum cleaner. and lags. Most people would not take a turbo over an rs
Exactly. There is no argument on the Aventador being a supercar. There is no argument when people see a Mclaren 720S that it's not a supercar.
When people see a 911, 95% of the people will classify it as a sports car.
Since it’s fun to argue online, I’ll jump in though I don’t really have a horse in the race. I would say there is a grey area on where it becomes a supercar, it’s a continuum.
To a Koenigsegg owner, a 918 is mundane. With that said, I think the overwhelming majority of people would consider a 918 a supercar. Similarly, a regular 911 Carrera would be considered a sports car by most, despite it being well above the average Kia Sorento or Nissan Rogue in the scale of exoticness. Evidently, we need to draw the bar somewhere in between.
C8 Corvette? It’s much cheaper than even a regular 911, and will become more common in North America, but looks exotic in its shape, and it’s rare enough at the moment that most laypeople would say it’s a supercar if they didn’t know it’s a Corvette.
911 Turbo S? It’s in supercar performance territory for sure, arguably in supercar price territory, though fairly tame in its appearance. If you ask people if it’s a supercar, you’d get mixed answers, probably leaning towards sports car.
Audi R8? A little behind the 911 Turbo in performance, but a little more low and bold in styling. Similar to the 911 Turbo in construction techniques, materials, production numbers, and pricing. Is it a supercar? You’d get mixed answers, but I’d guess the majority would say yes.
Lamborghini Huracan? It’s an R8 with a sharp angled body kit, bright colours, and hexagonal interior. A little more expensive than a 911 Turbo S, a little slower, similar in construction techniques, and only slightly lower in production numbers (they’ve built around 15k so far). Owners of “true” supercars may question its label, but most laypeople would probably call it a supercar.
AMG GT R? It’s similar to the GT3 RS in performance, slightly cheaper, similar production numbers, similar materials and construction techniques. The AMG GT body style is less commonly seen on the road the the 911, and it’s a more distinctive shape due to its proportions, so they get more attention than most 911s. Is it a supercar? The general public would give mixed answers, but they’d probably lean towards yes, particularly given its similarity to the SLS.
Lotus Evora? It’s fairly low production, looks exotic, an uncommon brand, and rare to see on the road. Materials and pricing aren’t that exotic, nor is performance, and it competes more with cars like the Cayman GT4. Still, I’d expect most members of the general public to classify it as a supercar.
Ferrari Portofino? It’s a Ferrari, so exotic by brand name, and it’s a pretty fast car, pretty expensive, and pretty in general, albeit not particularly exotic in its shape. A C8 Corvette looks more exotic. Would the general public call it a supercar? You’d get mixed results, probably leaning towards supercar.
GT2 RS? It’s a 911, but has all sorts of vents and edges and wide hips and a big wing. Usually in bright colours too. Would the general public call it a supercar? You’d get mixed answers, but most would probably say yes. However, it still has the tall, bulbous, practical, and ubiquitous shape of a 911 underneath, and most laypeople would consider a McLaren 570S more exotic, even though the McLaren is slower, cheaper, produced in larger numbers, and not all that much more special in construction/materials. The 570S body is mostly Aluminum too, aside from carbon fibre in the central tub.
Why do we as car buyers have to accept that when we spend MUCH more to buy an exotic car that we have to put up with the bull**** of poorer reliability and resale? Pretty much everything else that's expensive in the world doesn't work this way. Imagine buying an AP watch and it has poorer build quality than a Casio G-shock. Imagine buying your 10 bedroom mansion and it's built worse than a crack house in Compton. Would you accept that?
I find it odd that people are ok with this.... I get the higher insurance cost, the higher service hourly rates. If I'm spending north of $200K for a car, I expect it to be better built than my Lexus. Why does my 570s which has almost same MSRP as my GT3RS have abysmal build quality and resale when it's considered the exotic car between the two?
Very odd world we live in.
Originally Posted by ipse dixit
I'm not sure "reliability" is the right word.
I think a better word is "finicky".
To take your analogy with fine timepieces, an Audemars Piguet or a Patek, while gorgeous to look at and made with exquisite craftsmanship with the most exotic of materials (gold, platinum, lightweight mainsprings, column wheels, etc.), they tend to be more finicky than a digital quartz watch from Casio or Timex or a Seiko (the Porsches of watches). They require more regularly maintenance and service, are not nearly as accurate, and oftentimes have imperfections with things like the face or case simply because they are hand assembled and not simply built on an assembly line.
Same with cars that are considered "exotics" -- the are never going to be as reliable as a mass-produced Camry or even a mass produced 911. They are going to be finicky with quirks and personality. That's sort of the quiddity of their exoticness.
I was thinking about watches before I read through to these comments.
I have a stainless Daytona (116520, black dial) that I’ve owned for 3.5 years. I have never serviced it or babied it or made any conscious behavioral accommodation to protect the value or integrity of the watch. I don’t wear it every day like I used to, because I purchased another watch that I wear more often (see below), and I don’t keep it on a winder. It keeps time perfectly (once wound) and I’ve encountered zero issues with it during my ownership. Chrono24 indicates that it has appreciated by 89% since I bought it (I highly doubt this). Bottom line is - it’s just a watch.
I also have an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak “Jumbo” ref. 15202, which is a reissue of the original Royal Oak design from 1972 (it was “Jumbo” then, but fairly small 48 years later), that I’ve owned for 1.5 years. I wear it almost every day, despite the fact that it is much more fragile and precious than my Daytona. I am careful with it and always mindful not to scratch it. It is profoundly beautiful, and the steel is finished to a ridiculous standard. It needed service this spring and ended up spending 91 days in service (versus the quoted 28 days). Audemars Piguet was condescending and difficult to deal with regarding the service. The watch is under warranty - and will be until 2023 - but told me that they were debating whether or not to cover the watch repair under warranty. Regardless, it’s a beautiful thing and I wear it almost every day.
There are some obvious parallels between the “Supercar” argument and the “Haute Horlogerie / Holy Trinity” arguments that crop up in horological circles:
The “Holy Trinity” brands are Audemars Piguet, Patek Philippe, and Vacheron Constantin (very old, prestigious watchmakers who built their reputation in the manufacture of refined dress watches)
Some people believe that Rolex is on the same level as the above watchmakers, but they serve a different market segment (in my opinion); it doesn’t matter that you can buy a Rainbow Daytona or a platinum day date or whatever from Rolex - they don’t make the same kind of product as the Holy Trinity
Finally, it shouldn’t be left unsaid that many people view the Daytona as the rough equivalent of the 911 or the GT3 more specifically; I think this is a fairly apt comparison
Look I get it, the GT3RS is the most expensive car in your garage and you are butt hurt that it's not an exotic.
But the GT3RS is not a supercar. Not in looks, not in construction, not in performance.
I think I am unbiased when I say this. I own a wide range of cars: Porsches, Ferraris, BMW, and even a pedestrian Ford. I did a restomod of a 1973 240Z a few years back that won Best of Show at SEMA and it got made into a Hot Wheels car and you can play my car in Gran Turismo on your Playstation.
Once again, I will go back to my example of the Mustang GT500. By your definition, then the Mustang GT500 must be a supercar too no?
GT3RS is slow by today's standard. Anyone who understands cars will tell you that lap time on the track has nothing to do with going fast on the street/canyons. You put a car with grippy tires and high downforce, that thing will be fast on the track. However, with only 500hp with a tiny 339ft/lbs of torque, on the street it's going to have a hard time keeping up in the canyons with the likes of the 720S. This is the reason why the 911 Turbo S is one of the fastest cars in the real world. The Turbo S might not be as fast as the GT3RS on track, but on the streets, Turbo S with like for like drivers, will destroy the 3RS.
Butt hurt? About what? About your ingenious “5 year old child” exotic car test Now modified to include other groups? About “your” definition of what an exotic car is? Lol. RS most expensive car I own? Incorrect on both counts.
I provided facts to refute your conclusion based on your own litmus test and criteria wherein you concluded the 3RS is not an exotic or supercar.
Now your litmus test evolves to canyon street driving? Seriously? So if that’s the litmus test why do manufacturers spend gobs of money and effort to obtain the top times at the Ring which is widely considered to be “the litmus test” for performance?
In fact the 3RS is in the top 10 times. Not shabby for a non supercar. Even clipped other super cars in your garage.
The fact that you fancy yourself as a car aficionado and perhaps some automotive celebrity based on the fact PlayStation has some resto mod you did on some kid games only gives your opinion some special imprimatur in your own mind (clearly your very impressed with yourself) but unfortunately it doesn’t mean squat to me and likely many others.
Your definition as to what’s exotic is your definition. You are entitled to it. You are also entitled to expose yourself as a jerk. Well played.😎
As to Mustangs not being exotics you likely don’t even know what this is:
Its more exotic than anything you own in my book and likely many other auto enthusiasts would agree.
I was thinking about watches before I read through to these comments.
I have a stainless Daytona (116520, black dial) that I’ve owned for 3.5 years. I have never serviced it or babied it or made any conscious behavioral accommodation to protect the value or integrity of the watch. I don’t wear it every day like I used to, because I purchased another watch that I wear more often (see below), and I don’t keep it on a winder. It keeps time perfectly (once wound) and I’ve encountered zero issues with it during my ownership. Chrono24 indicates that it has appreciated by 89% since I bought it (I highly doubt this). Bottom line is - it’s just a watch.
I also have an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak “Jumbo” ref. 15202, which is a reissue of the original Royal Oak design from 1972 (it was “Jumbo” then, but fairly small 48 years later), that I’ve owned for 1.5 years. I wear it almost every day, despite the fact that it is much more fragile and precious than my Daytona. I am careful with it and always mindful not to scratch it. It is profoundly beautiful, and the steel is finished to a ridiculous standard. It needed service this spring and ended up spending 91 days in service (versus the quoted 28 days). Audemars Piguet was condescending and difficult to deal with regarding the service. The watch is under warranty - and will be until 2023 - but told me that they were debating whether or not to cover the watch repair under warranty. Regardless, it’s a beautiful thing and I wear it almost every day.
There are some obvious parallels between the “Supercar” argument and the “Haute Horlogerie / Holy Trinity” arguments that crop up in horological circles:
The “Holy Trinity” brands are Audemars Piguet, Patek Philippe, and Vacheron Constantin (very old, prestigious watchmakers who built their reputation in the manufacture of refined dress watches)
Some people believe that Rolex is on the same level as the above watchmakers, but they serve a different market segment (in my opinion); it doesn’t matter that you can buy a Rainbow Daytona or a platinum day date or whatever from Rolex - they don’t make the same kind of product as the Holy Trinity
Finally, it shouldn’t be left unsaid that many people view the Daytona as the rough equivalent of the 911 or the GT3 more specifically; I think this is a fairly apt comparison
Are Grand Seikos the Lexus LFA of the watch world?
I would agree with that comparison. Porsche is like the Rolex of cars. Very reliable, dependent and make great products. I have a few Rolex and other brands.
I would say the Daytona is the equivalent of the GT3/GT3RS. Not as exotic as a AP ROO or Patek Nautilus. The only difference here is that Rolex doesn’t make anything that is above its class beyond the Daytona like Porsche does with the Carrera GT/918.
Originally Posted by Guest89
I was thinking about watches before I read through to these comments.
I have a stainless Daytona (116520, black dial) that I’ve owned for 3.5 years. I have never serviced it or babied it or made any conscious behavioral accommodation to protect the value or integrity of the watch. I don’t wear it every day like I used to, because I purchased another watch that I wear more often (see below), and I don’t keep it on a winder. It keeps time perfectly (once wound) and I’ve encountered zero issues with it during my ownership. Chrono24 indicates that it has appreciated by 89% since I bought it (I highly doubt this). Bottom line is - it’s just a watch.
I also have an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak “Jumbo” ref. 15202, which is a reissue of the original Royal Oak design from 1972 (it was “Jumbo” then, but fairly small 48 years later), that I’ve owned for 1.5 years. I wear it almost every day, despite the fact that it is much more fragile and precious than my Daytona. I am careful with it and always mindful not to scratch it. It is profoundly beautiful, and the steel is finished to a ridiculous standard. It needed service this spring and ended up spending 91 days in service (versus the quoted 28 days). Audemars Piguet was condescending and difficult to deal with regarding the service. The watch is under warranty - and will be until 2023 - but told me that they were debating whether or not to cover the watch repair under warranty. Regardless, it’s a beautiful thing and I wear it almost every day.
There are some obvious parallels between the “Supercar” argument and the “Haute Horlogerie / Holy Trinity” arguments that crop up in horological circles:
The “Holy Trinity” brands are Audemars Piguet, Patek Philippe, and Vacheron Constantin (very old, prestigious watchmakers who built their reputation in the manufacture of refined dress watches)
Some people believe that Rolex is on the same level as the above watchmakers, but they serve a different market segment (in my opinion); it doesn’t matter that you can buy a Rainbow Daytona or a platinum day date or whatever from Rolex - they don’t make the same kind of product as the Holy Trinity
Finally, it shouldn’t be left unsaid that many people view the Daytona as the rough equivalent of the 911 or the GT3 more specifically; I think this is a fairly apt comparison
Although I'll argue Porsche is more Rolex than Seiko
great analogy. But Have you seen Grand Seiko recently? Or their high end 6 figure plus watches. But yes Porsche = Rolex. I think it’s a great parallel. I love my SS Submariner and my Grand Seiko. Very good watches. Wear them daily - 50/50. I can sell my SS Rolex for what I paid for it. But it’s not a Patek Or an exotic like that. I do have one Patek but really don’t wear it much. Like my cars I have owned, the Porsche’s may not be the exotics but I tend to like them more for 95% of the time. Just like a Rolex. Great quality, reliable, good resale and very very nice. 😀
I’m sure you are a good lawyer in real life. If I want to sue somebody for personal injury, I will hit you up. But calling the GT3RS a supercar is like saying your gold Rolex Day Date is on the same level as the Holy Trinity of watches. I never said I was a car aficionado, you said it, not me. I do have a lot of contacts in the automotive industry and I have done a few car projects with major automotive sponsors.
You need to sit down and relax. I never said the 911 was a bad car. I own 4 of them (993 GT2, 991R, 991 Speedster, 991 GT2RS). I have a lot of friends within PAG and none of them, who works at Porsche, would ever classify the 911 as a supercar. In fact, their marketing department is clear in the 911 market segments: a sports car with certain variations that touches upon supercar performance.
So if Porsche themselves don’t consider the 911 to be an exotic/supercar, what makes you think you know better than Porsche?
Originally Posted by Waxer
Butt hurt? About what? About your ingenious “5 year old child” exotic car test Now modified to include other groups? About “your” definition of what an exotic car is? Lol. RS most expensive car I own? Incorrect on both counts.
I provided facts to refute your conclusion based on your own litmus test and criteria wherein you concluded the 3RS is not an exotic or supercar.
Now your litmus test evolves to canyon street driving? Seriously? So if that’s the litmus test why do manufacturers spend gobs of money and effort to obtain the top times at the Ring which is widely considered to be “the litmus test” for performance?
In fact the 3RS is in the top 10 times. Not shabby for a non supercar. Even clipped other super cars in your garage.
The fact that you fancy yourself as a car aficionado and perhaps some automotive celebrity based on the fact PlayStation has some resto mod you did on some kid games only gives your opinion some special imprimatur in your own mind (clearly your very impressed with yourself) but unfortunately it doesn’t mean squat to me and likely many others.
Your definition as to what’s exotic is your definition. You are entitled to it. You are also entitled to expose yourself as a jerk. Well played.😎
As to Mustangs not being exotics you likely don’t even know what this is:
08-06-2020, 06:51 PM
