[Mach550]

Because when you think of supercar brands BMW doesn't come to mind. They have their place in the auto world but super is not it.

[stein_325i]

BMW is too concerned with the ///Money. New CEO is all about profit and electrification, any model that sells in low volume is being rumored for cancellation/no successor (Z4, 6GT, 8 coupe/vert, 2 vert, etc.), he likely doesn't want to spend the money on making a 911/AMG GT/R8 competitor even though there have been many articles about how the M team does want to make a standalone vehicle.

[fastboatster]

Originally Posted by b92

To me, supercar is a class of vehicles and not a criteria of numbers. A new M5 has more power and can lap tracks quicker than a Ferrari 360, but I only consider the latter to be a supercar.

The lines are blurry and everyone will have differing opinions on the matter so it's not worth arguing, but more about sharing different points of view.

Well, that's interesting, can you please explain your criteria on what the supercar should be? Just want to know what your criteria are.

[Humdizzle]

you dont see supercars every day.

you see a 5 series, corvette, mustang on every street corner. thats why i can't consider them exotics/supercars.

i'd consider a GTR more of a supercar than any current M product... because there aren't a ton of base models everywhere. there's not much 'sharing' of parts. The chassis is made from the ground up for just being a sports car... not a luxury cruiser or commuter.

911 is kind of an exception to this. But they start at like $120k so you aren't going to see a ton of base models everywhere.

[GenXer]

Hypercars don't make money. VW is losing money selling Bugatti Veyeron, Toyota is losing money making LFA. Those cars are only for show. They are halo cars designed as moving billboards so they can sell millons more bland and profitable models.

[euro*]

Originally Posted by genxer

hypercars don't make money. Vw is losing money selling bugatti veyeron, toyota is losing money making lfa. Those cars are only for show. They are halo cars designed as moving billboards so they can sell millons more bland and profitable models.

exactly this!!

[b92]

Originally Posted by fastboatster

Well, that's interesting, can you please explain your criteria on what the supercar should be? Just want to know what your criteria are.

It’s not a defined set of criteria such as RWD, mid-engined, etc. because like I said, the lines are blurry & subjective. I think the first key ‘ingredient’ is the manufacturer’s intention to produce a performance car two steps above ordinary; finely tuned, not mass produced, and no compromises on materials or manufacturing processes. But a supercar isn’t strictly about performance, it must also balance performance with looks, refinedness and comfort.

Then there must also be a distinction between supercar and grand tourer. This can be defined by looking at the manufacturer’s compromises on weight for refinedness/comfort vs performance. Cars like Aston Martins or SL63s fall out of the supercar class and into GT.

[hk401]

No one will ever pay over 200k for the bmw super car. Bmw is too late for the game. Anything above 200k people have many options to choose something that worth.

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by hk401

No one will ever pay over 200k for the bmw super car. Bmw is too late for the game. Anything above 200k people have many options to choose something that worth.

The pool of buyers willing to shell out $200k+ for supercars is extremely shallow and unless you are a low volume automaker that specializes in this (Ferrari, Lamborghini, McLaren, etc.) there's little in the way of profitability to be had. A $150k Acura NSX pretty well blew up in Honda's face as Honda is selling less than 250 of them annually so you can imagine that any CEO that signs off on such an endeavor could feel hot around the collar sinking company resources into a vehicle that's not warranted or profitable.

[Conissah]

Originally Posted by TheMidnightNarwhal

A super car has to be "exotic" looking.

A GT-R doesn't look exotic, at all, yet it is considered a super car no?

[desibaba]

I work in a BMW dealership and we regularly get jammed up with i8s, the v12 7 Series, etc. There simply isnt much of a market for those vehicles. I used to work for Lexus and they were stuck with a brand new 2012 LFA which sat in the showroom like a paper weight for 4 years and finally the owner's son took it home in 2016.

[jmack]

Originally Posted by Conissah

A GT-R doesn't look exotic, at all, yet it is considered a super car no?

Most people don't consider GT-R or Corvette Z's to be super cars, despite having better performance than many, precisely because they don't have the exotic look.

[Conissah]

Originally Posted by jmack

Most people don't consider GT-R or Corvette Z's to be super cars, despite having better performance than many, precisely because they don't have the exotic look.

But it IS considered a super-car, because of the performance aspect of it.

[desibaba]

Originally Posted by Conissah

But it IS considered a super-car, because of the performance aspect of it.

My daily driver is a 2018 Corvette z06 but id give my left nut to have an Aventador SVJ.

[Conissah]

Originally Posted by desibaba

My daily driver is a 2018 Corvette z06 but id give my left nut to have an Aventador SVJ.

Same.