[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
What exactly isn’t “supercar” enough about a 217 mph top speed?
Well it is a ‘supercar’ of sorts (price and looks) but the thing was shite. It was supposed to be 4WD. “Um no sorry, we can’t afford that”. Right, so what about the V12? “Er, no, sorry, that’s too expensive and heavy”.
Basically, it started with a great spec, and ended up as a series of hideous compromises. Not my idea of a true supercar.
Price went up by a huge amount, leaving customers wanting to back out of their purchase agreements with jaguar.
In short, I think it was the best ‘supercar that never was’.
And top speed doesn’t necessarily mean automatic entry into the supercar hall of fame. The latest Nissan Skyline is a giant killer of a car, with incredible performance, etc, but it will never be a supercar IMO. It just doesn’t have the pedigree. Like th XJ220 doesn’t have the pedigree. Sure, it was developed by Jag, who do have some pedigree, but they messed the XJ220 up too badly.
The XJR-15 on the other hand, was much better, though still not a ‘supercar’ in the true sense of the word (IMO anyway).
BBB[/quote]
I guess being the fastest production car ever for 5 years is below your standards. (I think the McLaren dethroned it)
Unless I’m mistaking, Christian Bael drives one in batman begins. If it’s good enough for Batman, it’s good enough for me.
Throwing out the v-12 for weight issues is a good reason in my book. If you can get comparable power out of a much lighter motor, why not?
Edit: the V6 actually exceeded the original spec of 500hp all the way up to 550 (more than they could have apparently gotten out of the v12)
