What's the worst supercar?

I saw this topic on another forum and thought it seemed right up GRM's alley.

What are the worst supercars ever made, and why?

Do cars that pretend to be supercars but are not count?

If so then Delorean and Maserati Merak fit well.

Pseudo-supercars definitely count, IMO.

My vote for semi-supercars is the Alpina version of the Z8. What could've been a great sports car crippled by a slushbox.

The Jaguar XJ220 was saddled with lawsuits around its introduction. Deposits were taken for a V12, awd prototype. By the time revisions were made to production, it yielded only rwd and V6 costing more than the proposed prototype.

In reply to JohnRW1621:

Well this thread is over.....the jag is by far the worst there is not another supercar or whatabe supercar that is in its class as the all time worst supercar period.....dont even try

I'm not sure I'd put the Jag in this class. We're all still reeling from the changes in spec and price, but general opinion seems to have come around to the idea that the car actually wasn't bad to drive, and it was still very fast. A disappointment it may have been, but not necessarily a bad car.

Vector M12. It's a heavier, awkwardly restyled Lamborghini Diablo. Everything I've read about it says it was screwed together even worse than a contemporary Lambo and the interior was horrid.

Protip: Three-spoke wheels are hideous. Period. Search your feelings, 90's JDM and Saab fans, you know this to be true...

RexSeven wrote: Vector M12. It's a heavier, awkwardly restyled Lamborghini Diablo. Everything I've read about it says it was screwed together even worse than a contemporary Lambo and the interior was horrid. Protip: Three-spoke wheels are hideous. Period. Search your feelings, 90's JDM and Saab fans, you know this to be true...

This thing looks like it was styled by Matt Groening.

Alan Cesar wrote:

RexSeven wrote: Vector M12. It's a heavier, awkwardly restyled Lamborghini Diablo. Everything I've read about it says it was screwed together even worse than a contemporary Lambo and the interior was horrid. Protip: Three-spoke wheels are hideous. Period. Search your feelings, 90's JDM and Saab fans, you know this to be true...

This thing looks like it was styled by Matt Groening.

kanaric wrote: Do cars that pretend to be supercars but are not count? If so then Delorean and Maserati Merak fit well.

While I realize that much of this thread is tongue in cheek, I'd still like to know why you consider the Merak a pretender? It was comparable to other similar cars of the era like. I don't think the DeLorean was ever considered a supercar by anyone, a sports car yes, an overpriced sports car certainly, but it never pretended to be a super car.

Much as I hate to admit it there are two cars I think need to be on the list. Both pain me to put here. The first pains me as it’s a British car, it’s the Lotus Esprit turbo. Certainly a supercar that tried to go up against comparable Ferrari’s and Porsche’s of the day, but let’s face it, any car that cam make a Ferrari look good from a maintenance and reliability point of view. The second pains me as I worked on it for 2 years and it never made production. The Yamaha OX-99 (code name was Madonna) tandem seat F1 based engine. While I loved it at the time, let’s face it, it was somewhat stylistically challenged and the tandem seating arrangement was silly. As soon as the McLaren F1 was announced it really showed the fallacy of the concept.

I would say any supercar that puts your life in danger of burning like a piece of coal, so... just about any Ferrari made these days.

racerfink wrote: I would say any supercar that puts your life in danger of burning like a piece of coal, so... just about any high end Italian car.

FTFY

Max_Archer wrote: I'm not sure I'd put the Jag in this class. We're all still reeling from the changes in spec and price, but general opinion seems to have come around to the idea that the car actually wasn't bad to drive, and it was still very fast. A disappointment it may have been, but not necessarily a bad car.

have you ever seen one in person or drove one? well i have they are junk in my mind... the one i looked at the owner paid $725,000.00 for he was looking to get $300,000.00 out of it 3 years ago it is still sitting.

one of the nicest if not the nicest one in the states (the exact number in the states is "unknown" for some reason 15 to 100 i would say around 25) is in DuPont Registry it is being offered at $275,000.00 OBO and rumor has it that it would go for $200,000.00.

when you take in all the hype and all the garbage that surrounds this car and then no resell value and really no buyers for them. it is at the very top of my list as worst ideas when it comes to a supercar.

the idea was spot on but it is a jag

In reply to RexSeven:

I was gonna go with it's predecessor the W8.

It never actually went. I mean they delivered it to people with the caveat they couldn't actually drive it till they took it back to finish it.

Off the shelf, not really cool when they were released, aluminum saw blades, with the visual appeal being assembles with flat strips of foam board like a kids school project.

Man, I guess I have a thing for bad supercars. I love the XJ220 and if prices continue to drop, I will probably own a Lotus Esprit in the near future. Oh and I actually loved my deep dish 3 spokes I had on my SAAB 9000. Guess it's the 90's kid in me.

I would say the Delorean is one of the worst supercars ever.

JohnRW1621 wrote: The Jaguar XJ220 was saddled with lawsuits around its introduction. Deposits were taken for a V12, awd prototype. By the time revisions were made to production, it yielded only rwd and V6 costing more than the proposed prototype.

Really? Although not meeting expetations, I wouldn't say the XJ220 was a total failure. I liked the way they were styled and if you wrecked it and lived you could always find another use for the powertrain

I will say that there are many italian cars that probably immediately spring to mind for their propensity to engulf themselves in flames. Or maybe because some are almost undrivable for anyone over 5.5 and 160lbs. Atleast those types of cars had some character as a saving grace.

In my world, I hate the Veyron most of all. It is a giant, ugly, over-hyped, massively heavy, super expensive mess. In the 80s, the same could be said of the 959. Technology for technologies sake has no business in my car fantasies. Let's toss the GTR on the heap while we are at it.

Instead, I'll take one of those Carrera GT widow makers w/o traction control or a Donkervoort somethingorother any day.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: I will say that there are many italian cars that probably immediately spring to mind for their propensity to engulf themselves in flames. Or maybe because some are almost undrivable for anyone over 5.5 and 160lbs. Atleast those types of cars had some character as a saving grace. In my world, I hate the Veyron most of all. It is a giant, ugly, over-hyped, massively heavy, super expensive mess. In the 80s, the same could be said of the 959. Technology for technologies sake has no business in my car fantasies. Let's toss the GTR on the heap while we are at it. Instead, I'll take one of those Carrera GT widow makers w/o traction control or a Donkervoort somethingorother any day.

Sorry, I've seen an XJ220 and it's not junk. It's an amazing car. They were well viewed by testers at the time and now. I think most of the law suits used the 'change in spec' as an excuse. Calling it a change is spec was a bit of a stretch. They built a concept car for a motor show that had a V12 and AWD, response was so great and people were begging to buy them so they said they’d build something based on it. Then the world economy crashed and the speculation of super cars crashed. Cars that had been changing hands for millions suddenly dropped to a couple of hundred thousand. Most of the people who had ordered XJ220’s were planning on flipping them for double or triple and realized they wouldn’t be able to do that, so they tried to cancel their orders and went looking for excuses to do so.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In my world, I hate the Veyron most of all. It is a giant, ugly, over-hyped, massively heavy, super expensive mess. In the 80s, the same could be said of the 959. Technology for technologies sake has no business in my car fantasies. Let's toss the GTR on the heap while we are at it.

I agree with this. The Koenigsegg, F40 and cars like that are the best supercars because if Paris Hilton tried to drive one it would put her into a tree whereas in a Veyron, she would be able to continue to dumb down the world. And I blame the 959 for supercars going that way so my vote would be the 959. And also it is stupid ugly.

In reply to t25torx:

dont worry you are not alone...i stand by what i say about the 220 but they are at the top of the bucket list to own and that is why i know what they are going for...one sold last year for $180,000.00

Flight Service wrote:

It might be a terrible car, but it's still the epitome of an 80's school boy poster child of supercar. It look ridiculous now, but in the80's it looked awesome to my eyes.

I think we are all saying the same thing...that the XJ220 was a flop on the new car market (what was delivered vs hype and price) but can be a gem in the used marketplace (insert VW Phaeton here.)

cutter67 wrote: In reply to t25torx: dont worry you are not alone...i stand by what i say about the 220 but they are at the top of the bucket list to own and that is why i know what they are going for...one sold last year for $180,000.00

I keep thinking "how many cars could I buy on CL cheap, fix up, and sell on in order to make 180k?" Sure I could pay off my house with that money.. but it's an XJ220... /drool