The XJ220's V6 wasn't just any V6. It was a V6 made specifically for racing (a derivative of the Cosworth DFV) that made more power than the proposed V12, while being smaller and weighing less.
I'll agree that it doesn't have the cachet of a V12, but it probably is a better car for it.
m4ff3w wrote: The XJ220's V6 wasn't just any V6. It was a V6 made specifically for racing (a derivative of the Cosworth DFV) that made more power than the proposed V12, while being smaller and weighing less. I'll agree that it doesn't have the cachet of a V12, but it probably is a better car for it.
It's a bit of a stretch to call the engine a development of the DFV, the original engine was designed for the Metro 6R4 and had some of it's layout based on the DFV. It's like saying a new Corvette LT1 is based off the original 350 SBC. After the 6R4 died Tom Walkinshaw bought the rights to the engine, developed it with twin turbo's to replace the glorious but thirsty, heavy and dated V12 for the group C cars, then used a version for the XJ220.
Knowing they are still changing hands for less than $200k moves them further up the want list.
You know there's always the XJR-15 which predated the XJ220. It was meant to be the world’s first all carbon road car and a few made their way onto the road. Most were used in the one make race series that accompanied some European F1 races in 1990 I think it was. They had a reputation as a bit of a widow maker with suspect handling due to the size, weight and height of the V12. Now that's a car I'd really like to own. I love the styling of the XJ 220 in a sophisticated elegant way, but the XJR15 is more aggressive in a race car for the street kind of way. Ironic that the pure road car (220) went on to win LeMans (OK it's class win was later revoked, but it took the checker)
I still haven't seen anything on this list that I wouldn't own if I could afford to. "Worst supercar" is a bit like "ugliest Victoria's Secret model", isn't it? 
I think I'd have to pick the lamborghini muira. I haven't ever even seen one, but from everything I have heard they are uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive, about as expensive as a WWII airplane to maintain, and it's pretty much given that it will be on fire at least once while you own it. And they cost close to $1million now.
the 959 was not made so much for technologies sake, but was designed as a Group B rally car to compete against the Lancia and Audi. The problem was the series was ended before it ever turned a wheel in anger. Stuck with all that work already put into it, they made it into a pretty awesome road car
Every Carrera 4 built can thank it
Looked at in today's light, it is pretty ugly looking. But given the context of why it was built and when, it was pretty tame compared to a lot of it's Group B siblings.
Travis_K wrote: I think I'd have to pick the lamborghini muira. I haven't ever even seen one, but from everything I have heard they are uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive, about as expensive as a WWII airplane to maintain, and it's pretty much given that it will be on fire at least once while you own it. And they cost close to $1million now.
That one gets my vote too. I've seen one. It looks gorgeous. But they've got a worse problem than typical Italian ergonomics - if you drive on at Autobahn speeds, the front tires get lifted almost completely off the ground! I doubt the brakes would be up to track use, either. Not exactly well engineered as a complete package.
Travis_K wrote: I think I'd have to pick the lamborghini muira. I haven't ever even seen one, but from everything I have heard they are uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive, about as expensive as a WWII airplane to maintain, and it's pretty much given that it will be on fire at least once while you own it. And they cost close to $1million now.
Yeah, but can't you say that about every Italian supercar built before the mid-90s? These are supercars, fantasies. You can't judge them by the standards of a daily driver. Besides, look at it!
Eh, anyone counting the DMC-12 as a Supercar should probably have their head checked. It was originally supposed to be a safe, affordable, technologically advanced car and sell for $12K (hence its designation...)- I'd imagine a tune-up on more supercars cost more than that. The only people who might consider it a Supercar would be those who don't know the first thing about them. They certainly have their fair share of issues, but being the worst supercar isn't one of them.
As a child of the 80's I of course had a poster of a Lambo Countach on my wall.
A few years ago I saw one on the used lot of the local Lexus dealer, so I checked it out. What a raging abortion of a car. I'd say it had the build quality of a kit car, but that is an insult to most kit car builders.
One of the worst interiors i've ever seen belonged to a Lamborghini Diablo. I couldn't wait to get OUT of the thing.
As far as the WORST supercar? I've heard some positively SCARY things about the Mercedes Benz CLK GTR-
Supposedly they have a penchant for eating anything regarding cooling or lubrication. I can't find the story, but there's one stateside that got so bad the guy ended up SUING mercedes when they wouldn't warranty it, it had something ridiculous like 300 miles on it and spent literally YEARS in the shop.
Flight Service wrote: 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.
That thing looks awesome. Who cares if the rear window is for legal reasons only and is otherwise completely useless.
DILYSI Dave wrote: As a child of the 80's I of course had a poster of a Lambo Countach on my wall. A few years ago I saw one on the used lot of the local Lexus dealer, so I checked it out. What a raging abortion of a car. I'd say it had the build quality of a kit car, but that is an insult to most kit car builders.
^^^^
The Countach may have been bad, but the Diablo was even worse. Horrid build quality, without the groundbreaking looks. I was blown away at how crappy the interior was in the Diablo. Stupidly designed, with horrible build quality, and terrible outward visibility. Total crap---- but it will pick up the "ladies" on South Beach.
I'd also have to throw the Ferrari F50 into the mix. Ugly as sin, totally unusable, and worse than the F40 that preceded it.
Remember this "Concept Eyeball Stabber"?
Gasoline wrote: Remember this "Concept Eyeball Stabber"?
Looks like somebody melted an Enzo on a giant stovetop.
If "fake supercars" count it's gotta be a Maserati Merak or one of those sad imitation supercars. Anything that was only available with a slushbox is definitely a front-runner for the title.
And the Yamaha OX-99 is silly, but definitely awesome, like a Caparo T1.
Flight Service wrote: In reply to RexSeven: I was gonna go with it's predecessor the W8.
You shut your filthy whore mouth. The W8 is a super supercar. Ill take mine in black.
I think worst supercar is any 911 based supercar. Things like the GT2. These cars carry supercar pricetags and are undeniably awesome cars but as a supercar they fail because they can be confused for the relatively mundane base 911 they share so much with. Cars like the Carrera GT and all lambos etc. never appear non super but to the uneducated the GT2 just looks like a 911.
GameboyRMH wrote:Gasoline wrote: Remember this "Concept Eyeball Stabber"?Looks like somebody melted an Enzo on a giant stovetop. If "fake supercars" count it's gotta be a Maserati Merak or one of those sad imitation supercars. Anything that was only available with a slushbox is definitely a front-runner for the title. And the Yamaha OX-99 is silly, but definitely awesome, like a Caparo T1.
separated at birth?
Gasoline wrote: Remember this "Concept Eyeball Stabber"?
You win.. That has to be the worst looking "concept" I've ever seen.
Tom_Spangler wrote: I still haven't seen anything on this list that I wouldn't own if I could afford to. "Worst supercar" is a bit like "ugliest Victoria's Secret model", isn't it?
This.
JoeyM wrote:racerfink wrote: I would say any supercar that puts your life in danger of burning like a piece of coal, so... just about any GOOD Italian car.FTFY
FTFBY
Ashyukun wrote: Eh, anyone counting the DMC-12 as a Supercar should probably have their head checked. It was originally supposed to be a safe, affordable, technologically advanced car and sell for $12K (hence its designation...)- I'd imagine a tune-up on more supercars cost more than that. The only people who might consider it a Supercar would be those who don't know the first thing about them. They certainly have their fair share of issues, but being the worst supercar isn't one of them.
I agree, the Delorean shouldn't be considered here.......it should however be in the running for the worst car of all time though....
t25torx wrote:Gasoline wrote: Remember this "Concept Eyeball Stabber"?You win.. That has to be the worst looking "concept" I've ever seen.
Somehow that stingray seems NSFW.
The veyron is an engineering marvel, but if you factor in looks of the lamprey-style grill
and cost of ownership....
Let's just take the tires, for example: in the U.S., the Michelin Pilot Sport 2s fashioned with the Veyron's unique compound cost about $30,000; in the UK they're £23,500 ($38,216 U.S.). Bugatti recommends you change them every 4,000 kilometers, or 2,500 miles, and at every ten thousand miles the company recommends changing the wheels and tires, which runs north of $50,000.
nocones wrote: I think worst supercar is any 911 based supercar. Things like the GT2. but to the uneducated the GT2 just looks like a 911.
I'm pretty sure that was about the entire point of the GT2's.
Travis_K wrote: I think I'd have to pick the lamborghini muira. I haven't ever even seen one, but from everything I have heard they are uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive....
You don't drive them! You park them in your living room with the engine lid open:
I am sure we have all heard the Lamborghini Countach is a huge disappointment in reality:
You'll need to log in to post.
