Which car company has made the most great cars?

[JulesMaximus]

Ok, I think it would have been easier for you to list the Ferrari's you didn't think were great. Some of those are debatable, the Testerossa was just awful, and is not debatable. It's also rather dubious to pick a manufacturer that sells cars that cost 10x or more what the other candidates here are producing. Is the 458 an engineering marvel? Absolutely. Does the base MSRP of nearly $190,000 significantly detract from its credentials for being a great car. IMO, yes.

One of Ford's great cars, the Mustang, can be had in GT trim for around $30,000. Is the 458 six times better at anything than the Mustang? What Ford has done with the Mustang for $30,000 bringing great performance to the masses is far more worthy of greatness than what Ferrari has done. Doing more with less is more deserving of praise than doing more with more.

You are completely missing the point of owning a Ferrari.

And the hell a Testarossa is awful. I saw a Testarossa the other day on the road and it still captures my attention. It was one of the iconic supercars of the late 80s I absolutely lusted after. What's not to love about it? It had a 12 cylinder boxer engine, futuristic styling, 2 seats, and awesome performance.

 

[HAL9000]

You are completely missing the point of owning a Ferrari.

And the hell a Testarossa is awful. I saw a Testarossa the other day on the road and it still captures my attention. It was one of the iconic supercars of the late 80s I absolutely lusted after. What's not to love about it? It had a 12 cylinder boxer engine, futuristic styling, 2 seats, and awesome performance.

It's hideous...

 

[HeXen]

pretty vague thread. What factors are considered great? Are we going by personal preferences? looks, reliability, best selling...what? Is this around the world or USA only? based on personal experience or what we've read and seen in pics about it?
Seems exotics would be in a different category. but to generalize from experience i think Honda has made some good reliable and safe cars.

 

[HAL9000]

pretty vague thread. What factors are considered great? Are we going by personal preferences? looks, reliability, best selling...what? Is this around the world or USA only? based on personal experience or what we've read and seen in pics about it?
Seems exotics would be in a different category. but to generalize from experience i think Honda has made some good reliable and safe cars.

Whatever cars you consider truly great, a car you would own above all else, use your own criteria, e.g. A Lamborghini Miura is a truly great car IMO as its beautiful, revolutionary and rare.

 

[JulesMaximus]

It's hideous...

You're nuts. This thing is beautiful.

This is a pile of crap.

 

[HAL9000]

You're nuts. This thing is beautiful.

This is a pile of crap.

Wow we have a different taste in cars, I can't hate the Testerossa more than I do, and the Jag is a thing of beauty IMO.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Wow we have a different taste in cars, I can't hate the Testerossa more than I do, and the Jag is a thing of beauty IMO.

The Jag isn't bad looking, it's just a complete pile of crap. One of my bosses had one and it was always in the shop. That piece of rubbish cost him many thousands of dollars every year in repairs. Oil leaks, electrical problems, etc. Just an awful car.

 

[HAL9000]

The Jag isn't bad looking, it's just a complete pile of crap. One of my bosses had one and it was always in the shop. That piece of rubbish cost him many thousands of dollars every year in repairs. Oil leaks, electrical problems, etc. Just an awful car.

Oh yeah it's unbelievably unreliable, owning one is a bad idea, it will cost you loads, electrics alone just fall apart.

 

[KentState]

You're nuts. This thing is beautiful.

This is a pile of crap.

The Testarossa is a beautiful car and still looks good today. The Jag on the other hand looks like all of the bad mistakes of the error. Britian's version of the crappy C3 Corvettes with the ungodly long hood. I'm just picturing the douche bag dentist rolling around in one.

 

[HAL9000]

The Testarossa is a beautiful car and still looks good today. The Jag on the other hand looks like all of the bad mistakes of the error. Britian's version of the crappy C3 Corvettes with the ungodly long hood. I'm just picturing the douche bag dentist rolling around in one.

Meh, I love it, I'll buy one eventually, the V12 one aswell. Can't wait.

 

[KentState]

Meh, I love it, I'll buy one eventually, the V12 one aswell. Can't wait.

To each his own. I generally have a problem with most car built in the 70's through 90's. Not competitive with anything made today and not old enough to feel like a classic.

 

[HAL9000]

To each his own. I generally have a problem with most car built in the 70's through 90's. Not competitive with anything made today and not old enough to feel like a classic.

The later ones have 300+hp! so still pretty quick. 0-60 in about 6.9s... hardly slow, I badly want one.

 

[sdifox]

The later ones have 300+hp! so still pretty quick. 0-60 in about 6.9s... hardly slow, I badly want one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testarossa

390hp, 0-60 5.2, 100 in 11.4

 

[HAL9000]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testarossa

390hp, 0-60 5.3

A Ferrari Testerossa now will set you back £50,000

A Jaguar XJS V12 will set you back £2,000

Hardly comparable.

 

[MagickMan]

"Great" cars? Ferrari.

 

[sdifox]

A Ferrari Testerossa now will set you back £50,000

A Jaguar XJS V12 will set you back £2,000

Hardly comparable.

Jags just depreciate a lot faster. XJS was in the 65k range and 1986 Testarosa was around 85k when it came out. Went to like 150k sticker in 1990.


Blame Don Johnson for the crazy price spike.

 

[HAL9000]

Jags just depreciate a lot faster. XJS was in the 65k range and 1986 Testarosa was around 85k when it came out.

According to Wikipedia:

In 1995, the F512 M retailed for $220,000.[3] Testarossa means "redhead" in Italian.

The price of the Testarossa in the US was $181,000 in 1989

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Testarossa

Still comparing a Jag to a Ferrari... The Jag will be slower.

 

[sdifox]

According to Wikipedia:





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Testarossa

Still comparing a Jag to a Ferrari... The Jag will be slower.

Any company that thinks a gas tank switch is a good idea gets an automatic fail from me.

 

[DaTT]

The later ones have 300+hp! so still pretty quick. 0-60 in about 6.9s... hardly slow, I badly want one.

Since when is 0-60 in 7 seconds considered "hardly slow"....remove the word "hardly" and you're bang on.

 

[HAL9000]

Any company that thinks a gas tank switch is a good idea gets an automatic fail from me.

I don't know what that is, so I don't really have a response.

Since when is 0-60 in 7 seconds considered "hardly slow"....remove the word "hardly" and you're bang on.

For me:

0-60 in:

Production Cars
8-9s Normal Car
7-8s Fast for a small Car
6-7s Fast
5-6s Very fast or Just fast in a straight line
4-5s Super Car or Just fast in a straight line
3-4s Hyper Car
2-3s Track Car / Veyron / McLaren F1 / Bike
1-2s Fast Bike / Dragster thing.

 

[sdifox]

I don't know what that is, so I don't really have a response.


For me:

0-60 in:

Production Cars
8-9s Normal Car
7-8s Fast for a small Car
6-7s Fast
5-6s Very fast or Just fast in a straight line
4-5s Super Car or Just fast in a straight line
3-4s Hyper Car
2-3s Track Car / Veyron / McLaren F1 / Bike
1-2s Fast Bike / Dragster thing.

Mark X ( and previous Mark ) and XJ6 had twin tanks. you have to use a switch to change fuel tank. And them switches (and pumps), being Lucas, failed nicely. Hell the tanks leaked too.

 

[HAL9000]

Mark X ( and previous Mark ) and XJ6 had twin tanks. you have to use a switch to change fuel tank. And them switches, being Lucas, failed nicely.

Well that's stupid the number of things they did wrong with that car far outweigh the number of things they did right, such a shame.

To quote Top Gear (James May):

"Jaguar had the perfect reciepe for a sheapards pie, and made it with dog meat"

 

[KentState]

I don't know what that is, so I don't really have a response.


For me:

0-60 in:

Production Cars
8-9s Normal Car
7-8s Fast for a small Car
6-7s Fast
5-6s Very fast or Just fast in a straight line
4-5s Super Car or Just fast in a straight line
3-4s Hyper Car
2-3s Track Car / Veyron / McLaren F1 / Bike
1-2s Fast Bike / Dragster thing.

Um, 0-60 sub 6 seconds is getting pretty common even in cars like the Accord. Plenty of non-hyper cars in the sub 4 second range also. I think your definition of fast is pretty slow.

 

[sdifox]

Since when is 0-60 in 7 seconds considered "hardly slow"....remove the word "hardly" and you're bang on.

Um, 0-60 sub 6 seconds is getting pretty common even in cars like the Accord. Plenty of non-hyper cars in the sub 4 second range also. I think your definition of fast is pretty slow.

I know eh, my 06 E350 4Matic is in the 6.5 range and it's a boat :biggrin:

 

[HAL9000]

Um, 0-60 sub 6 seconds is getting pretty common even in cars like the Accord. Plenty of non-hyper cars in the sub 4 second range also. I think your definition of fast is pretty slow.

I don't know any common cars in the Uk that have a sub 0-60 time that I don't consider fast cars.

I do know a couple of super cars with sub 4s 0-60 times, but they are fairly new, like the MP4-12c and the 458...