6 ms·
> Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches For street usage, I think those cars are popular because they’re beautiful more than because they’re fast (or because ent
by sokoloff 2y ago
> Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches
For street usage, I think those cars are popular because they’re beautiful more than because they’re fast (or because enthusiasts like them).
My utterly soulless Lexus will drive more than fast enough to get me in serious trouble. No one will look at it and feel stirred by its beauty, whereas the typical Ferrari or Porsche coupe will look at least appealing to most and beautiful to many, even those who can’t tell the three marques apart or even unaided recall the name Lamborghini.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoI would say they're popular because they are expensive. It's bragging rights, conspicuous consumption…
- thfuran 2y agoIf they were cheap, I might have one. As is, I never will.
- world2vec 2y agoBut people desire them as a conspicuous symbol because some people decades ago were really into fast cars and picked those brands as the best of the best. It was the true enthusiasts that promoted them and then other people copied them because they wanted to be in the same "gang" and over time that evolved into a status symbol, far removed from the original one. But it did start with a small group of true fans.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoAnd professional racing.
- shakna 2y agoIf it was just expense, then Koenigsegg would be a household name. Most enthusiasts will know them, but the average person won't. There's something more that leads culture in such a way to uphold a particular brand.
- bbor 2y agoReally great, succinct way to make this point. Here's an NGRAM of mentions of these brands in the English Fiction corpus, 1860-2025 -- Ferrari dominates until ~1970, when Porsche gains dominance. Obviously, Koenigsegg is barely on the graph at all. P.S. I think it's telling that Porsche wasn't mentioned almost at all in English until the mid 1950s, given their role in the war! https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ferrari%2CLamborghini%2CPorsche%2CKoenigsegg&year_start=1860&year_end=2022&corpus=en-fiction&smoothing=3&case_insensitive=false https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ferrari%2CLamb...
- shmeeed 2y agoI'm not sure what it's supposed to be telling about, but it's probably not about their involvement in the war, which was hardly out of line for any german engineering company at the time. Ferdinand Porsche was arrested for war crimes, but never tried (which IS telling in its own way). Rather, the NGRAM just traces the rise of the company as it's known today: Up until about 1948, Porsche was a pure development contractor mostly for the government. They only started manufacturing cars under their own brand in the early 50s (a few 356 built basically in a shed notwithstanding) after Ferry Porsche had taken over, and with the introduction of the 911 began a meteoric rise as a volume manufacturer for international markets.
- vladvasiliu 2y agoDon't they make like 5 of those, and for absurdly high prices? Ferraris, Porsches and similar are somewhat attainable, which, I think, helps with their being symbols, since most people have already actually seen them and know they're real. A Koenigsegg is as good as a story. Hell, I live in Paris and I've never actually seen one. Porches and Ferraris? They're seemingly everywhere.
- bzzzt 2y agoFerrari and Lamborghini predate Koenigsegg by a generation so my guess is it's about the history.
- teqsun 2y agoI guess the term would be "conspicuous consumption". As to why Koenigsegg doesn't get the rep, I'll take the outside opinion that it's because their name is too inaccessible whereas "Bugatti" slips easily into rap lyrics.
- red_admiral 2y agoIndeed, Andrew Tate's tagline when someone criticised him was "I drive a Bugatti and you don't".
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y agoNot for the enthusiasts. My neighbor has a $120k Porsche and a $20k Porsche and appears to adore them both
- nradov 2y agoIt's not just that they're expensive markers of conspicuous consumption, it's about exclusivity. Exotic car manufacturers like Ferrari intentionally make fewer cars than the market demands. Only "special" customers are even allowed to buy them regardless of price. Ownership, especially of the higher end models, marks a consumer as a member of a high-status exclusive club. (I am not claiming that this is rational or sensible, but it is an effective marketing strategy for luxury goods.)
- amrocha 2y agoThat doesn’t explain why japanese manufacturers who used to make sports cars in the 90s don’t anymore. It’s a mixture of enthusiasm and conspicuous consumption. Most enthusiasts love 90s japanese cars, but the average person sees an old mazda and recoils. But put an old ferrari in front of anyone and they have a completely different reaction.
- wlesieutre 2y agoMiata, BRZ, Nissan Z, and GT-R? Toyota's GR86 is BRZ derived but still counts, though their Supra is a BMW. Honda's closest thing is the Civic Type R, but they're bringing back the Prelude soon. Mitsubishi are the odd one out, all they have is an SUV recycling the Eclipse's name. There's no million dollar Japanese supercars competing against Lamborghinis and McLarens, but I wouldn't say they stopped making sports cars.
- lloeki 2y ago> There's no million dollar Japanese supercars competing against Lamborghinis and McLarens Well there was the NSX
- amrocha 2y agoKey word was, because nobody wants to spend 200K on a Honda no matter how many F1 drivers swear by it.
- kod 2y agoI get where you're coming from, but describing the fastest production FWD car as the "closest thing" is really funny
- wlesieutre 2y agoYeah I mean dedicated sports car models, rather than sportified versions of existing models
- cestith 2y ago
- jt-hill 2y ago> No one will look at it and feel stirred by its beauty Except for the Toyota nerds who will want to come talk to you about the LFA. Ask me how I know!
- lmz 2y agoWould someone really describe the LFA as "utterly soulless"?
- jt-hill 2y agoTbf I don’t think the parent meant all Lexuses (Lexes? Lexi?) are soulless, just theirs. But the brand has its fans.
- tristor 2y ago> Would someone really describe the LFA as "utterly soulless"? When it came out the LFA was widely lampooned by the car media for being too "soft", not fast enough, and generally lacking spirit and individuality. It's not pretty much recognized in hindsight that it's one of the single greatest cars ever made, and everybody who regularly buys/drives supercars regrets not buying one when they were still being produced. Weirdly, many people realized this when it was new, that the LFA was actually excellent, but like anything else cars go through different hype cycles where media organizations and insiders focus on different parameters for what they think makes something good, and the LFA came out during a hype cycle that was focused on raw speed, as it was released around the time that "hypercars" were gaining steam as a concept. Personally, having driven an LFA one time, I quite literally have regular dreams about the memory, and I wish that I owned one. It's on my bucket list.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoBut a large portion of their beauty is reflective. The Countach was seen as a very ugly car by many when it was released. But it was lust-worthy for its performance. That lust-worthiness over time transformed the car's image, and now it's seen as iconic.
- HPsquared 2y agoA lot of Veblen goods are kinda "unpleasant but striking". I mean just look at recent BMW design.
- butlike 2y agoI agree, and I feel the beauty oftentimes comes from the intrinsic love evident in the machine. Looking at a Ferrari it's evident Enzo had a passion for autos. This can also cross boundaries (eating at fine dining restaurants, fine art gallery layouts, etc.) and is probably discernible in MOST things people put out.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y agoHonest question: are you not a "car guy/girl"? Lexus people absolutely love Lexuses. I recently sold mine (needed something larger after having another kid) and I miss it every day.
- sokoloff 2y agoI am ~98th percentile car guy. I own two classic Mustangs, one stock, one restomodded by me, and have had a variety of interesting daily drivers over the decades, including dailying an 80s Alfa Spider year-round including 4 winters in Boston. It’s comfortable, safe, and dead-nuts reliable, but no one gives a shit about or even notices my hybrid RX450h.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y agohahahaha, yeah the RX450h is soulless You're more of a car guy than me
- Marsymars 2y agoWell, some people. My friend with a Lexus just has a base model RX 350 because she couldn’t find a RAV4 in stock and her buying criteria were basically “crossover built by Toyota”.
- neogodless 2y agoIt always surprises me how quickly people forget nuance. OK so we're discussing niche vs mainstream, or "what most people want" vs "what a few want". The few cars you listed are not popular in the ownership sense, but they are well-known and aspirational. People can buy them to show off status / money / exclusivity, or perhaps beauty. Speed is table stakes, of course. They have to objectively be better than most cars but also special. They can be strikingly beautiful or strikingly hideous but they must not be ordinary. If you watch / read reviews of those cars, then it tends to be from the enthusiast driver point of view. Is it good at racing, cornering, reading the driver's intentions and reacting instantly and accurately? But then more often than not, those that can afford them do not buy them to use them for that purpose (or at least not frequently.) Many are treated a bit like investments or merely items in a collection. What a long-winded way to get back to the original point of faster horses and enshittification of software, eh? Netflix and Spotify might as well be a Toyota Corolla or Prius. I lost my train of thought. I think I just wanted to pontificate about exotic cars for a while. (I drive a Polestar 2. It looks like a Volvo, is heavy as a dump truck, but damn is it fast as hell.)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]