No-Windscreen Hypercars Embody Everything Worst About The Car Industry

We’re fed up with car makers trying to milk the cow of cash by producing limited-edition super and hypercars that serve no purpose other than adding to the ultra-rich’s dormant collections
No-Windscreen Hypercars Embody Everything Worst About The Car Industry

Of all the automotive cash-cows we could name, the open-top hypercar is the most heinous. Manufacturers are really tugging those teats lately and we’re really not sure there’s anything left to gain. If this were a living, mooing milk-factory you’d be done for animal cruelty.

I am of course writing in the wake of the Lamborghini SC20‘s reveal, and this only a few months since McLaren scaled-down production of the Elva again to a final total of 149. These cars are designed to bring in massive amounts of raw profit; nothing more. They serve no useful purpose and they’re not art, because true art has no higher function than its own existence, and these are, at the end of the day, just cars.

No-Windscreen Hypercars Embody Everything Worst About The Car Industry

Let me further explain my loathing for these things. I’ve driven a few four-wheeled vehicles that lacked windscreens. First there have been quad bikes. Not that fast, often quite bonkers at low speeds and good fun for it. Then there was the Ariel Atom. Sitting inside a frame designed only to contain you and the engine guarantees big smiles, but only when the experience isn’t wildly overwhelming.

Once upon a time I also took the wheel of a small, closed-wheel racing car at Rockingham Raceway – before they turned the once-proud track into a literal car park. I can’t even remember the make or model of the tiny little open-cockpit car, but the experience is absolutely seared into my memory. Helmet on, basic fireproofs secured, I couldn’t believe the transition from a fast road car on track to this impossibly light, direct and aggressive grip monster.

No-Windscreen Hypercars Embody Everything Worst About The Car Industry

The concept is the same but taken to an even greater extreme with dedicated track cars like the wild Radical SR10, but I’ve got no problem with cars purpose-built to be hammered hard on track days - and repaired afterwards.

But wait – as amazing as that experience was, from the novelty to the physics, just to get into the car I had to be wearing special gear. Even if you could stick number plates on it, you’d never use it if every time you took it out you had to go full Stig. At least the name-forgotten racer was small and light enough to take to a circuit on a trailer, and cheap enough that you could make repairs if you have an off.

Put the same tests against the ridiculo-cars we’re talking about here. The SC20 and Elva will need you to don a full-face helmet when you drive them. Even the Elva’s clever aerodynamics won’t stop insects and stones testing the puncture resistance of your face. These cars are just too powerful not to have windscreens. And what if you crash it? Try getting hold of replacement body panels for it once you’ve accidentally atomised them on trackside Armco, or on the local chip shop wall while you were trying to fight off a wasp. It’s just not worth the risk, so lesser cars being driven harder will sail right by. If you’re the sort of proud and stubborn person who makes themselves very rich in the first place, that’s a humiliation you don’t want.

But will it deflect stone chips?
But will it deflect stone chips?

So in windscreen-less hypercars, you get neither one thing nor the other. You don’t get a glamorous and glossy capsule within which to transport your attractive partner to luxurious venues and star-studded events. You don’t get a lap-record-capable car you can easily chuck onto a trailer and smash around a circuit for hours without fear of the end bill.

You just get a blob of terrible, wasteful excess. Excess you can’t risk on track, even if the circuit users allow it under their safety rules. Excess that just has to sit in your heated garage along with all the other sad, lonely machines whose true glory fades with every passing day they go unused. It’s a tragedy. These cars represent an exchange of a vast amount of money for a product that’s really no good to anyone. It’s the cynical production of baubles to sell to people whose wealth has outstripped their sense. It’s wholly and inexcusably awful.

Comments

Anonymous

This. Cars like those are just opulence and excess.

I remember the first time I went karting on an outdoor track - while I had a full helmet on I had left the visor up to better hear what was around me. Then while lining up an overtake I felt something hit my face, and boy did it hurt. I couldn’t even see anything get flicked up or anything to that effect, so whatever it was must have been tiny (a tiny stone fragment, or maybe a fly). I couldn’t have been going more than about 60 km/h as it was just after a tight chicane.

Driving an open cockpit car anywhere other than an urban street will need a helmet as even at mild road speeds you’d be one piece of gravel away from serious hurt and bleeding all over the super expensive interior. No one who is buying a car like this will be wearing a helmet or goggles when just driving around. Those that try will quickly see the error of their ways after a few face stinging events.

So yeah, while these open cockpit supercars have so much potential in their development, they will exist primarily as a showpiece. Locked up and caged, to be shown off at the owner whim, then hidden away once again. A sad and sorry existence, masked by the glamour of being a gloriously unique vehicle.

12/20/2020 - 11:50 |
4 | 0
Nishant Dash

Two words:
money laundering

12/20/2020 - 17:22 |
8 | 0
That_1_Guy

they also look hideous

12/20/2020 - 22:56 |
4 | 0
Yusuf Ashari

And the most important problem of all: they’re stock…. and stock does not rock. And also you can’t bond quite well with these Hypercars since you can’t risk yourself to use them on track days or a quick blast through the winding rural roads - you can only store them in the garage.

It would be a lot better to drive tuners/project cars/hot rods. The base cars costs a lot less and you can do a lot of things to the chosen base car with the same amount of cash to buy one of these bargain basement windscreen-less hypercars (regardless it’s a muscle car, JDM and EuDM or sleeper materials), not just making them faster and track worthy (track day events, grassroots racing events, drift events, Nurburgring laptime) but also making them better just for a daily drive (daily commute or just cruisin’ down the street while listening to Dr. Dre’s “Still Dre” or Foghat’s “Slow Ride”, or just a blast down the winding roads). Project car / tuning car owners can do things that these sorts of Hypercar owners can’t do. Plus, most project cars, tuner cars and hot rods looks better and more artistic than most hypercars.

Forget about R34 Skylines, A80 Supra or E36 M3 (those two were obviously favorite choices for tuners), you can even turn a hideous old Nissan Micra into a track day and daily-drive journeyman on the budget less than buying a McLaren Elva Hypercar. While with the Elva you can only store them like in museum and turning them into an excess, you can keep rocking on with your light tuned Micra and you can bond together with it.

“Hey, at least I didn’t drive EVs”, “I can do anything with my cash so you can go kiss my arse and suck my balls”, “Imma rich kid and I deserve a better car to roll than yours” - those kind of excuses from rich hypercar owners when berating other people’s car of choice just makes them looking like a basic, airheaded simpleton who would rather flaundering money to buy things that are serving no other purpose than a mere perceived symbol of worth and dignity to its owners (in this case , hypercars) and using them just to show themselves off. Not to offending wealthy people here, and not all wealthy people are like that.

12/21/2020 - 03:19 |
2 | 2

Topics

Sponsored Posts