The Noble story
Noble’s modern identity was established by M12 and the more focused M400 before M600 moved the company into a different performance bracket. M500 develops the current road-car story with a new mechanical and usability proposition. Across those programmes, the manual transmission and relatively direct driver interface remain central themes.
The history is particularly interesting because a small manufacturer can improve access, space and everyday operation without abandoning a focused purpose. We do not think inconvenience needs to be preserved simply to prove authenticity. What matters is whether the complete car retains a clear relationship between the driver’s actions and the machine’s response.
Current lineup & programmes
Performance and specialist model families are listed below. Programme status describes the manufacturer’s published range or announcement, rather than stock or an available allocation. Open-top and special derivatives are grouped where they share a family; follow the model link for the distinctions.
Noble M500
Current range · 2020s
Past models
Past performance-car families relevant to our 1996–2026 archive. A surviving product page or conversion catalogue does not mean the original donor car remains in production.
Noble M12 / GTO / GTO-3 / GTO-3R / M400
Archive · 2000s
Noble M600 / CarbonSport / Speedster
Archive · 2000s
The SuperCarNews view
Noble's M12 and M400 established a recognisable specialist identity before the M600 moved the marque into a different performance bracket. The current M500 is presented by Noble as a more approachable relative of the M600, using a twin-turbocharged Ford V6 and a six-speed manual gearbox. The manufacturer's own page leaves some performance measurements undetermined, so we do not invent them.
The most interesting part of that progression is the attempt to broaden usability while preserving a physical relationship with the controls. A larger cabin or easier access does not necessarily weaken a focused car. It can allow more people to experience what the manufacturer considers important. That is a more persuasive argument than treating inconvenience as a badge of authenticity.
We are sympathetic to the manual proposition, but a gear lever alone does not prove driver involvement. Pedal placement, control effort, response and the clarity of the chassis still need assessment. Noble deserves an article about how these elements might work together, rather than a reflexive celebration of the absence of electronics.