RE: McLaren P1 - inside story

[British Beef]

The P1 will never become iconic like the F1, no ifs, buts and no maybes!!

The F1 was just right on every level, from design ethos, execution, ergonomics, packaging, and for me simplicity! You look at it and you understand straight away why things are the way they are, central driving, lack of driver aids, V12 NA, manual box etc etc.

This new hypercar race is now truly in the digital age, apart from the Ferrari which in concept appears the most analogue.

If I was connected to Russian mafia and had holdings in say a Premiership club, I would buy myself a second F1 rather than any of these.

[toppstuff]

Many people do not understand the McLaren ethos.

That's fair enough.

Compare them to Ferrari by all means. After all, they seem natural competitors.

I would bet a large sum of money that the P1 will be faster than the LaF around a track.

The 12C is a "better" car than the 458. Faster, better riding, more efficient, more like a Porsche in fact in terms of ease of ownership.

But that does'nt mean that people prefer McLaren to Ferrari. Indeed, in choosing a 458 people are picking an inferior car on most objective measures. But they like the Ferrari more because it is noisier, because it is less cohesive, because it is more compromised. They call this character and justify it on the basis that these things are desirable in a car that isn't used every day.

Mclaren don't care about this. They just build the best car possible. In doing so they lose some of the "character" that some people look for.

It is possible to make something too good.

[David1976]

McLaren sound about as bullish about the P1 as they did about this seasons F1 season contender at the launch party.

My money would be on the Ferrari. No question.

Part of the experience in any sporting car, especially a hypercar, has to be the drama the noise brings you. The P1 sounds pretty dull if you ask me. The Ferrari by contrast sounds epic.

[Esty]

Face for Radio said:

Kermit79 said:

I do worry for Mclaren in some respects. They do know how to shoot their mouths off, there is confidence, and then there is CONFIDENCE bordering on arrogance, in my opinion. They have not driven the Ferrari, but have effectively discounted it based upon some snippets of information they can SEE re aero etc.
I seem to remember a certain Ron Dennis discounting the Ferrari 458 against the 'MP4-12/4:33(99)>400c12' or whatever it is called now.. on technology grounds, and that wasn't a walk over. I would have thought that they would learn from this previous error.
I am not belittling the P1 in anyway, I'm sure it will be a fantastic car and am ecstatic that the UK is creating such a wonderful piece of kit, it is more about the cocksure nature of their comments based on nothing tangible re the competition. Talk about setting yourselves up for a potential fall! I do hope they are right..........

It's quite obvious that you, and many other people in this thread, do not like McLaren for whatever reason.

But comparing the MP4-12C to the 458, I recommend you do a little research on this topic, because in the real world with cars delivered to customers the McLaren is much quicker.

I think he's right actually and i've done my research. I drove the 12c for two hours (had a deposit down quite early for almost a year) and cancelled the next day. I then bought a 458. The 12C was definitely more usable and probably quicker but unless you're tracking them you'll never find out. The 458 is however a country mile more exciting and an event every time you drive it. The 12c was (sorry to say) a little dull and reminded me more of a Turbo S.

I wouldn't buy a P1 as it feels too similar to a 12C. I'd definitely buy a La Ferrari though (but wasn't invited!) Mclaren can try to big up themselves which is a good marketing strategy but in the end....have a look and see how many of either car come on the "open" market and that will tell you all you need to.

[Mosdef]

loudlashadjuster said:

Sergio giving his best "corporatesepak waffle" there.

You're better than that, son.

As for the car, even if it is as good as they say (and, like everyone else, I'm really looking forward to the P1/LaFerrari/918 shootout) there'll still be the usual "no passion" whiners.

Let's see...

Exactly, how many times did he mention how it's just like a formula 1 car???? It might, possibly, be similar to a top spec GT but an F1 car? That has to be bullst.

[aelord]

One wants to like McLaren, but the company ethos and it's products have developed in the last decade a deeply unattractive smugness; an arid, passionless, anally retentive personality. No passion, emotion or humour, they take themselves far too seriously.

The F1 was their undoubted masterpiece; tellingly, it was in essence one man's project, not a committee design.

Edited by aelord on Tuesday 7th May 17:56

Edited by aelord on Tuesday 7th May 17:57

[hairyben]

Esty said:

I think he's right actually and i've done my research. I drove the 12c for two hours (had a deposit down quite early for almost a year) and cancelled the next day. I then bought a 458. The 12C was definitely more usable and probably quicker but unless you're tracking them you'll never find out. The 458 is however a country mile more exciting and an event every time you drive it. The 12c was (sorry to say) a little dull and reminded me more of a Turbo S.

I wouldn't buy a P1 as it feels too similar to a 12C. I'd definitely buy a La Ferrari though (but wasn't invited!) Mclaren can try to big up themselves which is a good marketing strategy but in the end....have a look and see how many of either car come on the "open" market and that will tell you all you need to.

I wonder if it's a bit like audio speakers, technically geeky hifi is all about perfect reproduction yet you can buy a pair of studio monitors for a grand or so, yet people spend several times that for something that sounds "nicer", yet which are technically less accurate/capable.

I wonder also if, when mr. lamborghini showed his mid-engined supercar to the world, the purists were aghast at this new fangled upstart that was soulless in comparison to the more "engaging" driving experience they were used to..

[mrclav]

JohnGoodridge said:

loudlashadjuster said:

mrclav said:

kith said:

As for the V12 being the past? Well, so are mechanical watch movements, but true watch enthusiasts don't buy quartz.

That's a very bad example; watch movements are not held to legislation regarding emissions so it's not really a comparable argument. Remember, McLaren is not a mass-market car manufacturer so unlike VAG, Toyota et al they have to keep an eye on these things more than Ferrari or Porsche would need to. If for them a V12 is a thing of the past blame the EU quangos not McLaren.

It's also a very bad example in that quartz watches comprehensively trump mechanical watches in terms of 'performance' (i.e. keeping time), with the "enthusiast" watches only scoring on design, appreciation of engineering and not a little amount of history/brand cachet/snob value/etc.

No-one doubts that a V12/mechanical movement can still perform at a high level, but if you want to build the highest-performance car/watch then the absence of a V12/mechanical movement may not be an impediment, and may in fact give a significant advantage.

V12s look great, sound lovely, have excellent characteristics (smoothness, power delivery etc.) and so on, but the fact remains they are generally large, heavy and thirsty compared to other layouts and that today it is no longer necessary to have a thumping great cylinder count and swept capacity to offer ultimate performance.

McLaren, in their own slightly clumsy way, are only recognising this, perhaps as stubborn justification/denial of the fact they seemed bound to use a derivative of the 12C's V8?

Not convinced. The LaFerrari does not look huge, especially heavy or thirsty compared to the P1. And it is all about compromises. And why would you choose to compromise great looks, sound, smoothness and power delivery for CO2 and economy and er... what else? This is the hypercar segment, not the citycar.

IMHO it's the product of faulty thinking, McLaren's 'both/and' philosophy produces bad compromises like 'I was worried about the LaFerrai but then I found out it didn't have an electric only function'.. The more singlemindeness of the Ferrari design process, and the McLaren F1's result in less compromise IMHO.

You don't understand how the rules regarding CO2 and emissions affect ALL car manufacturers. Whether or not you make city cars or hypercars the rules are that (and I quote from the directive itself):-

"As a result of the regulation [made in 2008 regarding climate change concern] , the EU car manufacturers' fleet average has to be aligned with 130g CO2/km - partially as of 2012 and completely by 2015. In addition, the integrated approach measures (e.g. eco-innovations) should bring the average emission to 120g CO2/km."

Simply put, if your average across the whole range of cars you make doesn't fall in line with the above directive, you're going to be fined - heavily.

Ferrari and Maserati can offset this because they're owned by Fiat as can Porsche/Lamborghini/Bugatti/Bentley etc who are owned by VAG; McLaren only make supercars which means they have no other brand which they can use to offset their average CO2 emissions hence the incentive to go "hybrid". Why do you think Aston Martin made that abomination of a car called the Cygnet? Do you think they'd have do that when they were still owned by Ford? Of course not!

McLaren aren't at fault for their thinking at all, it's just you presume that hypercar makers don't need to take emissions into account when they have no choice but to. As has been already stated, compromises always have to be made from an engineering point of view, it's just that they're not always the obvious ones!

[greygoose]

aelord said:

One wants to like McLaren, but the company ethos and it's products have developed in the last decade a deeply unattractive smugness; an arid, passionless, anally retentive personality. No passion, emotion or humour, they take themselves far too seriously.

The F1 was their undoubted masterpiece; tellingly, it was in essence one man's project, not a committee design.

Edited by aelord on Tuesday 7th May 17:56

Edited by aelord on Tuesday 7th May 17:57

I agree, I loved the F1 when it came out but the clinical nature they have adopted since seems so soulless and the bashing of Porsche and Ferrari is pathetic given the three cars haven't been tested together.

[chelme]

hairyben said:

Esty said:

I think he's right actually and i've done my research. I drove the 12c for two hours (had a deposit down quite early for almost a year) and cancelled the next day. I then bought a 458. The 12C was definitely more usable and probably quicker but unless you're tracking them you'll never find out. The 458 is however a country mile more exciting and an event every time you drive it. The 12c was (sorry to say) a little dull and reminded me more of a Turbo S.

I wouldn't buy a P1 as it feels too similar to a 12C. I'd definitely buy a La Ferrari though (but wasn't invited!) Mclaren can try to big up themselves which is a good marketing strategy but in the end....have a look and see how many of either car come on the "open" market and that will tell you all you need to.

I wonder if it's a bit like audio speakers, technically geeky hifi is all about perfect reproduction yet you can buy a pair of studio monitors for a grand or so, yet people spend several times that for something that sounds "nicer", yet which are technically less accurate/capable.

I wonder also if, when mr. lamborghini showed his mid-engined supercar to the world, the purists were aghast at this new fangled upstart that was soulless in comparison to the more "engaging" driving experience they were used to..

The Ferrari 458 has nothing 'inferior' to the MP4 12C. It is in fact superior in many important respects. When tested back to back, most testers found that the 458 was not only quicker around a track, but also a great deal more malleable and easier to drive on the limit, and needless to say far more emotionally engaging, both aesthetically, in feel and aurally. It is a future classic. The MP4 12C is rather like a modern Porsche Turbo, or GTR, lacking in that something special which gets it under your skin.

[007 VXR]

Cant wait to see how they do side by side.

[CraigZR]

McLaren dont seem to get much love on PH.

[007 VXR]

CraigZR said:

McLaren dont seem to get much love on PH.

Nope, and most from posters that have never driven one

[harryowl]

Can't help but feel its kind of a 'half baked' attempt... same engine and tub as the 12c, no central driving position.

[AFC1886]

“Big V12s aren’t practical in this day and agedue to legislation. McLaren should be building supercars of the future and the V12 is of the past. McLaren will never build another car with more than eight cylinders.”



Just when i thought Mclaren could not be anymore boring and souless, they come out with this crap!

[HighwayStar]

harryowl said:

Can't help but feel its kind of a 'half baked' attempt... same engine and tub as the 12c, no central driving position.

So what you would like to see is just the same again?
I'm amazed how sooo many people know exactly what LaFerrari and the P1 will deliver. The P1 with cold, sterile, unemotional. Bit like if you have a convicted murderer or thief in your family then hell, clearly you're all dodgy. McLaren are on their 3rd car (not the MacMerc stuff) and they've gone their own way. If they'd taken the Ferrari route they'd have been slaughtered saying they were just copying and you may as well buy a Ferrari.
I love that McLaren are British and they are getting stuck in, the 12C is the first proper production car, one that's not quite as good as a 458 maybe. Hardly a total failure. Lets see happens once the journos get behind the wheel.
Incidentally, I like that Macca are being a bit cocky, why not... All this going about our business, quietly, dignified, in a very British way... Yeah it could all fall flat but nowt wrong with hanging ya balls out there in my book.

Edited by HighwayStar on Tuesday 7th May 20:11

[boxerTen]

AFC1886 said:

“Big V12s aren’t practical in this day and agedue to legislation. McLaren should be building supercars of the future and the V12 is of the past. McLaren will never build another car with more than eight cylinders.”

Just when i thought Mclaren could not be anymore boring and souless, they come out with this crap!

Of course what McLaren means is its too expensive/difficult to engineer a high performance naturally aspirated engine that complies with legislation. Ferrari and Lamborghini seem to manage it though.

[anonymous-user]

Got to love Mclaren PR and trash talking, considering they are struggling to shift cars atm e.g MP-12c not selling well as people are going for the spider, Ron Dennis losing his voting powers at Mclaren, Pissed off Bahrainis demanding answers about their investment, struggling f1 team with two meh drivers and also losing Mercedes engines in F1, they will soon turn into another Williams.

http://forums.autosport.com/index.php?showtopic=18...

A good read for those who are not convinced.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th May 21:11

[HighwayStar]

JohnGoodridge said:

loudlashadjuster said:

mrclav said:

kith said:

As for the V12 being the past? Well, so are mechanical watch movements, but true watch enthusiasts don't buy quartz.

That's a very bad example; watch movements are not held to legislation regarding emissions so it's not really a comparable argument. Remember, McLaren is not a mass-market car manufacturer so unlike VAG, Toyota et al they have to keep an eye on these things more than Ferrari or Porsche would need to. If for them a V12 is a thing of the past blame the EU quangos not McLaren.

It's also a very bad example in that quartz watches comprehensively trump mechanical watches in terms of 'performance' (i.e. keeping time), with the "enthusiast" watches only scoring on design, appreciation of engineering and not a little amount of history/brand cachet/snob value/etc.

No-one doubts that a V12/mechanical movement can still perform at a high level, but if you want to build the highest-performance car/watch then the absence of a V12/mechanical movement may not be an impediment, and may in fact give a significant advantage.

V12s look great, sound lovely, have excellent characteristics (smoothness, power delivery etc.) and so on, but the fact remains they are generally large, heavy and thirsty compared to other layouts and that today it is no longer necessary to have a thumping great cylinder count and swept capacity to offer ultimate performance.

McLaren, in their own slightly clumsy way, are only recognising this, perhaps as stubborn justification/denial of the fact they seemed bound to use a derivative of the 12C's V8?

Not convinced. The LaFerrari does not look huge, especially heavy or thirsty compared to the P1. And it is all about compromises. And why would you choose to compromise great looks, sound, smoothness and power delivery for CO2 and economy and er... what else? This is the hypercar segment, not the citycar.

IMHO it's the product of faulty thinking, McLaren's 'both/and' philosophy produces bad compromises like 'I was worried about the LaFerrai but then I found out it didn't have an electric only function'.. The more singlemindeness of the Ferrari design process, and the McLaren F1's result in less compromise IMHO.

He was saying the V12 engine tends to be heavy and thirsty
Also you missed that whole point about what the McLaren guy was saying about the electric motor. He wasn't saying the Ferrari can't drive purely on electric power. He said the electric motor gives added torque... Instantly!!! And increases throttle response. Read it again!

[Studio117]

Why go to the trouble of developing a new engine, when they have invested a large amount of money in the current v8?

It isn't exactly old or underpowered and the whole car shares the same tub as the 12c, so makes sense.

I prefer the screaming v12's from Pagani, Lamborghini and ferrari they are just immense.