Harry's Garage - YouTube
Discussion
PinkHouse said:
I'd be willing to bet that most of the people slating the 750s have not seen one in person, let alone driven one. If you listen to one drive by or drive one yourself, there's no way you won't be impressed by the sound. McLarens always sound tamer from inside and video audio doesn't do it justice
I drove a 720 to Germany and round the Ring and had enough McLarens go past me in the U.K. on both the road and track. It's a simple fact that the engine is not aurally inspiring as the rear of the car. It's simply missing the notes or tones that get under one's skin and exist in other engines. It's just one of those things. I had a deposit on the 12c and finally got a test drive in 2011/12 and through London the key thing that was clear was that the engine just didn't have the noises that you generally expected. From the get go it's always sounded as if you are hearing it through a wall rather than directly, if that makes sense?
I also think the sound aspect has been well documented over the years. And that the joke was that Ron Dennis wasn't a fan of emotion so had it removed.
The negative aspect that I would prefer to counter is the constant repetition that these cars are unreliable and live in the workshop. I think it is fair to accuse them of not being as robust as one's mother's Golf but up at where they sit I'm not sure it is a valid claim and appears to generally come across as one of those football things where if you support one team you are legally obliged to slander and slur the other. To which note, McLaren have only been building supercars for 14 years. Ferrari have been trying to do it for 85 years and still keep making mistakes so I think that turning up on their turf on day one with something that was a near match and then surpassing them with some models ought to be considered rather impressive and you certainly see more McLarens on track days than Ferraris and there are a lot more of those out there so getting chosen over the de facto GT3 porker for something that can be driven to a circuit, hammered and driven home has to account for something.
0a said:
E90_M3Ross said:
I think basically all flat-plane crank V8s sound pretty crap....Yes, including Ferraris! There are few exceptions, for me.
Agreed. This was particularly bad. 
Although you can't put a 458 and any McLaren into the same boat, they're on different planets sound wise.
Great road trip although unless I'm mistaken we didn't actually hear Harry run it out to the redline in any gear.
I wonder if that's because it's just so fast you can't do it on the road without being deeply irresponsible or maybe the sound is just so poor it didn't sound like it was anywhere near 8000rpm when in fact it was.
Still dream roadtrip fodder.
I wonder if that's because it's just so fast you can't do it on the road without being deeply irresponsible or maybe the sound is just so poor it didn't sound like it was anywhere near 8000rpm when in fact it was.
Still dream roadtrip fodder.
Edited by ChocolateFrog on Monday 15th April 07:49
ChocolateFrog said:
Great road trip although unless I'm mistaken we didn't actually hear Harry run it out to the redline in any gear.
I wonder if that's because it's just so fast you can't do it on the road without being deeply irresponsible or maybe the sound is just so poor it didn't sound like it was anywhere near 8000rpm when in fact it was.
Still dream roadtrip fodder.
Certainly in the earlier road section the corners were just arriving long before the engine was hitting high rpm. Those are the exact sort of roads that I enjoy driving the most but I struggle to find pleasure on them with modern supercars, partly because they are just so unbelievably good at doing what they do but partly just because the world has evolved. The days of running French motorways at 140+ or the sweeping country roads of Alsace maintaining a 100+ average or wringing out in the hills of the Dordogne are kind of gone. The whacky racers era is over but also the entrants themselves are just so phenomenally capable that you still wouldn't be using their capabilities. If you could still drive like that it would still be like asking Einstein to fix Windows 11 for you but in reality today it's more akin to hiring Einstein to just turn the drawing room lights on and off. I wonder if that's because it's just so fast you can't do it on the road without being deeply irresponsible or maybe the sound is just so poor it didn't sound like it was anywhere near 8000rpm when in fact it was.
Still dream roadtrip fodder.
Edited by ChocolateFrog on Monday 15th April 07:49
The autoroute is generally 90 tops these days and I just find these types of cars irritating. They drive at 90 on the motorway exactly like a generic travelling salesmen's car. Low rpm, zero fuss, zero drama, very comfortable except you're in something that exists to precisely not do that unlike the repmobile. Then on the open country roads these things can hit close to 200 and even at 100 are so capable that they're boring or at least there is zero excitement in driving them at 100 on the open road, they're just above tickover and handling so well you might as well be doing 40. Then, once into the real twisties you've got too much performance left over between the corners so again you just aren't using the car for what it was born to do.
For me, it's a car you have to have a circuit as a key destination otherwise a loop round European roads and back is just hugely frustrating. Insert a good thrashing at Spa, the Ring or elsewhere and the game changes as you e got to use it for what god intended. For a pure road trip I find much more pleasure in much slower stuff which deliver a bit of excitement much closer to both legal and sensible limits.
ChocolateFrog said:
0a said:
E90_M3Ross said:
I think basically all flat-plane crank V8s sound pretty crap....Yes, including Ferraris! There are few exceptions, for me.
Agreed. This was particularly bad. Although you can't put a 458 and any McLaren into the same boat, they're on different planets sound wise.
DonkeyApple said:
I drove a 720 to Germany and round the Ring and had enough McLarens go past me in the U.K. on both the road and track. It's a simple fact that the engine is not aurally inspiring as the rear of the car. It's simply missing the notes or tones that get under one's skin and exist in other engines.
It's just one of those things. I had a deposit on the 12c and finally got a test drive in 2011/12 and through London the key thing that was clear was that the engine just didn't have the noises that you generally expected. From the get go it's always sounded as if you are hearing it through a wall rather than directly, if that makes sense?
I also think the sound aspect has been well documented over the years. And that the joke was that Ron Dennis wasn't a fan of emotion so had it removed.
The negative aspect that I would prefer to counter is the constant repetition that these cars are unreliable and live in the workshop. I think it is fair to accuse them of not being as robust as one's mother's Golf but up at where they sit I'm not sure it is a valid claim and appears to generally come across as one of those football things where if you support one team you are legally obliged to slander and slur the other. To which note, McLaren have only been building supercars for 14 years. Ferrari have been trying to do it for 85 years and still keep making mistakes so I think that turning up on their turf on day one with something that was a near match and then surpassing them with some models ought to be considered rather impressive and you certainly see more McLarens on track days than Ferraris and there are a lot more of those out there so getting chosen over the de facto GT3 porker for something that can be driven to a circuit, hammered and driven home has to account for something.
Good post. It seems McLaren bashing is a favourite pastime of many on the internet and it seems to be that old weird British habit of bashing our own and excusing the flaws of the German/Italian competition.It's just one of those things. I had a deposit on the 12c and finally got a test drive in 2011/12 and through London the key thing that was clear was that the engine just didn't have the noises that you generally expected. From the get go it's always sounded as if you are hearing it through a wall rather than directly, if that makes sense?
I also think the sound aspect has been well documented over the years. And that the joke was that Ron Dennis wasn't a fan of emotion so had it removed.
The negative aspect that I would prefer to counter is the constant repetition that these cars are unreliable and live in the workshop. I think it is fair to accuse them of not being as robust as one's mother's Golf but up at where they sit I'm not sure it is a valid claim and appears to generally come across as one of those football things where if you support one team you are legally obliged to slander and slur the other. To which note, McLaren have only been building supercars for 14 years. Ferrari have been trying to do it for 85 years and still keep making mistakes so I think that turning up on their turf on day one with something that was a near match and then surpassing them with some models ought to be considered rather impressive and you certainly see more McLarens on track days than Ferraris and there are a lot more of those out there so getting chosen over the de facto GT3 porker for something that can be driven to a circuit, hammered and driven home has to account for something.
I think you're right about the aural lack of satisfaction compared with some competitors. I would argue that recent V8 Ferraris have been lacking in that department too. 296 doesn't sound great IMO. For me, this is where Lamborghini murder the competition. Huracan or Aventaor sound absolutely epic...
cerb4.5lee said:
I never thought much of the sound of the flat plane crank V8 at idle in my Cerbera either, so I do understand where you're coming from. It did sound nice and angry at really high revs in fairness to it for me though.
I'll likely be shot down for this but I don't think the 458 sounds that good. It's not bad by any means, but there are far nicer V8s in my opinion. ChocolateFrog said:
And still significantly slower in a straight line than a much cheaper Taycan.
I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
Significantly slower? Really?I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
2.4s 0-62 goes up against 2.8s for the Mclaren (looking at the Taycan Turbo S) - but that 'win' gets completely flipped in the 0-200km/h stats.
Wouldn't call that a win in either direction, except to say both are staggeringly quick, such that you won't be doing too many launches before feeling ill.
Sway said:
ChocolateFrog said:
And still significantly slower in a straight line than a much cheaper Taycan.
I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
Significantly slower? Really?I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
2.4s 0-62 goes up against 2.8s for the Mclaren (looking at the Taycan Turbo S) - but that 'win' gets completely flipped in the 0-200km/h stats.
Wouldn't call that a win in either direction, except to say both are staggeringly quick, such that you won't be doing too many launches before feeling ill.
ChocolateFrog said:
And still significantly slower in a straight line than a much cheaper Taycan.
I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
I'd skip the Taycan just for the moment as the journey planning isn't my style and you wouldn't have the option of towing car B to destination B. I'm not convinced we've reached the point just yet where GT EVs are adding luxury over ICE. I think I'd prefer a Cayenne for the better utility and the Audi V8 does sound nice even when towing at 80 and hustling a van is fun. I think that's why stuff like the Alpine appeals so much.
A 1000hp Taycan daily and a sub 1.1t sports car that you can actually wring round some B-roads without risking prison.
p1stonhead said:
And also that entire trip would have been impossible in a taycan due to the mileages done.
I would't say impossible but just that you need to do more route and destination planning and any deviation also requires planning. While that wouldn't bother some people for others it's a total luxury and pleasure killer. For me a big part of a road trip and getting away is the not planning beyond definitely having to book accommodation in advance these days as long gone are the days of just rocking up. A few days of no real planning and just making it up as you go remains a core part of the pleasure for me. DonkeyApple said:
Certainly in the earlier road section the corners were just arriving long before the engine was hitting high rpm. Those are the exact sort of roads that I enjoy driving the most but I struggle to find pleasure on them with modern supercars, partly because they are just so unbelievably good at doing what they do but partly just because the world has evolved. The days of running French motorways at 140+ or the sweeping country roads of Alsace maintaining a 100+ average or wringing out in the hills of the Dordogne are kind of gone. The whacky racers era is over but also the entrants themselves are just so phenomenally capable that you still wouldn't be using their capabilities. If you could still drive like that it would still be like asking Einstein to fix Windows 11 for you but in reality today it's more akin to hiring Einstein to just turn the drawing room lights on and off.
The autoroute is generally 90 tops these days and I just find these types of cars irritating. They drive at 90 on the motorway exactly like a generic travelling salesmen's car. Low rpm, zero fuss, zero drama, very comfortable except you're in something that exists to precisely not do that unlike the repmobile. Then on the open country roads these things can hit close to 200 and even at 100 are so capable that they're boring or at least there is zero excitement in driving them at 100 on the open road, they're just above tickover and handling so well you might as well be doing 40. Then, once into the real twisties you've got too much performance left over between the corners so again you just aren't using the car for what it was born to do.
For me, it's a car you have to have a circuit as a key destination otherwise a loop round European roads and back is just hugely frustrating. Insert a good thrashing at Spa, the Ring or elsewhere and the game changes as you e got to use it for what god intended. For a pure road trip I find much more pleasure in much slower stuff which deliver a bit of excitement much closer to both legal and sensible limits.
You've summarised so much better than my feeble attempts at what I was trying to say. Not attacking the McLaren at all, but more a combination of the type of car, the ridiculous power and capability they have nowadays, and the laws of diminishing returns.The autoroute is generally 90 tops these days and I just find these types of cars irritating. They drive at 90 on the motorway exactly like a generic travelling salesmen's car. Low rpm, zero fuss, zero drama, very comfortable except you're in something that exists to precisely not do that unlike the repmobile. Then on the open country roads these things can hit close to 200 and even at 100 are so capable that they're boring or at least there is zero excitement in driving them at 100 on the open road, they're just above tickover and handling so well you might as well be doing 40. Then, once into the real twisties you've got too much performance left over between the corners so again you just aren't using the car for what it was born to do.
For me, it's a car you have to have a circuit as a key destination otherwise a loop round European roads and back is just hugely frustrating. Insert a good thrashing at Spa, the Ring or elsewhere and the game changes as you e got to use it for what god intended. For a pure road trip I find much more pleasure in much slower stuff which deliver a bit of excitement much closer to both legal and sensible limits.
loudlashadjuster said:
I took his comment to mean “these guys were more used to their own cars and to the terrain, but with the power on tap in the 750S it was never a problem to make up any gap in even the shortest of straights”
At the end of the day, he’s driving McLaren’s £250k car. He’s not going to be giving it 10/10.
Yes, that occurred to me too, later. I agree.At the end of the day, he’s driving McLaren’s £250k car. He’s not going to be giving it 10/10.
JeremyH5 said:
With all this talk of the flat plane V8 McLaren use, I realise I don’t know why a manufacturer would choose one over an alternative that sounds better. Are they more efficient, better balanced? Can anyone educate me on this please?
Used to be about getting better balance out of the v8 design. DonkeyApple said:
JeremyH5 said:
With all this talk of the flat plane V8 McLaren use, I realise I don’t know why a manufacturer would choose one over an alternative that sounds better. Are they more efficient, better balanced? Can anyone educate me on this please?
Used to be about getting better balance out of the v8 design. DonkeyApple said:
JeremyH5 said:
With all this talk of the flat plane V8 McLaren use, I realise I don’t know why a manufacturer would choose one over an alternative that sounds better. Are they more efficient, better balanced? Can anyone educate me on this please?
Used to be about getting better balance out of the v8 design. Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff