More replies to McLaren F1 questions and comments
Discussion
Who could say 'no' to an F1, but after taking in these exchanges my answer to the question about wanting one more or less is that, if money was no object, you could have anything and everything you wanted and for most that would include the McLaren. But if it was about choosing one hypercar only, for me it would have to be a Dauer Porsche 962 LM. Not just because of 0-60 in 2.6s or the top speed of over 250, but it helps 
flemke,
since you are familiar with donkervoort, are you anywhere near to holland? cause i live in nijmegen and there are some fairly nice dutch/german roads out here that would allow spirited driving at the right moment of the day.
secondly, i just love the look of you car, the dark rims, the mirrors (later more on that), the blue, it's plain awesome.
There are a few things i think you're not quite right about:
-mclaren will change stuff on the car, performance wise too. lately chassis 73 was auctioned by christies and it had different rims with lower tires and it featured a 691 bhp lm-spec engine, and the high downforce kit. I know the braking of the mclaren is not up to modern standard (set by the carrera gt as far as i know), have you ever asked if the ferrari enzo brakes (brembo too) could be installed on your car, or will that conflict with the size of your rims? it must be sufficient for braking out a carrera gt
-your car was not the only one car with the z1 mirrors. chassis 69, formerly owned by the alleged criminal christopher dawes from england (killed in another f1, investigation was stopped) had a historic (or papaya) orange road car with the same mirrors you have (this car was spotted being trailed on a driveway by a nissan patrol gr in hattem (the netherlands)).
some more about the mirrors, i heard they broke of at high speeds, because the small thing that connected the mirror body to the a-pillar was not strong enough, but i think you know more on that anyway.
I am an automotiveforums.com member too, as you might have noticed, and i too want to invite you there, a discussion between frank selldorff and you would be fun and very interesting to watch.
many thanks in advance for answering
cheers,
maarten
since you are familiar with donkervoort, are you anywhere near to holland? cause i live in nijmegen and there are some fairly nice dutch/german roads out here that would allow spirited driving at the right moment of the day.
secondly, i just love the look of you car, the dark rims, the mirrors (later more on that), the blue, it's plain awesome.
There are a few things i think you're not quite right about:
-mclaren will change stuff on the car, performance wise too. lately chassis 73 was auctioned by christies and it had different rims with lower tires and it featured a 691 bhp lm-spec engine, and the high downforce kit. I know the braking of the mclaren is not up to modern standard (set by the carrera gt as far as i know), have you ever asked if the ferrari enzo brakes (brembo too) could be installed on your car, or will that conflict with the size of your rims? it must be sufficient for braking out a carrera gt
-your car was not the only one car with the z1 mirrors. chassis 69, formerly owned by the alleged criminal christopher dawes from england (killed in another f1, investigation was stopped) had a historic (or papaya) orange road car with the same mirrors you have (this car was spotted being trailed on a driveway by a nissan patrol gr in hattem (the netherlands)).
some more about the mirrors, i heard they broke of at high speeds, because the small thing that connected the mirror body to the a-pillar was not strong enough, but i think you know more on that anyway.
I am an automotiveforums.com member too, as you might have noticed, and i too want to invite you there, a discussion between frank selldorff and you would be fun and very interesting to watch.
many thanks in advance for answering
cheers,
maarten
A few replies to recent comments on this thread:
ettore (how about 908/02?) -
In most respects it is a lovely thing. I had a close look at one over the weekend and its beauty shone through, with a stark exception.
The (visual) problem is those dive planes stuck on the outside of the front wings. Don't you think that they look awkward? At 300 kph it's probably better if your front wheels are in contact with the ground, I suppose, but in a fantasy car the looks are important.
condor (doesn't being selfish and aggressive interfere with racing success?) -
Your view surprises me. I am unacquainted with McNab, who I have no doubt is both an honourable man and a very quick driver. I would have thought that he is exceptional.
In current competition, the most blatant example to the contrary is M Schumacher, whose overwhelming selfishness and frequently outrageous on-track behaviour have become infamous. His predecessor uber-shoe, Senna, was scarcely more decent.
It seems to me that the nature of the game penalises the nice guy: "No, please, my good fellow, after you..."
From what one reads, it seems that in years past when racing was far more dangerous than it is today, it was more common, and perhaps the norm, for civility to rule. Sad to say, I don't believe that that applies any longer.
turbobloke (Dauer 962 LM?) -
A creative suggestion. No doubt the dynamics of this car are extraordinary. The same could be said for any big-league race car of the last twenty years. In the manner of smashing a square peg into a round hole, Dauer contrived to make a fabulous racer road-legal. That is very different from making it into a fabulous road car.
I have no experience with the Dauer, but I have spent a bit of time in the road version of the CLK-GTR, which was Mercedes's Le Mans car in the late '90's (remember Dumbreck's and Webber's flying lessons?). What a nightmare that car is, even when it's earthbound! The heat, noise, ride, space - in short, those environmental factors by which one judges whether one is glad at any particular moment to be alive - were almost unbearable. The Dauer can't be much different.
As I recall the Dauer costs something like a million Euro's. For that money, wouldn't you rather have a Rothmans 962, or four 962s with lesser provenance?
dew@pr (highest gear in which wheelspin possible?) -
I couldn't say for sure, as I don't drive that way. My guess would be third.
maartenvanthek (Dutch driving conditions/possible factory mod's to F1/mirrors/the other website) -
Judging from what I have heard about the Leftist anti-driving environment in the Netherlands, I think that if I never drove there my life would not go unfulfilled.
As I said in other places recently, the factory will do some mod's, but only if they are either cosmetic or have previously been approved by British authorities (via the LM's type-approval or whatever it was exactly). They will use 18" wheels, as they did on the LM, but the fronts are very wide, so by using them you would not be improving the handling progressivity, and those wheels/tyres make for a very big turning circle. They also increase the unsprung weight. The high-downforce kit is available, as on the auctioned car, but as I said before there are compromises with it.
The situation regarding the factory's changing the engine spec I should not get into. As I also said before, the car does not need more power. You can barely, in the rarest of circumstances, use what you got as standard.
On the Z1 mirrors, I believe that I said that my car was, so I was told, the only one to come out of production with those mirrors. I had heard that two owners subsequently wanted them retro-fitted to theirs.
As regards Internet dialogues or participation with other owners, I like Pistonheads and the folks who use it, so I'll stay here, thanks.
flemke said:
condor (doesn't being selfish and aggressive interfere with racing success?) -
Your view surprises me. I am unacquainted with McNab, who I have no doubt is both an honourable man and a very quick driver. I would have thought that he is exceptional.
In current competition, the most blatant example to the contrary is M Schumacher, whose overwhelming selfishness and frequently outrageous on-track behaviour have become infamous. His predecessor uber-shoe, Senna, was scarcely more decent.
It seems to me that the nature of the game penalises the nice guy: "No, please, my good fellow, after you..."
From what one reads, it seems that in years past when racing was far more dangerous than it is today, it was more common, and perhaps the norm, for civility to rule. Sad to say, I don't believe that that applies any longer.
McNab is a senior PHer
Funnily enough
I disagree with your most blatant example of Michael. I don't think such a loving family man and great team player could ever be described as 'hugely selfish'. His joy at winning each GP has to be admired...because it's so genuine...for him and his team. Valentino Rossi is an incredible talent...it's amazing what he's done this year - his move from the very successful Repsol Honda team to poor performers Yamaha was a new challenge for him and his team.
I think it needs a very special person to be a successful racer...
Agreed that Rossi is a shining star.
I know nothing about bike racing, but it appears to be rare that one rider actually puts another in physical jeopardy. Not sure whether that is because of the risk to oneself, the risk to the competitor, the amount of space available for overtaking, the sport's traditions or something else. In Moto GP bikes come together much less often than they do in F1; presumably that is not because F1 drivers are simply more mistake-prone.
Schumacher is another story. With respect to his being a loving family man, there are plenty of scoundrels who are loving family men.
Team player? He is very interested in the success of his team - so long as he himself is the beneficiary of that success. It has always seemed pathetic that Rubens is forced to commit in writing unfailingly to subordinate himself to the interests of Schumacher whenever instructed to do so.
Recently one of Schumacher's earliest teammates at Benneton - it may have been Brundle, but I forget - remarked that even at the very beginning of his F1 career it was obvious how focused and adept young Michael was at getting the team to work for him, at the expense of the other team driver. This behaviour is very much in the Senna mould.
Just think about some of the stunts that Mikey has pulled: punting off Hill to secure a championship, unsuccessfully attempting the same against Villeneuve, forcing Alonso onto the grass at 180mph at last year's British GP.
Two years ago in Austria Schumacher was already dominating the F1 championship, yet he conspired to force Barrichello to gift him that farcical "victory". Was that the conduct of a true champion?
Michael Schumacher is a man with enormous talent and miniscule class. The talent he inherited at birth; the class he's made himself.
Agreed Flemke.
However the unpleasantness you see in many F1 drivers doesn't necessarily exist in all areas of racing. Equally you don't need to be that way in order to do well. Many F1 drivers come from a background where they are pushed hard at a young age, and they storm their way up the racing series like a bunch of spoilt brats.
But for every one of these ther are lots of people who just want to race. Whether you do well or not depends on talent and motivation to win. I believe strongly that it is possible to be a success (in sport and in life) and yet try to be as nice to people as possible.
Anyhow if Schumacher et al are unpleasant, they will get their reward in the end - what comes around goes around !
However the unpleasantness you see in many F1 drivers doesn't necessarily exist in all areas of racing. Equally you don't need to be that way in order to do well. Many F1 drivers come from a background where they are pushed hard at a young age, and they storm their way up the racing series like a bunch of spoilt brats.
But for every one of these ther are lots of people who just want to race. Whether you do well or not depends on talent and motivation to win. I believe strongly that it is possible to be a success (in sport and in life) and yet try to be as nice to people as possible.
Anyhow if Schumacher et al are unpleasant, they will get their reward in the end - what comes around goes around !
I agree that it can help, but I don't think that it is a necessity. Greed, selfishness aggression etc are often confused with the ability to make the correct decision, particularly when it is a hard decision that will not be universally popular.
You've obviously been reasonably successful Flemke (what with the F1 and all that), yet you come across as a nice guy. Obviously, in order to be successful (in sport, business, life - whatever) hard decisions have to be made (whether it's sacking somebody, confronting somebody etc) but it doesn't follow that it's always necessary to trample everyone underfoot in the name of success.
Of course if one does behave in a ruthless way it can give you an advantage, but I believe that it is a price worth paying in order to try and find that balance between being nice and being successful (i.e. not having that advantage). This is easy for me to say though, as I just want to be successful enough for myself, I don't need to win at all costs (except when I play football).
Actually I think this is particularly true in business, what's the point in being the boss if everybody hates you ? These people always end up being stabbed in the back at the first opportunity !
I think the most important things are the ability to get on with people, the ability to work hard, the ability to make the most of whatever talent you have and a bit of common sense. I hope this is true anyhow .... as my F1 purchase (at an unspecified future date) relies on it !
:-)
You've obviously been reasonably successful Flemke (what with the F1 and all that), yet you come across as a nice guy. Obviously, in order to be successful (in sport, business, life - whatever) hard decisions have to be made (whether it's sacking somebody, confronting somebody etc) but it doesn't follow that it's always necessary to trample everyone underfoot in the name of success.
Of course if one does behave in a ruthless way it can give you an advantage, but I believe that it is a price worth paying in order to try and find that balance between being nice and being successful (i.e. not having that advantage). This is easy for me to say though, as I just want to be successful enough for myself, I don't need to win at all costs (except when I play football).
Actually I think this is particularly true in business, what's the point in being the boss if everybody hates you ? These people always end up being stabbed in the back at the first opportunity !
I think the most important things are the ability to get on with people, the ability to work hard, the ability to make the most of whatever talent you have and a bit of common sense. I hope this is true anyhow .... as my F1 purchase (at an unspecified future date) relies on it !
:-)
condor said:
Funnily enough
:coughsplutter: That's one of the funniest things I've read all year! I really hope you're not being serious...
His 'joy' at winning each GP isn't genuine in the least - his post-race actions are exactly the same every time, right down to supposedly pointing at someone in the crowd and putting his thumb up to them. As for the 'trademark' jump into the air, words almost fail me... Prost never felt the need to leap into the air like a monkey and neither did Stirling Moss.
You've been listening to James Allen a bit too much...
Rossi, however, does always look pleased and his celebrations always raise a chuckle.
Anyway, it's been very interesting reading about McLaren ownership, Flemke. A race driver I used to work with owned one of the early '95 F1 racers - which he road-registered for fun after it became uncompetitive - but this is the first I've heard about what it's like to own a proper road car.
I think with regards to bike racing despite being as ultra competitive as most other forms of motor sport, my belief is that there is certainly a more gentlemanly rivallry and in fact, tactically, it pays off to "vacate" positions in a race to preserve fuel, tyres etc and to take advantage aerodynamically. It is accepted that positions will change in a race and therefore less risk taking/defensive riding except perhaps coming towards the end of a race. In F1 there is less room for overtaking and subsequently a very agressive offensive and defensive stance adopted by all of the drivers (some moreso than others though however).
Flemke, it was indeed Brundle that provided these comments about Schumacher.
Flemke, it was indeed Brundle that provided these comments about Schumacher.
in driving ambition, there's a chapter with that orange car i was talking about (the car is not 69 btw, maybe 71 iirc), but it does have z1 mirrors, and one of ralph lauren's cars (he has 2 different shades of silver) has them too, i've seen pictures, so maybe mclaren is a bit to precious with giving information about other cars to owners ;-)
maarten:
Good detective work. I had never looked closely enough at those images.
The guys at the factory always tell the truth as they know it, to the best of their ability. Especially on something as trivial as this question, they don't even have a reason to dissemble.
The Lauren car was one of the two to which I was referring (I hope that it does not seem uncooperative of me not to mention names, but I should not do so.). As the other car never gets driven, it's more a statistic than a part of the real world.
I believe that the car pictured in the book was destroyed, was it not? In that case, perhaps the exact words that I was told were, "There are only two others...", which would strictly speaking be correct.
Good detective work. I had never looked closely enough at those images.
The guys at the factory always tell the truth as they know it, to the best of their ability. Especially on something as trivial as this question, they don't even have a reason to dissemble.
The Lauren car was one of the two to which I was referring (I hope that it does not seem uncooperative of me not to mention names, but I should not do so.). As the other car never gets driven, it's more a statistic than a part of the real world.
I believe that the car pictured in the book was destroyed, was it not? In that case, perhaps the exact words that I was told were, "There are only two others...", which would strictly speaking be correct.
Gary,
I have been following and reading your posts with intense interest and facination, thank you so much for sharing your experiences!
I had the pleasure of meeting a friend of yours when he recently purchased a BJ Trailer I was selling to transport his "toy" to various tracks. Out of courtesy, I shall not name him as he is also PHer.
At the time of chatting over a coffee, I was in complete awe of his anecdotes of your car related "dawn raids!"
I mentioned at the time: If I can I die having been able to share half the stories you have, I will die having lead a fulfilled life.
Thanks you again for making PH's that much better.
Tuan
I have been following and reading your posts with intense interest and facination, thank you so much for sharing your experiences!
I had the pleasure of meeting a friend of yours when he recently purchased a BJ Trailer I was selling to transport his "toy" to various tracks. Out of courtesy, I shall not name him as he is also PHer.
At the time of chatting over a coffee, I was in complete awe of his anecdotes of your car related "dawn raids!"
I mentioned at the time: If I can I die having been able to share half the stories you have, I will die having lead a fulfilled life.
Thanks you again for making PH's that much better.
Tuan
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff