RE: McLaren MP4-12C, Now With Added 'Phwoarr'

[TVRWannabee]

Dagnut said:

Should probably get a train back to 1974 where that expression could be appreciated.

We clearly move in different circles.

[E21_Ross]

Rich_W said:

Ref the earlier poster who said "well the Audi V10 has done well" Yep. But it's CONSIDERABLY cheaper!

might be worthwhile you reading my post properly before commenting on it; just a thought.

[E21_Ross]

Rich_W said:

So WHY did McLaren choose to ignore ALL that history and brand loyalty and build a car that has divided opinion so much? Why couldn't they just build a baby F1 for the 2010's with all the regulations we have today.

because without any electrics it would be much slower than all the competition, and people like you would moan like fk that it's slow and raggy on the edge.

[toppstuff]

E21_Ross said:

because without any electrics it would be much slower than all the competition, and people like you would moan like fk that it's slow and raggy on the edge.

And because most people could not afford one and would not want one anyway...

McL know what they are doing. The order book is evidence of this.

And, without repeating myself for the eleventieth time, this is NOT THE ONLY McLAREN BEING BUILT- IT IS THE START OF A RANGE OF CARS....

No doubt they are working on a version for teenage onanists and people after the "Phwoarr factor" to impress their "model and actress" girlfriends in Cheadle Hulme as we speak.

The MP4 is a car that is a precision tool for drivers who do not want to look like a tool.

[Turbo Harry]

otolith said:

Turbo Harry said:

That's what these people think. They'd find the truth somewhat different if they weren't so lazy. But now thanks to James' efforts, it's a mantra that will be parroted by the ignorant.

Interesting - so, if they're wrong about why so many cars ride so badly, what would you say is the real reason?

Fashion. Spend some time with the chassis engineers at the Ring and they will deliver you a car that not only handles well enough not to be instantly slated by the press but also will ride well. These people who have never been to the Nurburgring sometimes seem to think it's a billiard-smooth racetrack when it's anything but. The Karussell absolutely eats driveshafts. It's so arduous, it acts as an accelerated wear programme that would otherwise need thousands of road miles to replicate. I was at the Mercedes plant at Sindelfingen the other week and they have a test rig there which takes data recorded from the Ring and uses it to test suspension components because they haven't found any better general program.

Then the marketing department will intervene and insist that the car in question has to run on 20-inch wheels or nobody will buy it. Look at Audi. People complain about Audi ride quality yet every bugger chooses S-Line trim with huge alloys. The Nurburgring isn't turning all cars into racing cars. That's just ignorant.

[Daisy Duke]

P9UNK said:

Daisy Duke said:

Not at all, I love the three wheeler that Morgan have recently released. I'm not sure what you mean by tabloid speculation, as I was describing my experience of McLaren and partly what put me off buying one. I was actually offering constructive criticism by saying if they weren't so hung up about trying to look uber efficient (which they aren't) they might be cut more slack.

If you're going to use the F1 analogy who would you honestly want to drive for - Ferrari with their chaotic passion, McLaren with their rather austere efficiency or Red Bull with their inventiveness and sense of fun? Personally for me it would be Red Bull as they seem to be able to win whilst still being able to have a good time - and they're an Austrian team showing that you don't have to conform to stereotypes.

Oh and just a tip, if you're going to try to be condescending you tend to undermine your argument if you can't spell the name of the manufacturer correctly.

I was just checking you would spot the spelling error! (You have me on that point!) Rather than being condescending I just disagree with you, I love all the stats and nonsense of making precision engineering, and I don't make judgements about Ron Dennis as I don't know him. I'm just not on site to give a real view on what it is like working at McLaren and I don't feel the 'austere efficiency'. If you have had a McLaren experience and you explained it I might understand your point but as it is there are so many people making claims on a car they haven't even seen it is difficult to fully get your point. I am sure life at Ferrari isn't perfect, I'm sure they are not back slapping each other and talking about Tardelli's 1982 world cup goal all day... generally people are people and business is business.

That's exactly my point though, Ferrari can get away with not being perfect and a bit disorganised because they can play the "it's all part of being a passionate Italian" card whereas McLaren can't because, from the outset, they made out that they were infallible and the car would be spectacular. Aiming high is all very laudable but if you're not realistic then you are bound to disappoint people, and disappointment leads to disillusionment and ultimately derision. It's all about management of expectations and I think they promised too much, both in terms of the car and organisation of the company. If they had seemed more human then I believe they would have been forgiven more easily for their failings. Let's hope that the fact that they have effectively admitted they have made mistakes means they won't be seen as quite so arrogant in the future.

As to my question regarding what the brand stands for, I know what McLaren think they are saying when they play up Ron's OCD* and the sterile working environment, but it's counterproductive IMO. I know geek cool had a brief reign recently, but generally geeky things aren't attractive, and rain man tendencies certainly aren't, not in an aspirational product anyway. My point is, is that I know Chris Goodwin actually has a good sense of humour, as I'm sure many of the other guys working there do too, but McLaren themselves don't seem to want that to shine through and instead want to portray themselves as some sort of borg-like organisation which can be rather off-putting to those of us who prefer a more human face of a company. I'm not suggesting that they try and associate the brand with sexiness like the Italian brands are, but I'm not sure that it being seen as the brand for nerds (someone even commented that the insignia looked like something out of Star Trek) is such a good idea either.

• For the record, I don't care about Ron's issues, I just found it strange (and a bit distasteful to be honest) that they seemed to want to make a kind of selling point out of it. Oh and my partner and I had two on order, one to be an everyday car for me and the other to be a trackday car for him.

[JonRB]

toppstuff said:

The MP4 is a car that is a precision tool for drivers who do not want to look like a tool.

Quotable quote of the thread for me.

[marcosgt]

KaraK said:

... If no-one is allowed to comment unless they have the cash to buy one then most of this thread wouldn't be allowed to comment and neither would alot of the journalists who have reviewed the cars...

Indeed and I totally agree, but I qualified my question by saying that if I (or you, I suspect) REALLY had that kind of money for a car, I'd expect the car to be totally great in every respect.

Even without having that kind of money I KNOW that I wouldn't spend £200K on a 'supercar' that broke down all the time or was relatively boring to drive.

I wouldn't accept that of the kinds of cars I buy now, so why would anyone settle for anything less than excellence when they have a lot more money?

M.

[JonRB]

SniffPetrol nails it as usual:

http://sniffpetrol.com/2011/07/21/mclaren-revises-...

SniffPetrol said:

McLaren has announced a raft of changes to the MP4-12C which it hopes will address media criticism of the car.

The first change is to the styling, which McLaren say has been revised to look ‘more familiar’. In tandem with this major revision, the car will now be available only in red.

Inside, the previous unadorned steering wheel has been pointlessly festooned with confusing buttons whilst in the engine compartment a new facility has been introduced to allow the car spontaineously to catch fire.


The revised McLaren, yesterday

Finally, the McLaren badge has been revised so that it now incorporates a large equine animal in an upright posture and the car’s name has been simplified, retaining the number 4 but following it with the number 5 to reflect that it has over 500 horsepower and the number 8 to acknowledge the car’s cylinder count.

McLaren promise that all customer cars will be to the new spec and that the motoring media will be able to assess the revised model under circumstances of the factory’s choosing, accompanied by 37 of their engineers and a second, slightly lumpy sounding test car which can mysteriously be used only for straight line performance tests.

‘We think these far reaching changes will address all of the complains we have seen from journalists,’ said a McLaren spokesman. ‘And if they criticise the car again, this time we will react in a laughably pompous and histrionic way by throwing a big hissy fit and then banning them from talking about our products ever again’.

[E21_Ross]

JonRB said:

SniffPetrol nails it as usual:

http://sniffpetrol.com/2011/07/21/mclaren-revises-...

SniffPetrol said:

McLaren has announced a raft of changes to the MP4-12C which it hopes will address media criticism of the car.

The first change is to the styling, which McLaren say has been revised to look ‘more familiar’. In tandem with this major revision, the car will now be available only in red.

Inside, the previous unadorned steering wheel has been pointlessly festooned with confusing buttons whilst in the engine compartment a new facility has been introduced to allow the car spontaineously to catch fire.


The revised McLaren, yesterday

Finally, the McLaren badge has been revised so that it now incorporates a large equine animal in an upright posture and the car’s name has been simplified, retaining the number 4 but following it with the number 5 to reflect that it has over 500 horsepower and the number 8 to acknowledge the car’s cylinder count.

McLaren promise that all customer cars will be to the new spec and that the motoring media will be able to assess the revised model under circumstances of the factory’s choosing, accompanied by 37 of their engineers and a second, slightly lumpy sounding test car which can mysteriously be used only for straight line performance tests.

‘We think these far reaching changes will address all of the complains we have seen from journalists,’ said a McLaren spokesman. ‘And if they criticise the car again, this time we will react in a laughably pompous and histrionic way by throwing a big hissy fit and then banning them from talking about our products ever again’.

[Steve Gunnis]

That is great, spot on.

[andyclax1]

+1

[Turbo Harry]

Yep, funniest thing he's written for a very long time.

[Rich_W]

E21_Ross said:

Rich_W said:

Ref the earlier poster who said "well the Audi V10 has done well" Yep. But it's CONSIDERABLY cheaper!

might be worthwhile you reading my post properly before commenting on it; just a thought.

Dear fk nuts! I can read but here for your simplified clarity is your quote. And my simplified explanantion as to why, once again. You are an idiot HTH.

e21rossiloverondennishecandonowrong said:

oh, just a thought, is there any reason behind those saying when people want a super car they want it to be flamboyant etc? are there really any other super cars out there which are a little conservative? not really, the best i can think of is perhaps an R8 V10 Audi, and that's done pretty well IMO

The reason they can get away with more generic looks is ENTIRELY the PRICE. No one would pay 200K for the R8. Lots of shared components with the Gallardo of course. So why don't people just buy the Audi and NEVER the Lambo? Because, a very small percentage of supercar buyers buy with their head. They buy with the heart. If they bought with their head they'd have a M5/911

E21_Ross said:

because without any electrics it would be much slower than all the competition, and people like you would moan like fk that it's slow and raggy on the edge.

Well lets not fk about McLaren COULD have made that work and be faster than F458 and have driver involvement and all the things the 12c lacks. But they CHOSE not to. And that's just sad.

Anyway. ETA


Forthcoming.

Edited by Rich_W on Thursday 21st July 20:37

[E21_Ross]

Rich_W said:

some stuff

Touch a nerve did I?

well, why didn't ferrari make their car free from electrics then?

[toppstuff]

Rich_W said:

incoherent stuff

And your point is what exactly...

Oh and I'll raise you this..

Watch this car cream the 458's in GT racing..

[Rich_W]

E21_Ross said:

Rich_W said:

some stuff

Touch a nerve did I?

well, why didn't ferrari make their car free from electrics then?

I dunno. I don't care. McLaren wanted to be "different" to Ferrari. That's commendable. But they went the wrong way. And THAT'S the real problem. (With the secondary one being the 2 year hype and how it will be "better than Ferrari")

p.s nice way to dodge my salient points though No one noticed...

[Rich_W]

toppstuff said:

Watch this car cream the 458's in GT racing..

Only thus far it hasn't has it...

[toppstuff]

Rich_W said:

I dunno. I don't care. McLaren wanted to be "different" to Ferrari. That's commendable. But they went the wrong way. And THAT'S the real problem. (With the secondary one being the 2 year hype and how it will be "better than Ferrari")

p.s nice way to dodge my salient points though No one noticed...

You did not make any salient points that I could see...

The McLaren is apparently faster, more practical, better riding and less like a posing pouch.

You don't want one. Good for you. Lots of people do not share your view.

Besides, this is only the FIRST new McLaren. No doubt the Phwoarr version with added chestwig will be launched later.

Edited by toppstuff on Thursday 21st July 21:08

[Badapple]

where are the pictures taken?