RE: McLaren MP4-12C, Now With Added 'Phwoarr'
Discussion
Alfa numeric said:
They set out to build a Device For Travelling Quickly that can be used every day and in that they succeeded admirably- the trouble is in the real world this isn't the be all and end all of supercar ownership. The conclusions of the magazines and the reaction of the factory to those conclusions reflect that and to suggest that the magazines all skewed the result to sell magazines is a little unfair.
But the "loud , outlandish sideways supercar" thing is already covered by Ferrari and Lamborghini. For some people this is the "be all and end all of supercar ownership" as you put it. And its well covered.Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
Frik said:
otolith said:
I've certainly seen the criticism made in print before.
It was Richard Porter, ironically in his column in Evo. I'm sure the fact that he was banging the drum against development at the 'ring some time ago and just happens to be the script editor for Top Gear is merely coincidental...
Alfa numeric said:
I think you're reading too much into their test
I don't think so. EVO set a narrative that the internet across the world leapt on ( how many pages did the thread here on PH last for !! ) that said the Mclaren was great but lacked "soul" and 'passion".EVO then appoints itself as the hero of the hour, making McLaren change the car so that it better suits the subjective opinion of a handful of self-important motoring journalists.
EVO then issues a front page on their next magazine telling the world what clever chaps they are , how they got Mclaren to change things and how mighty and important they must be.
Frankly, I would have preferred it if McLaren simply told them to bugger off.
And if I do find myself in a Mclaren showroom - I would be interested to know if I can delete the "EVO" options and have the car as Mclaren intended...
jamespink said:
I understand the occasional driver would want a shreiking monster but, in the real world, ML intend this to be an "every day" supercar. My bet is the extra in cabil noise plumbing will be a regreted addition for those that want to really drive a supercar through the week...
From what I have read it's only in the upper echelons of the rev range that the noise becomes apparent, also throttle position dependant.toppstuff said:
Alfa numeric said:
They set out to build a Device For Travelling Quickly that can be used every day and in that they succeeded admirably- the trouble is in the real world this isn't the be all and end all of supercar ownership. The conclusions of the magazines and the reaction of the factory to those conclusions reflect that and to suggest that the magazines all skewed the result to sell magazines is a little unfair.
But the "loud , outlandish sideways supercar" thing is already covered by Ferrari and Lamborghini. For some people this is the "be all and end all of supercar ownership" as you put it. And its well covered.Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
toppstuff said:
But the "loud , outlandish sideways supercar" thing is already covered by Ferrari and Lamborghini. For some people this is the "be all and end all of supercar ownership" as you put it. And its well covered.
Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
I totally agree, especially about different not being second best. Just because the motoring press prefer something else doesn't mean we all have to think that way. They get paid to have an opinion, just like film reviewers, football pundits and so on. You're allowed to disagree and thet's why they still have letters pages.Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
McLaren set out to beat Ferrari using empirical measures, and it appears that using those measures they've achieved their goals. The trouble is they're building a car, not a hifi, so there are more than just empirical ways to measure them.
You seem to think that the magazines have written the McLaren off but it wasn't like that at all. the general conensus seems to be "the McLaren is an immensely impressive car but given the choice we'd rather take the Ferrari". It wasn't written off as a competitor, it wasn't even as heavily criticised as the Mk3 MX5 was at launch. They tried a variety of cars out and concluded that they preferred a particular one. I'd disappointed it wasn't the McLaren but I don't think less of the mag or the car.
Guys, many of you are missing the point...
It's not the magazine, or the "facts", or the lap time.
Otherwise, you'd see streets clogged with GT-R's and no Porsche/Ferrari/Lamborghini.
You buy what you like. I reckon that *I* would be much faster on a track driving a GT-R instead of a GT3, but I'd never buy the Nissan, I don't like it even if today I could afford one. I rather prefer driving my Boxster S with the roof down and enjoy the sound of my flat-six, even though I've "just" 280 hp under my right foot.
In the same way, there's no way one can convince someone who loves the sound of a high-pitched V8 to buy a MP4 instead of a 458. Or someone who cares about the brand with the prancing horse. Or the looks, or the soul or whatever you call the emotional side of buying a car (which is very important in this price range).
But I'm sure there are a lot of people willing to buy something different, and this McLaren is precisely for them.
So relax and let the rich guys buy what they like.
It's not the magazine, or the "facts", or the lap time.
Otherwise, you'd see streets clogged with GT-R's and no Porsche/Ferrari/Lamborghini.
You buy what you like. I reckon that *I* would be much faster on a track driving a GT-R instead of a GT3, but I'd never buy the Nissan, I don't like it even if today I could afford one. I rather prefer driving my Boxster S with the roof down and enjoy the sound of my flat-six, even though I've "just" 280 hp under my right foot.
In the same way, there's no way one can convince someone who loves the sound of a high-pitched V8 to buy a MP4 instead of a 458. Or someone who cares about the brand with the prancing horse. Or the looks, or the soul or whatever you call the emotional side of buying a car (which is very important in this price range).
But I'm sure there are a lot of people willing to buy something different, and this McLaren is precisely for them.
So relax and let the rich guys buy what they like.
Edited by Kamox on Tuesday 19th July 13:41
toppstuff said:
I don't think so. EVO set a narrative that the internet across the world leapt on ( how many pages did the thread here on PH last for !! ) that said the Mclaren was great but lacked "soul" and 'passion".
EVO then appoints itself as the hero of the hour, making McLaren change the car so that it better suits the subjective opinion of a handful of self-important motoring journalists.
EVO then issues a front page on their next magazine telling the world what clever chaps they are , how they got Mclaren to change things and how mighty and important they must be.
Frankly, I would have preferred it if McLaren simply told them to bugger off.
And if I do find myself in a Mclaren showroom - I would be interested to know if I can delete the "EVO" options and have the car as Mclaren intended...
Wasn't Autocar and Car on the shelves a week before EVO? I'd also suggest that McLaren changed the car as a result of the feedback it got from all the motoring press. EVO's piece does make it sound like it was all down to them though, I'll agree with you there.EVO then appoints itself as the hero of the hour, making McLaren change the car so that it better suits the subjective opinion of a handful of self-important motoring journalists.
EVO then issues a front page on their next magazine telling the world what clever chaps they are , how they got Mclaren to change things and how mighty and important they must be.
Frankly, I would have preferred it if McLaren simply told them to bugger off.
And if I do find myself in a Mclaren showroom - I would be interested to know if I can delete the "EVO" options and have the car as Mclaren intended...
toppstuff said:
And that is the problem. And it demonstrates the power of journalism, if a single magazine can set a narrative that may influence your own point of view.
Of course, we look to those people who do have the good fortune to drive these cars to help us form an opinion. This is true of all journalism. But this only works if we trust the journalist or the motive of the publication they are writing for.
I do not trust EVO, Autocar or indeed any of the motoring press. The big problem ( as so well described in another post above ) is that the press have been passing off subjective points of view as fact.
The Mclaren clearly is at least the equal of the 458 from a technical or objective point of view. But clearly the 458 image, kudos and noise was preferred by a good number of journo's. But this is entirely subjective. I have a problem when this subjective view is then translated to a 'fact" with a headline saying that the "458 beats Mclaren".
The narrative spun from the magazines does influence opinion - it influenced you. I am just making the point that we need to separate the subjective from the objective and the likes of EVO are not helping us do this.
There are plenty of people who do not want the traditional supercar image. There are plenty of people who want a stealthier, quieter car without the "image baggage" of a traditional supercar. This is subjective too, but clearly it is a view not understood by the motoring press when they get given a car for 48 hours and the chance to rag it around a track. It is a point of view that the press should pay more respect to.
To review a car completely objectively, you’d have to remove all the emotional and intangible elements and purely use hard data to assess its merits. It’s one way of doing things, I suppose… But that’s not what supercars are really about, is it? Of course, we look to those people who do have the good fortune to drive these cars to help us form an opinion. This is true of all journalism. But this only works if we trust the journalist or the motive of the publication they are writing for.
I do not trust EVO, Autocar or indeed any of the motoring press. The big problem ( as so well described in another post above ) is that the press have been passing off subjective points of view as fact.
The Mclaren clearly is at least the equal of the 458 from a technical or objective point of view. But clearly the 458 image, kudos and noise was preferred by a good number of journo's. But this is entirely subjective. I have a problem when this subjective view is then translated to a 'fact" with a headline saying that the "458 beats Mclaren".
The narrative spun from the magazines does influence opinion - it influenced you. I am just making the point that we need to separate the subjective from the objective and the likes of EVO are not helping us do this.
There are plenty of people who do not want the traditional supercar image. There are plenty of people who want a stealthier, quieter car without the "image baggage" of a traditional supercar. This is subjective too, but clearly it is a view not understood by the motoring press when they get given a car for 48 hours and the chance to rag it around a track. It is a point of view that the press should pay more respect to.
Edited by toppstuff on Tuesday 19th July 12:51
So, in defence of magazine road testers, the only way that they can differentiate between one supercar and another is to be subjective because the measurable differences between them are so small. Sure, they may only have the cars for a short time, but they tend to drive them harder and in a greater variety of conditions than many owners will do in a lifetime. And most road testers will form their subjective opinion based on the experience of actually having driven the whole gamut of supercars over the course of many years. As for the McLaren not being a 'traditional supercar', I'm sure if the MP4-12C had triumphed in those group tests, McLaren would have been overjoyed to be considered traditional.
You may not agree with their conclusions about a particular car, but at least their opinion has been constructed around knowledgeable, first-hand experience. Disagree with the mags, sure, but it seems a little misguided not to trust them.
I would imagine McLaren have taken far more feedback from prospective and actual owners who have tried the car than paying particular heed to the press.
The tweaks are small time, low cost high impact with no issue against delivery times, so why not?
If they had wanted to build a car designed to emotionally engage like a pantomime Ferrari, they surely would have done- their own research dictated that wasn't necessary. All they have done in this instance is make small changes to further enhance the experience.
The tweaks are small time, low cost high impact with no issue against delivery times, so why not?
If they had wanted to build a car designed to emotionally engage like a pantomime Ferrari, they surely would have done- their own research dictated that wasn't necessary. All they have done in this instance is make small changes to further enhance the experience.
10 Pence Short said:
I would imagine McLaren have taken far more feedback from prospective and actual owners who have tried the car than paying particular heed to the press.
The tweaks are small time, low cost high impact with no issue against delivery times, so why not?
If they had wanted to build a car designed to emotionally engage like a pantomime Ferrari, they surely would have done- their own research dictated that wasn't necessary. All they have done in this instance is make small changes to further enhance the experience.
I agree.The tweaks are small time, low cost high impact with no issue against delivery times, so why not?
If they had wanted to build a car designed to emotionally engage like a pantomime Ferrari, they surely would have done- their own research dictated that wasn't necessary. All they have done in this instance is make small changes to further enhance the experience.
I know someone who has literally sold all they can to buy one of these and they couldn't give a fig about the Road Tests.
How many years have the Mags and likeminded people been saying "If only there were someone who could build a Ferrari challenger and all round supercar you really can use every single day because right now there is only Porsche."
McLaren have done it. Okay so it isn't £90k otr but it's there.
I would really want to love the MP12 as I adore the F1. First reviews left me somewhat cold. The styling is ok but nothing to keep me awake at night. The many comments on lacking emotional engagement were a bit a downer for me. I don't need the fastest car on the street but the one that is most fun to drive. There are many faster cars than my 7.2 GT3 but it delivers "specialness" on so many dimensions that it is near perfect for me.
It is great to see that McL immediately reacted to the criticism and did not go into a defensive mode. Desirability has gone up a lot with this news - at least for me
It is great to see that McL immediately reacted to the criticism and did not go into a defensive mode. Desirability has gone up a lot with this news - at least for me
Or888t said:
Sorry but Ferrari beats McLaren. What are you on about. the macca is better in everyway, except from so called 'soul' or whatever.
Almost every modern car will be better in every measurable way than a MK1 Capri, and yet you still chose to use a picture of one in your profile and have one in your fantasy garage.If you stand back and think why you like the Capri, you'll understand what people mean by the 'soul' of a car.
P9UNK said:
You are absolutely right, and this was exemplified by the 5th Gear test, the presenters obsessed with sideways when Hamilton and Button were probably feeding back more intelligent input. The 5th Gear test for me is quite a controversial piece of TV in that they really did fail to do any justice to a car that is such an engineering 'tour de force'.
To be honest, the evo review seemed fair to me.It was full of praise for the mclaren, and i fail to see where all this gumpf has come from about them "not getting mclaren"
Mclaren had set the goalposts that this was to be better than the 458. It was in many areas, but wasn't in two key areas. It's lap time wasn't faster round bedford and they complained that it didn't inspire confidence on turn in. The lack of noise, grabby brakes and paddles that were too stiff were minor annoyances.
What seemed totally stupid, was the 5th gear review whereby they went on about how they couldn't drive the car properly and was nothing but negative. The evo review was very balanced imo.
FWIW there was one parked in the Farm at Sillystone for the GP.
I'd seen it before in the flesh but was able to have a really good look around it and, dare I say, touch it in the flesh.
I doubt I will ever have the funds to own such cars myself but have crawled in, under and around 1,000's of the most desirable cars in the World including all of the MP4-12's closest road and race competition.
None of them have the sheer understated presence and force that this car has. Perhaps the best way to put it is read this thread:-
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
then make a car the embodies all of this and you have the MP4-12.
I'd seen it before in the flesh but was able to have a really good look around it and, dare I say, touch it in the flesh.
I doubt I will ever have the funds to own such cars myself but have crawled in, under and around 1,000's of the most desirable cars in the World including all of the MP4-12's closest road and race competition.
None of them have the sheer understated presence and force that this car has. Perhaps the best way to put it is read this thread:-
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
then make a car the embodies all of this and you have the MP4-12.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff