RE: Chris Harris video: 911 Turbo vs McLaren 12C
Discussion
Randomer123 said:
k-ink said:
Absolutely. It would be an interesting comparison.
I will volunteer my Litch GTR if Monkey wants a comparison! http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
tjlees said:
The Litchfield's GTR lost against the Audi R8 last time ....
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
If I remember rightly didn't it lose on enjoyment but on pace battered the pair of them? http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
GroundEffect said:
GALLARDOGUY said:
jacksparrow11 said:
around the saschenring , the 991 turbo s (on standard production road tyres) , was faster than both the mclaren spyder and coupe both with 625bhp (on slicks) , evo also run a test where the gt3 991 was faster than the mclaren , and Porsche claims the turbo s is faster than the gt3 on a track. On a twisty road the turbo s would disappear from the 12c , same with the f12 and aventador , the only performance advantage these cars have over the 911 is in a 1 mile drag race and unless you go to organised drag races , you're never gonna see the performance advantage over the 911 turbo.Sure they all sound better and are head turners , but its that attention and drama that makes people buy the 911 turbo in my opinion.
I simply don't believe the the road tyre/slick type statement you made.It's not possible.
New account eh APOLO1?
Sportauto which I am given to believe is a more highly regarded publication had the 12c pre power update and turbo s (both on cup type tyres) doing the same time around Hockenheim for what that is worth.
tjlees said:
Randomer123 said:
k-ink said:
Absolutely. It would be an interesting comparison.
I will volunteer my Litch GTR if Monkey wants a comparison! http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Could I just ask why anyone would think that the price difference between the two cars would have ANY bearing on the performance tests?
The Spyder was only chose because the normal car was not available for testing and it is common practice for demonstrators to be fully loaded as it encourages people to go for these options once they have seen / experienced them - it's just good marketing. However, I'd be interested in knowing how certain posters feel that this affects this performance test, as an option less model would give the same performance stats as the fully loaded one, so I don't understand why they are harping on about the 100k difference compared to the 45k?
Back to the vid and in the beginning shots of the 12C, I thought that Chris looked ill at ease with it, as if he didn't gel with the open diff. And then he seemed to suddenly be able to make it "dance" as we expect from a CH vid. I suspect the tec in the Mclaren means that it takes much more getting used to, where the Porsche is much more intuitive and is easy to drive fast from the "get go".
Personally, I wouldn't have either, as both are too fast for the road and too road orientated for the track. As with many others on here, Porsche have made almost all other cars irrelevant with the 991 GT3. God only knows where the bar is going to end up with the RS version.
The Spyder was only chose because the normal car was not available for testing and it is common practice for demonstrators to be fully loaded as it encourages people to go for these options once they have seen / experienced them - it's just good marketing. However, I'd be interested in knowing how certain posters feel that this affects this performance test, as an option less model would give the same performance stats as the fully loaded one, so I don't understand why they are harping on about the 100k difference compared to the 45k?
Back to the vid and in the beginning shots of the 12C, I thought that Chris looked ill at ease with it, as if he didn't gel with the open diff. And then he seemed to suddenly be able to make it "dance" as we expect from a CH vid. I suspect the tec in the Mclaren means that it takes much more getting used to, where the Porsche is much more intuitive and is easy to drive fast from the "get go".
Personally, I wouldn't have either, as both are too fast for the road and too road orientated for the track. As with many others on here, Porsche have made almost all other cars irrelevant with the 991 GT3. God only knows where the bar is going to end up with the RS version.
VFM sportscar.Mike Rainbird said:
Could I just ask why anyone would think that the price difference between the two cars would have ANY bearing on the performance tests?
The Spyder was only chose because the normal car was not available for testing and it is common practice for demonstrators to be fully loaded as it encourages people to go for these options once they have seen / experienced them - it's just good marketing. However, I'd be interested in knowing how certain posters feel that this affects this performance test, as an option less model would give the same performance stats as the fully loaded one, so I don't understand why they are harping on about the 100k difference compared to the 45k?
Back to the vid and in the beginning shots of the 12C, I thought that Chris looked ill at ease with it, as if he didn't gel with the open diff. And then he seemed to suddenly be able to make it "dance" as we expect from a CH vid. I suspect the tec in the Mclaren means that it takes much more getting used to, where the Porsche is much more intuitive and is easy to drive fast from the "get go".
Personally, I wouldn't have either, as both are too fast for the road and too road orientated for the track. As with many others on here, Porsche have made almost all other cars irrelevant with the 991 GT3. God only knows where the bar is going to end up with the RS version.
Ignore the options on the cars. There is a price difference between these 2 cars at list price. It comes down to whether a potential buyer thinks they get a proportional or worthwhile advantage for the extra spend. Do you buy a 3 bed semi for £300K or £400K in the same road. Do you buy a normal Snickers or the Duo version. The Spyder was only chose because the normal car was not available for testing and it is common practice for demonstrators to be fully loaded as it encourages people to go for these options once they have seen / experienced them - it's just good marketing. However, I'd be interested in knowing how certain posters feel that this affects this performance test, as an option less model would give the same performance stats as the fully loaded one, so I don't understand why they are harping on about the 100k difference compared to the 45k?
Back to the vid and in the beginning shots of the 12C, I thought that Chris looked ill at ease with it, as if he didn't gel with the open diff. And then he seemed to suddenly be able to make it "dance" as we expect from a CH vid. I suspect the tec in the Mclaren means that it takes much more getting used to, where the Porsche is much more intuitive and is easy to drive fast from the "get go".
Personally, I wouldn't have either, as both are too fast for the road and too road orientated for the track. As with many others on here, Porsche have made almost all other cars irrelevant with the 991 GT3. God only knows where the bar is going to end up with the RS version.
Everytime there's a price difference between very similar items (and both these cars are high end fast road cars) you need to look to see if 1 makes more sense to the purchaser.
Dblue said:
tjlees said:
Randomer123 said:
k-ink said:
Absolutely. It would be an interesting comparison.
I will volunteer my Litch GTR if Monkey wants a comparison! http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Impasse said:
So what? Serious question. So what?
Car A is faster than Car B in conditions demarked by XYZ. It's only Top Trumps enthusiasts or pub bores who think that's important. Buyers don't care, the drivers the cars don't care. If they did then Aston wouldn't sell a single car, the Elise would have been a sales flop and the R8 would never have been lauded quite so vehemently.
Try to ignore your fixation with the stopwatch as its results aren't overly important when it comes to enjoying the experience of performance cars. Cars are so much more than parameters which can be measured in hundredths of a second and focussing on a such a narrow quality is missing the point of owning one.
I'm quoting this with little context, as I am a bit behind with this topic, and have not read everything, but in isolation, I wholeheartedly agree with you. The fascination with lap times and performance numbers increasingly bores me. For the purposes of general discussion, we are not racing drivers. We drive our road cars on the road. My previous car was slightly quicker than my current one, but do I care? Not really, I miss it sometimes, but my new steed is vastly superior in every other way. Both measurably and otherwise.Car A is faster than Car B in conditions demarked by XYZ. It's only Top Trumps enthusiasts or pub bores who think that's important. Buyers don't care, the drivers the cars don't care. If they did then Aston wouldn't sell a single car, the Elise would have been a sales flop and the R8 would never have been lauded quite so vehemently.
Try to ignore your fixation with the stopwatch as its results aren't overly important when it comes to enjoying the experience of performance cars. Cars are so much more than parameters which can be measured in hundredths of a second and focussing on a such a narrow quality is missing the point of owning one.
Very few people buying super cars actually care that XYZ is quicker at ABC, and even if they did, they'd probably own both anyway. Too many people judge cars based on their own financial position and personal choice. They forget that the guys who are able to afford such machines, can also afford to own the other options. Does anyone really believe that someone who is fortunate or hard working enough to be able to afford a Bugatti Veyron, really cares that some other car might lap a random circuit faster, with another driver behind the wheel? If they did, they'd just buy both anyway.
Kenny Powers said:
....
Very few people buying super cars actually care that XYZ is quicker at ABC, and even if they did, they'd probably own both anyway. Too many people judge cars based on their own financial position and personal choice. They forget that the guys who are able to afford such machines, can also afford to own the other options. Does anyone really believe that someone who is fortunate or hard working enough to be able to afford a Bugatti Veyron, really cares that some other car might lap a random circuit faster, with another driver behind the wheel? If they did, they'd just buy both anyway.
Monkey Harris does a great vid on the touchy feely aspects of a car - trying to gauge how your five senses are emotionally engaged by the car in question. This is why in the Litchfield's GTR v R8 - the R8 won... And why here CH does not give a clear winner - they are both at the top of their game. Both are a very good choice especially secondhand.Very few people buying super cars actually care that XYZ is quicker at ABC, and even if they did, they'd probably own both anyway. Too many people judge cars based on their own financial position and personal choice. They forget that the guys who are able to afford such machines, can also afford to own the other options. Does anyone really believe that someone who is fortunate or hard working enough to be able to afford a Bugatti Veyron, really cares that some other car might lap a random circuit faster, with another driver behind the wheel? If they did, they'd just buy both anyway.
However I do like the facts and figure that mags like autocar give on stopping distances, db at 70mph and of course lap time son the wet handling circuit - it adds another dimension and means I can really become a pub/Internet bore
Any car that achieves 0-60 of sub 4 secs at bruntingthorpe's concrete/ semi loose surface has my respect. And to add fuel to the fire, any car that is £100+k, 200kg and 50+ bhp down and still thrashes the Maclaren upto 120mph and on a track is definitely a supercar.
jacksparrow11 said:
APOLO1 said:
on track a 991tts, will leave a 12C....Like half a lap in front after a lap.....ok in the wet.......
yes , if I'm correct the 991 turbo s is the fastest production car around the saschenring , faster than the 625 bhp mclaren , and the 997 gt2 rs , both of which were on race tyres , the 911 was on standard production tyres.
Too much focus being placed on the drag race here for me, this is not a North American site! Its got to be the 12C for me everytime in the 'want' department. I go faint at the sight of those doors going up and down.
Most UK Porsche buyers seem to be graduating to GT3/4x4 (or random family shoitebox) approach anyway and are too old for the 2+2.
Apolo is right about the massive price difference, give the guy some credit at least but its a drag race everyone wanted to see, right ?
I would like to see what the Mp4 would do on Michelin rubber, surely this is one of the Porsche's strong points and one of the Macca's weakest.
tjlees said:
...thrashes the Maclaren upto 120mph
Really? What I saw was one car barely ahead of the other. Then the roles reversed, with one barely ahead of the other above 120. There was no thrashing on either side. If you really want to see a thrashing put either up against a modified GTR. k-ink said:
tjlees said:
...thrashes the Maclaren upto 120mph
Really? What I saw was one car barely ahead of the other. Then the roles reversed, with one barely ahead of the other above 120. There was no thrashing on either side. If you really want to see a thrashing put either up against a modified GTR. (Vmax 200)
This whole thread is pointless. So what difference does throwing a GTR in the mix make? My point is there is no thrashing going on here. Just splitting hairs between two cars with very similar performance. Lots of toys being thrown about for no real differences. If you want to see a proper thrashing you will need to compare it to much faster cars, such as modded GTRs or even unmodified Ultima 720 if you wish. Getting your panties in a twist over hardly any differences is daft.
Besides if your budget is £200k that buys a lot of tuning for an Ultima or GTR.
Besides if your budget is £200k that buys a lot of tuning for an Ultima or GTR.
Edited by k-ink on Sunday 1st December 11:48
k-ink said:
Besides if your budget is £200k that buys a lot of tuning for an Ultima or GTR.
I'm sure lots of potential Turbo customers are struggling to decide between that and an Ultima.Point of the Turbo is surely that out of the box it's very, very quick, refined and totally usable. If you want ultimate thrills or whatever there are plenty of other cars to choose from.
k-ink said:
tjlees said:
...thrashes the Maclaren upto 120mph
Really? What I saw was one car barely ahead of the other. Then the roles reversed, with one barely ahead of the other above 120. There was no thrashing on either side. If you really want to see a thrashing put either up against a modified GTR. It really is not decimation. It is a mere fraction of a second. That margin of advantage slips away a few seconds later anyway.
My whole point, which has been completely missed, is why argue about such tiny differences? If split seconds are so damn important buy a much faster car in the budget. £200k buys a lot of options. If other things are more important, such as badge, looks, massaging seats or golf club storage buy whatever floats your boat.
My whole point, which has been completely missed, is why argue about such tiny differences? If split seconds are so damn important buy a much faster car in the budget. £200k buys a lot of options. If other things are more important, such as badge, looks, massaging seats or golf club storage buy whatever floats your boat.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff