RE: McLaren vs Porsche

[Rich_W]

Johnny Cayman said:

How refreshing to read a senior figure in the industry openly and constructively admiring the product of one of his competitors. And why not? McLaren, Porsche Ferrari ALL make good cars, and it just childish to do nothing but put down another product just cos it doesn't have your badge on it.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if our politicians could adopt such a grown up attitude. I am sick to death of Messrs Milliband, Cameron and all the other braying donkeys ranting at each other with all the panache of a 5 year old in a playground. Wise up MP's, there is a lesson here for you from a proper grown up!

sleep envy said:

Mike Flewitt said:

We're less of a fashion statement than Ferrari and Lamborghini.

Indeed.



They just can't help themselves can they! All this PR says to me is that they don't consider Porsche a rival in the same mould as Ferrari.

It's like when some nobody wins the Masters golf. Woods, Mickelson Garcia etc go on about how he's a lovely bloke and deserves the win, he played so well. But if Woods was beaten by Garcia. The 'praise' is far more muted "he played well today. I played crap" It's the same for all top sports people. Same if Chilton won a race. Lewis et al would be pleased. You think Nico was pleased to get beaten by Lewis?

Dear McLaren. In future stop rubbishing the competitions products. Either give them respect or don't mention them at all. Blowing your competitors candle out doesn't make yours brighter!

Edited by Rich_W on Tuesday 8th April 19:21

[martin elaman]

I suspect that mclaren don't have the economies of scale that VW do. People may not realize it but the new 991 and GT3 variant (especially with roll cage in) are of similar weight and are actually more rigid structures than the tub that Mclaren uses...Ian Kuah reports here:

http://www.9tro.com/features/new-cars/mclaren-12c-...

"The steering, ride, handling and grip of any car are directly linked to its structural rigidity. Make a car rigid enough, and you don’t need as stiff a suspension, which benefits ride and handling. With a torsional stiffness of 23,000Nm/degree, the 12C Spider shows no loss of actual or perceived rigidity over its Coupe sister."

Some may say that with the roof the 12c is more rigid but in this targa like configuration as a base, I doubt by much. In truth the 991 series is a much more rigid platform somewhere around 40.000 nm/degrees. thats a big difference and maybe part of the reason why the much less powerful GT3 lapped Bedford (evo test)faster than the much more powerful 12c. m

[blasos]

Pistonheads said:

It looks likely the P13 will beat the GT3's weight of 1,505kg

The 650S is 2kg lighter than the GT3, so your assertion makes sense. Also, kilogram is not a unit of weight, it's a unit of mass. Personally, I'd have the GT3 or a 458 Italia over a 650S. Technically superb, but is almost devoid of any charm.

[jakesmith]

russy01 said:

I dont normally bite, but I hate comments like this. If Porsche didnt make SUV's then the sports cars they produce would be half as good. Its easy to sit and slate sports manufacturers for making superminis (cygnet!) & SUV's but these cars arent always made out of choice. They are often made so their business can continue to grow/become more profitable so they can continue to invest money into their sports models for us people to dream about.

Plus think about it. If you had the requirement (and funds of course) for a SUV - who would you rather have make yours. A run of the mill manufacturer who normally makes boring city cars for 20k or a top of the range volume sports car manufacturer who has tried to build fun/performance into an otherwise boring utility vehicle.

If in the future McLaren decide to release a top end SUV to support and grow their business, I bloody well hope people buy it so we can see what sports cars they will continue to produce in the future.

These manufacturers are businesses, not organisations to please old hat people

Brilliant post

[johnfm]

blasos said:

Pistonheads said:

It looks likely the P13 will beat the GT3's weight of 1,505kg

The 650S is 2kg lighter than the GT3, so your assertion makes sense. Also, kilogram is not a unit of weight, it's a unit of mass. Personally, I'd have the GT3 or a 458 Italia over a 650S. Technically superb, but is almost devoid of any charm.

When was the last time you saw a manufacturer quote vehicle weight in Newtons?

Pedantry like that suggests you're a bit odd.

[HighwayStar]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You are fairly wide of the mark the Cmoose...
30 odd years ago Porsche were on their knees, not a pot to piss in... on the edge of going out of business. Wendelin Wiedeking became boss and brought in Toyota's Kaizen, or continuous improvement programme and Japanese engines to instil it throughout the company. The Japanese revolutionised Porsches production processes. The time taken to build a 911 was reduced by a 3rd, weeks of parts we reduced to 30 minutes worth of stores. Everything was brought in 'just-in-time' as it was needed. Next, the Boxster was produced. The car that basically put the company on the road to where it is now.
Do some reading, it's all out there. The SUVs do provide the profits, the cash to invest in R&D and produce the sexy stuff.
Porsche don't need to produce even more sports cars... if they did would they sell them all. Look how many people already believe they see 911's and Boxsters everywhere.
I want a Porsche Cayman and it doesn't bother me one bit that they produce SUVs and people buy them.

[anonymous-user]

Porsche replaced my engine with a brand new one. Grr and gnash. I'm very very angry in general, mainly because I'm a tt but also about this appalling behaviour and it's a tragedy of biblical proportions, off to top meself now

Joking aside, would this have happened to a proper GT3 engine, i.e., a Metzger F6 (only saying). VW and its obsession with volume and chasing non-enthusiasts who can't drive will be the ruination of Porsche in the credibility stakes; not that they'll care, as more and more Audi 911s and Porsche Q7s roll off the production lines.

[lamboman100]

Porsche and McLaren are both somewhat overrated. Too clinical and not all that pretty for the prices they charge.

[Dan Trent]

dazren said:

Last paragraph, mentions the GT3 weighs 1505kg. Really? Thought it was about 1430kg.

Porsche quotes 1,505kg EU with a not especially powerfully built driver; 1,430kg DIN with fluids sans said proud owner aboard. A 650S is 1,330kg dry so, roughly, 30kg or so lighter if you were to go DIN for DIN.

I've amended the copy with the DIN figure for clarity's sake.

Cheers,

Dan

[Dagnut]

toppstuff said:

HeMightBeBanned said:

The comments about not competing against Ferrari ring hollow, tbh. Didn't McLaren come into the marketplace with the sole intention of being the best? The numbers for the 12C were impressive but it's not all about numbers. The fact that the 12C came off 2nd best in pretty much all magazine tests against the 458 and now this, "We're really competing with Porsche and not those Italian posing pouches" line reads to me like a tacit admission of failure.

I disagree. Quite the opposite IMO.

The media has been quick to compare the 12C with the 458 but I think they are quite different in character. Having had some time in both, I see where McLaren are coming from.

The 458 is all about instant thrills. Everything about the 458 is about having instant gratification.

The 12C just isn't like that. It is more of a car that you develop a longer term relationship with. It takes a while to get to know the McLaren, while the 458 plays all its cards immediately.

In this respect, Mclaren is a LOT more like Porsche than Ferrari IMO.

McLaren directly pitched the 12c against the 458 when it was released did they not? Similar price, performance, mid engine super car...how could they not be compared?
How short are peoples memories?

[The Vambo]

lamboman100 said:

Porsche and McLaren are both somewhat overrated. Too clinical and not all that pretty for the prices they charge.

I have asked a dozen posters who have described various cars as "clinical", what, specifically, does it mean?

I still haven't had a decent answer, I can only presume that it is the inverse of the mythical Alfa Romeo "character".

[Mermaid]

The Vambo said:

lamboman100 said:

Porsche and McLaren are both somewhat overrated. Too clinical and not all that pretty for the prices they charge.

I have asked a dozen posters who have described various cars as "clinical", what, specifically, does it mean?

I still haven't had a decent answer, I can only presume that it is the inverse of the mythical Alfa Romeo "character".

Flawed = character

[toppstuff]

Dagnut said:

McLaren directly pitched the 12c against the 458 when it was released did they not? Similar price, performance, mid engine super car...how could they not be compared?
How short are peoples memories?

I know they are compared, obviously. Given that they are both mid engined two seaters costing similar sums that is inevitable.

But I do strongly believe they are very, very , very different in character. This is why so many people apparently find their heads explode as a result of the tribal warfare that seems to break out whenever the two cars are mentioned. I think I have lost count of the number of people who disparage one of them to extremes, while bigging-up the other.

I personally do not think they are the same at all. And the Mclaren guy does have a point with the "fashion accessory " thing ( even if it was silly to say so ) . Ferrari DO have a much more fashionable brand and to many buyers that does, sadly, matter a lot.

Put it this way. Having spent time in 458's I am now quite certain that I do not want one. But I do want a Mclaren. They are more restrained, a bit less obvious, a bit more like the car you would move to from a Porsche. Thats IMO anyway.

[Dagnut]

toppstuff said:

I know they are compared, obviously. Given that they are both mid engined two seaters costing similar sums that is inevitable.

But I do strongly believe they are very, very , very different in character. This is why so many people apparently find their heads explode as a result of the tribal warfare that seems to break out whenever the two cars are mentioned. I think I have lost count of the number of people who disparage one of them to extremes, while bigging-up the other.

I personally do not think they are the same at all. And the Mclaren guy does have a point with the "fashion accessory " thing ( even if it was silly to say so ) . Ferrari DO have a much more fashionable brand and to many buyers that does, sadly, matter a lot.

Put it this way. Having spent time in 458's I am now quite certain that I do not want one. But I do want a Mclaren. They are more restrained, a bit less obvious, a bit more like the car you would move to from a Porsche. Thats IMO anyway.

That's fine, but that's your subjective opinion on how the cars feel and how they appeal to you. You could form that opinion on any two cars in the same market sector. No two cars from different manufacturers are they same,but without peers any comparison is pointless...

[ORD]

tommy1973s said:

Porsche replaced my engine with a brand new one. Grr and gnash. I'm very very angry in general, mainly because I'm a tt but also about this appalling behaviour and it's a tragedy of biblical proportions, off to top meself now

Joking aside, would this have happened to a proper GT3 engine, i.e., a Metzger F6 (only saying). VW and its obsession with volume and chasing non-enthusiasts who can't drive will be the ruination of Porsche in the credibility stakes; not that they'll care, as more and more Audi 911s and Porsche Q7s roll off the production lines.

You really are a special chap. Porsche makes Porsches. Audi make Audis.

The Macan is a Porsche on an Audi platform (and the sharing of major structural components is (a) not remotely unusual and (b) not even limited to marques under common ownership).

The 911 is pure Porsche, as is the Cayman/Boxster. VW does not control Porsche manufacturing any more than your boss tells you how to scratch your arse.

[RoverP6B]

Mermaid said:

Flawed = character

Not all character stems from flaws. I think most people would say that an Alfa Romeo Busso V6 or a Mezger flat six is flawless, but they have bags of character. Equally, there have been some pretty flawed engines that haven't had much character. The Ricardo V8 in the McLarens is a fine engine, but it's rather dull and anodyne. The current Ferrari V8 isn't much more appealing either. I'd far rather have an LS (Corvette engine) or the Yamaha/Volvo engine found in the Noble M600.

[matsoc]

I don't think that P13 engine would be NA, without forced induction that engine would just be too...poor, no chance against a 458 or a GT3 too. They should design it from scratch to make it competitive without turbo.

Said so, despite I think that, overall, the MP4-12C is not as good as the 458, I would buy it over a Ferrari. I had the lucky chance to have a brief drive in both and I love the fact that it doesn't takes all the Ferrari attention (at least here in Italy). I also love the looks (but the I can't say the same about the 650s seen in the flesh at Geneva but still not on the roads). The straight line performance is shocking and the added comfort make me believe I would be able to use it more than a 458 for weekend getaways. The 458 gave me more thrills but the MP4-12C made me more curious.

[Kawasicki]

martin elaman said:

I suspect that mclaren don't have the economies of scale that VW do. People may not realize it but the new 991 and GT3 variant (especially with roll cage in) are of similar weight and are actually more rigid structures than the tub that Mclaren uses...Ian Kuah reports here:

http://www.9tro.com/features/new-cars/mclaren-12c-...

"The steering, ride, handling and grip of any car are directly linked to its structural rigidity. Make a car rigid enough, and you don’t need as stiff a suspension, which benefits ride and handling. With a torsional stiffness of 23,000Nm/degree, the 12C Spider shows no loss of actual or perceived rigidity over its Coupe sister."

Some may say that with the roof the 12c is more rigid but in this targa like configuration as a base, I doubt by much. In truth the 991 series is a much more rigid platform somewhere around 40.000 nm/degrees. thats a big difference and maybe part of the reason why the much less powerful GT3 lapped Bedford (evo test)faster than the much more powerful 12c. m

Torsional stiffness specs are not something I would trust, unless I measured them myself.

[OlberJ]

smilo996 said:

Great. There will be a thrashed GT3 for sale, formerly owned by the McLaren Automotive MD once the P13 is on the road, the the owner laughing his head off as he gets into his P13.

All the better is that McLaren will do it without the resources of one of the biggest automotive groups in the world.

The days of the 911 are numbered. Look forward to see Porsches new mid engined sports car.

I find your unending posts of Porsche hate quite funny. I'm assuming tainted by experience in a 996?

Just remember to breath every once in a while.

[RoverP6B]

matsoc said:

I don't think that P13 engine would be NA, without forced induction that engine would just be too...poor, no chance against a 458 or a GT3 too. They should design it from scratch to make it competitive without turbo.

Said so, despite I think that, overall, the MP4-12C is not as good as the 458, I would buy it over a Ferrari. I had the lucky chance to have a brief drive in both and I love the fact that it doesn't takes all the Ferrari attention (at least here in Italy). I also love the looks (but the I can't say the same about the 650s seen in the flesh at Geneva but still not on the roads). The straight line performance is shocking and the added comfort make me believe I would be able to use it more than a 458 for weekend getaways. The 458 gave me more thrills but the MP4-12C made me more curious.

Is there anything fundamentally wrong with the block or head design for natural aspiration? I'm no engineer, but I'd have thought, fit a set of high-compression pistons and you're away.