Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[The Moose]

isaldiri said:

flemke said:

Have had a CGT from new (but not crazy about it). Do not have a 918 but was very impressed by one in recent drive and since then have been seriously considering it.

How would you say the 918 compares to the CGT (per above am guessing you liked the 918 better)? Almost completely different cars in ethos of course but i guess not too different to the P1 and F1 either.

Anyone can drive a 918 reasonably quickly - it is SOOOO easy.

The CGT is much more involving car to drive - much more of a drivers car.

[DannyScene]

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

RenesisEvo said:

The most shocking thing for me? How the Porsche driver holds the steering wheel.

Glad someone else picked up on that

Laugh if you will, but I'll bet his reactions times are faster than yours.

Not sure either of us laughed or suggested our reaction times were faster but thanks for the insight
Also not sure how relevant the 2 are, it's a bit like saying 'wow look how that guy wears his hat'.... 'yeah but I bet he can run faster than you'

Edited by DannyScene on Friday 20th November 08:58

[Reg Local]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but...

Track mode in the P1.

I've read quite a few reviews and seen a few videos of the P1, in which it is stated quite catagorically that the car has a "track mode" which is illegal to use on the road. I understand that activating this setting lowers the ride height considerably, firms up the dampers, changes some aero settings to provide maximum downforce etc. - all very racy stuff.

I also understand that these settings would be pretty incompatible with using the car comfortably on the road - particularly British roads, some of which resemble a third-world war zone.

However, I'm pretty familiar with road traffic law and construction and use legislation, and I'm not aware of any reason why the car couldn't legally be driven on the road with this setting activated. I've read that the mode is illegal because of the extremely low ride height and the fact that the rear wing extends to a point where the centre brake light is obscured, but to my knowledge,there is no legal minimum ride height law and you're only required by legislation to have two working brake lights on each rear corner.

I understand that the car might not pass a vehicle approval test in race mode, but that wouldn't necessarily make it illegal to use on the road. Foolish, if you consider the potential cost of a P1 splitter / speed bump interface, but not illegal.

So, race mode illegal on the road. truth or marketing BS?

[flemke]

isaldiri said:

flemke said:

Have had a CGT from new (but not crazy about it). Do not have a 918 but was very impressed by one in recent drive and since then have been seriously considering it.

How would you say the 918 compares to the CGT (per above am guessing you liked the 918 better)? Almost completely different cars in ethos of course but i guess not too different to the P1 and F1 either.

At least in my experience, all Porsches have similar steering feel and weighting, similar brake feel and weighting, sort-of similar chassis balance, predictability and turn-in (allowing for different engine placements), similar instrumentation and build quality. In Porsches all these things are done well, and the CGT and 918 have them in common. (This is not to mention the external styling cues that are unmistakeably Porsche.) If you had not seen the outside of either CGT or 918 or any of the badges, you would still think that each was a Porsche.

What I don't like about the CGT are:

- It feels huge (I believe that the 918 is slightly shorter and narrower).

- The bucket seats seem to have been designed for Walter Rohrl, which is great if you're Walter Rohrl but not so great if you are amongst the 99% of the world adult population that is not as tall as Walter Rohrl. The seats are awful, quite possibly the most uncomfortable sports car seats that I have ever experienced.

- A crucial factor in the quality and driveability of a car is whether its controls (steering, throttle pedal, brake pedal, clutch and gearshift) are balanced, so that they all require a similar amount of effort to operate. Porsche usually get this spot-on. The Carrera GT is an exception.
The clutch is really heavy. Even if you are accustomed to fairly heavy clutches, this one will tire out your leg muscles.
The gear shift is the opposite.
In the first place, at least in my opinion it is mounted too high. Yes, it is closer than a typical gear stick to the steering wheel, but when was the last time that you muffed a shift because the gearstick was too far from the steering wheel?
The real problem, however, is that it is much too light, especially when paired with a clutch that is much too heavy.
Porsche had a really cool idea for the shift cables. Instead of normal woven cables connecting the gearstick to the gearbox several feet away, they devised flat "cables", in effect long flexible blades, that are housed within a tube and are guided by ball bearings - hence the very light shift action.
There is far too much of a difference between the gearshift and the clutch in terms of effort required. For me, this spoils the experience. (It does not help that the car is the only one in the world with a carbon-ceramic clutch, which feels and engages like no other clutch, but this shortcoming is dwarfed by the clutch-gearshift imbalance.)

Is CGT-to-918 analogous to F1-to-P1? Certainly in some ways, although not all (e.g., F1 is only one of the four to have a smallish footprint and good storage; the other three have big footprints and small storage). I'd like to think about that some more.

[flemke]

DannyScene said:

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

RenesisEvo said:

The most shocking thing for me? How the Porsche driver holds the steering wheel.

Glad someone else picked up on that

Laugh if you will, but I'll bet his reactions times are faster than yours.

Not sure either of us laughed or suggested our reaction times were faster but thanks for the insight
Also not sure how relevant the 2 are, it's a bit like saying 'wow look how that guy wears his hat'.... 'yeah but I bet he can run faster than you'

Sorry, I think we got our wires crossed. I was referring to the ape's reaction times, which I assumed would be rather quicker than the reaction times of us homo sapiens.
The hand position of the guy driving the 918 reminded me of how an ape might grip a steering wheel - rather clueless.

[flemke]

Reg Local said:

Sorry if this has already been covered, but...

Track mode in the P1.

I've read quite a few reviews and seen a few videos of the P1, in which it is stated quite catagorically that the car has a "track mode" which is illegal to use on the road. I understand that activating this setting lowers the ride height considerably, firms up the dampers, changes some aero settings to provide maximum downforce etc. - all very racy stuff.

I also understand that these settings would be pretty incompatible with using the car comfortably on the road - particularly British roads, some of which resemble a third-world war zone.

However, I'm pretty familiar with road traffic law and construction and use legislation, and I'm not aware of any reason why the car couldn't legally be driven on the road with this setting activated. I've read that the mode is illegal because of the extremely low ride height and the fact that the rear wing extends to a point where the centre brake light is obscured, but to my knowledge,there is no legal minimum ride height law and you're only required by legislation to have two working brake lights on each rear corner.

I understand that the car might not pass a vehicle approval test in race mode, but that wouldn't necessarily make it illegal to use on the road. Foolish, if you consider the potential cost of a P1 splitter / speed bump interface, but not illegal.

So, race mode illegal on the road. truth or marketing BS?

I wish that all police officers would ask me to interpret road traffic law!
I have no idea, Reg. As you suggest, "Track Mode" bears no relevancy to public road driving, thus I have not thought about the issue. The next time that I am speaking with the factory (and not telling them how unhappy I am with some of their recent actions), I shall try to remember to ask them the source of that notion.

[gbruckner]

Reg Local said:

Track mode in the P1.

That's an interesting topic, especially in light of the new Chris Harris video where the P1 legitimately wiped the floor with the other two cars in Portimao. Very impressive, no doubt.
On the other hand I noticed that the P1 bottomed out very hard on this relatively smooth race track, so one has to wonder how well this high downforce, low ground clearance mode would work on a track that is closer to real world conditions. One with far more bumps, crests, elevation changes and maybe even the odd jump. Suddenly it all makes sense to me.

[DannyScene]

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

RenesisEvo said:

The most shocking thing for me? How the Porsche driver holds the steering wheel.

Glad someone else picked up on that

Laugh if you will, but I'll bet his reactions times are faster than yours.

Not sure either of us laughed or suggested our reaction times were faster but thanks for the insight
Also not sure how relevant the 2 are, it's a bit like saying 'wow look how that guy wears his hat'.... 'yeah but I bet he can run faster than you'

Sorry, I think we got our wires crossed. I was referring to the ape's reaction times, which I assumed would be rather quicker than the reaction times of us homo sapiens.
The hand position of the guy driving the 918 reminded me of how an ape might grip a steering wheel - rather clueless.

ohhh my bad mate, I got the wrong end of the stick entirely then

[ManFromDelmonte]

The P1 did well on the latest Chris Harris video, worth watching if you get the time.

[SydneyBridge]

not sure if this is correct but I understood that the P1 in track mode made the headlamp alignment illegal for road use- how this could be detected by the average police officer (unless they read Pistonheads) I don't know

[ManFromDelmonte]

I had assumed, based on nothing that it was the height of the rear wing that was the issue (in that it became dangerous for pedestrians).

[DannyScene]

ManFromDelmonte said:

I had assumed, based on nothing that it was the height of the rear wing that was the issue (in that it became dangerous for pedestrians).

I don't think the height of the rear wing matters on any car, I thought it was to do with how far the wing extrudes past the lines of the car?

[flemke]

flemke said:

Reg Local said:

Sorry if this has already been covered, but...

Track mode in the P1.

I've read quite a few reviews and seen a few videos of the P1, in which it is stated quite catagorically that the car has a "track mode" which is illegal to use on the road. I understand that activating this setting lowers the ride height considerably, firms up the dampers, changes some aero settings to provide maximum downforce etc. - all very racy stuff.

I also understand that these settings would be pretty incompatible with using the car comfortably on the road - particularly British roads, some of which resemble a third-world war zone.

However, I'm pretty familiar with road traffic law and construction and use legislation, and I'm not aware of any reason why the car couldn't legally be driven on the road with this setting activated. I've read that the mode is illegal because of the extremely low ride height and the fact that the rear wing extends to a point where the centre brake light is obscured, but to my knowledge,there is no legal minimum ride height law and you're only required by legislation to have two working brake lights on each rear corner.

I understand that the car might not pass a vehicle approval test in race mode, but that wouldn't necessarily make it illegal to use on the road. Foolish, if you consider the potential cost of a P1 splitter / speed bump interface, but not illegal.

So, race mode illegal on the road. truth or marketing BS?

I wish that all police officers would ask me to interpret road traffic law!
I have no idea, Reg. As you suggest, "Track Mode" bears no relevancy to public road driving, thus I have not thought about the issue. The next time that I am speaking with the factory (and not telling them how unhappy I am with some of their recent actions), I shall try to remember to ask them the source of that notion.

Reg,

By chance, one minute after writing the above I got a call from a man at McLaren, and even before I could enquire about it he happened to mention the road legality of "Track Mode".

He said there were two issues of which he was aware. One was that there seems to be a rule about the height of headlamps or maybe the height of the beam of light. Whichever, when the car is lowered it breaches that limit.
The other issue was that, in "Track Mode", the rear wing elevates and moves rearward. In moving rearward, it extends behind the rear of the body of the car, which is not allowed.
We discussed whether the above two factors would be "illegal" for personal road use or, rather, merely would fail in Type Approval for the manufacturer (if they were fixed features rather than being in an optional mode). He was not sure.
It would not surprise me if McLaren had said they were "Not legal for public road use" because they wished to emphasise that they are inadvisable for road use, rather than because they would be literally illegal if done by a private individual off his or her own bat.

[flemke]

DannyScene said:

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

flemke said:

DannyScene said:

RenesisEvo said:

The most shocking thing for me? How the Porsche driver holds the steering wheel.

Glad someone else picked up on that

Laugh if you will, but I'll bet his reactions times are faster than yours.

Not sure either of us laughed or suggested our reaction times were faster but thanks for the insight
Also not sure how relevant the 2 are, it's a bit like saying 'wow look how that guy wears his hat'.... 'yeah but I bet he can run faster than you'

Sorry, I think we got our wires crossed. I was referring to the ape's reaction times, which I assumed would be rather quicker than the reaction times of us homo sapiens.
The hand position of the guy driving the 918 reminded me of how an ape might grip a steering wheel - rather clueless.

ohhh my bad mate, I got the wrong end of the stick entirely then

No probs. You were right to mention that fellow's grip of the wheel.
Seriously, if that hand position is symptomatic of his driving overall, and he drives a 918 on public roads, he really could use some professional instruction.
Me - I don't have that hand position problem. My suicide knob lets me steer with one hand, which frees up the other for sending text messages.

[flemke]

gbruckner said:

Reg Local said:

Track mode in the P1.

That's an interesting topic, especially in light of the new Chris Harris video where the P1 legitimately wiped the floor with the other two cars in Portimao. Very impressive, no doubt.
On the other hand I noticed that the P1 bottomed out very hard on this relatively smooth race track, so one has to wonder how well this high downforce, low ground clearance mode would work on a track that is closer to real world conditions. One with far more bumps, crests, elevation changes and maybe even the odd jump. Suddenly it all makes sense to me.

In fairness, the floor-wiping times were set on Trofeo tyres. P1 was still faster on the Corsas that were also on the LaF, but the gaps to the 918 and then to LaF were a lot tighter.

[flemke]

SydneyBridge said:

not sure if this is correct but I understood that the P1 in track mode made the headlamp alignment illegal for road use- how this could be detected by the average police officer (unless they read Pistonheads) I don't know

I believe you understood correctly.

[Reg Local]

flemke said:

I wish that all police officers would ask me to interpret road traffic law!
I have no idea, Reg. As you suggest, "Track Mode" bears no relevancy to public road driving, thus I have not thought about the issue. The next time that I am speaking with the factory (and not telling them how unhappy I am with some of their recent actions), I shall try to remember to ask them the source of that notion.

Cheers Flemke. I've been out of the cops for a few years now, but I still work in a regulatory role, so if there had been a change in legislation I'd probably be aware of it.

I agree it'd be pretty daft to use track mode on the road, but it's an interestng solution to the usual compromises which have to be made between designing a car for road or track. I suspect that the "illegal on the road" line serves two purposes. It's a good marketng line, and it sows the seed of doubt in the minds of those who may be financially capable of buying the car, but a bit hard of thnking when it comes to driving it.

However, faced with the unlikely scenario of a LaFerrari or 918 pulling up next to you at the lights, I'd be tempted to press the button just to gain the psychological advantage!

[flemke]

DannyScene said:

ManFromDelmonte said:

I had assumed, based on nothing that it was the height of the rear wing that was the issue (in that it became dangerous for pedestrians).

I don't think the height of the rear wing matters on any car, I thought it was to do with how far the wing extrudes past the lines of the car?

I believe you also understood correctly.

[flemke]

Reg Local said:

flemke said:

I wish that all police officers would ask me to interpret road traffic law!
I have no idea, Reg. As you suggest, "Track Mode" bears no relevancy to public road driving, thus I have not thought about the issue. The next time that I am speaking with the factory (and not telling them how unhappy I am with some of their recent actions), I shall try to remember to ask them the source of that notion.

Cheers Flemke. I've been out of the cops for a few years now, but I still work in a regulatory role, so if there had been a change in legislation I'd probably be aware of it.

I agree it'd be pretty daft to use track mode on the road, but it's an interestng solution to the usual compromises which have to be made between designing a car for road or track. I suspect that the "illegal on the road" line serves two purposes. It's a good marketng line, and it sows the seed of doubt in the minds of those who may be financially capable of buying the car, but a bit hard of thnking when it comes to driving it.

However, faced with the unlikely scenario of a LaFerrari or 918 pulling up next to you at the lights, I'd be tempted to press the button just to gain the psychological advantage!

Btw, I tried to buy your book, but, being a disciple of Gutenberg rather than being a Kindle-kind-of-guy, there was no way that I could read it!

[isaldiri]

flemke said:

What I don't like about the CGT are:

- It feels huge (I believe that the 918 is slightly shorter and narrower).

- The bucket seats seem to have been designed for Walter Rohrl, which is great if you're Walter Rohrl but not so great if you are amongst the 99% of the world adult population that is not as tall as Walter Rohrl. The seats are awful, quite possibly the most uncomfortable sports car seats that I have ever experienced.

- A crucial factor in the quality and driveability of a car is whether its controls (steering, throttle pedal, brake pedal, clutch and gearshift) are balanced, so that they all require a similar amount of effort to operate. Porsche usually get this spot-on. The Carrera GT is an exception.
The clutch is really heavy. Even if you are accustomed to fairly heavy clutches, this one will tire out your leg muscles.
The gear shift is the opposite.
In the first place, at least in my opinion it is mounted too high. Yes, it is closer than a typical gear stick to the steering wheel, but when was the last time that you muffed a shift because the gearstick was too far from the steering wheel?
The real problem, however, is that it is much too light, especially when paired with a clutch that is much too heavy.
Porsche had a really cool idea for the shift cables. Instead of normal woven cables connecting the gearstick to the gearbox several feet away, they devised flat "cables", in effect long flexible blades, that are housed within a tube and are guided by ball bearings - hence the very light shift action.
There is far too much of a difference between the gearshift and the clutch in terms of effort required. For me, this spoils the experience. (It does not help that the car is the only one in the world with a carbon-ceramic clutch, which feels and engages like no other clutch, but this shortcoming is dwarfed by the clutch-gearshift imbalance.)

Is CGT-to-918 analogous to F1-to-P1? Certainly in some ways, although not all (e.g., F1 is only one of the four to have a smallish footprint and good storage; the other three have big footprints and small storage). I'd like to think about that some more.

Interesting that. Would agree on a lot of your points, particularly with regards to size and control weights of the gearbox/clutch. The 918 I think though is negligibly smaller, shorter perhaps but I think a bit wider but talking maybe a couple of cm either way. It does look optically smaller (sleeker profile i think and lower). 918 definitely the prettier car though imo!

Look forward to any further thoughts if you have the time. cheers.