Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
flemke said:
Have you driven one in order to judge? 
If not, you might be surprised. Impressive - very - but not the full deck, which is why it is so frustrating in its standard form. Actually the GTR is much more of a piece, but as a road car it has a couple of fatal flaws.
No I've never driven one, more's the pity. But I have, you know, read a lot about them and knowing me I would no doubt jump straight into romanticising the car and loving everything about it including the flaws. If not, you might be surprised. Impressive - very - but not the full deck, which is why it is so frustrating in its standard form. Actually the GTR is much more of a piece, but as a road car it has a couple of fatal flaws.flemke said:
Actually, the rubbish build quality of the F40 (and at least a few other of the most coveted Ferrari models) was first brought to my attention by one of the UK's most respected and experienced independent Ferrari service and restoration shops, and they would know!
Aha! I have sat in one of these
I adored the little ropes you pull to shut the doors. Flimsy, no doubt, but so purposeful. It just screamed speed at me, a message to which I'm all ears. My own car of that make was some 20 years older but superbly engineered in every respect I could discern. Edited by castex on Wednesday 2nd December 11:31
On the subject of rubbish build quality, it's importance something that is down to personal preference. To some, anything but perfection is no good, to others as long as it doesn't fall apart within 2 years they are happy, some are happy to put up with faults and work around them or even see them as character.
Having to keep a tea-towel in my Lotus to drapw across my left leg and catch the drips when it rained was part of the charm and didn't bother me one bit. To some that would have been a deal breaker.
It's a good job we're all different.
Having to keep a tea-towel in my Lotus to drapw across my left leg and catch the drips when it rained was part of the charm and didn't bother me one bit. To some that would have been a deal breaker.
It's a good job we're all different.
Flemke, my question if you have time is around the excitement factor of having such aspirational cars within your reach. We all know the feeling, you buy something new that you have aspired to, be it a 4k TV, Ipad, or your latest car and after the initial excitement fades you are looking to change/improve/adapt the item. I carry a small amount of shame that perhaps this is linked to my unknown materialism and the culture I have been sucked into.
This happened to me on my Mk1 Golf GTI, I loved it, dreamt of it, restored it back to original and made it mine... but then the love faded and the joy of ownership diminished in time... and its now someone elses.
So, getting there eventually, has the love and excitement ever faded with any of your cars and is this at least part of the reason you have updated the F1? Because when you have (what some perceive) as the best of the best, what else is there to aspire to...
This happened to me on my Mk1 Golf GTI, I loved it, dreamt of it, restored it back to original and made it mine... but then the love faded and the joy of ownership diminished in time... and its now someone elses.
So, getting there eventually, has the love and excitement ever faded with any of your cars and is this at least part of the reason you have updated the F1? Because when you have (what some perceive) as the best of the best, what else is there to aspire to...
Flemke
My last post was rather ambiguous, I apologise.
I was under the impression that McLaren frowned on limited edition cars being purchased by dealers and then sold at a premium (I assume that is a premium in this case). Am I correct, or is this a way of 'bolstering resale values' unofficially?
Paul
My last post was rather ambiguous, I apologise.
I was under the impression that McLaren frowned on limited edition cars being purchased by dealers and then sold at a premium (I assume that is a premium in this case). Am I correct, or is this a way of 'bolstering resale values' unofficially?
Paul
castex said:
flemke said:
Have you driven one in order to judge? If not, you might be surprised. Impressive - very - but not the full deck, which is why it is so frustrating in its standard form. Actually the GTR is much more of a piece, but as a road car it has a couple of fatal flaws.
No I've never driven one, more's the pity. But I have, you know, read a lot about them and knowing me I would no doubt jump straight into romanticising the car and loving everything about it including the flaws. If not, you might be surprised. Impressive - very - but not the full deck, which is why it is so frustrating in its standard form. Actually the GTR is much more of a piece, but as a road car it has a couple of fatal flaws.flemke said:
Actually, the rubbish build quality of the F40 (and at least a few other of the most coveted Ferrari models) was first brought to my attention by one of the UK's most respected and experienced independent Ferrari service and restoration shops, and they would know!
Aha! I have sat in one of these I adored the little ropes you pull to shut the doors. Flimsy, no doubt, but so purposeful. It just screamed speed at me, a message to which I'm all ears. My own car of that make was some 20 years older but superbly engineered in every respect I could discern. Rather I had in mind things such as welds that look like lines of cake frosting that have been applied by a child with a toothpick - terrible workmanship.
Seeing terrible workmanship where it is visible makes one wonder about the quality of the workmanship where it's not as visible.
ManFromDelmonte said:
On the subject of rubbish build quality, it's importance something that is down to personal preference. To some, anything but perfection is no good, to others as long as it doesn't fall apart within 2 years they are happy, some are happy to put up with faults and work around them or even see them as character.
Having to keep a tea-towel in my Lotus to drapw across my left leg and catch the drips when it rained was part of the charm and didn't bother me one bit. To some that would have been a deal breaker.
It's a good job we're all different.
I'd agree that, although a leaking roof may be an acquired taste, it need not be a deal-breaker if the rest of the package is good enough.Having to keep a tea-towel in my Lotus to drapw across my left leg and catch the drips when it rained was part of the charm and didn't bother me one bit. To some that would have been a deal breaker.
It's a good job we're all different.
When something lacks structural integrity, however, it is a different story. Other people may feel differently, but I would not want my life to depend on some of the things that I have seen on Ferrari suspensions and chassis.
Swampy1982 said:
Flemke, my question if you have time is around the excitement factor of having such aspirational cars within your reach. We all know the feeling, you buy something new that you have aspired to, be it a 4k TV, Ipad, or your latest car and after the initial excitement fades you are looking to change/improve/adapt the item. I carry a small amount of shame that perhaps this is linked to my unknown materialism and the culture I have been sucked into.
This happened to me on my Mk1 Golf GTI, I loved it, dreamt of it, restored it back to original and made it mine... but then the love faded and the joy of ownership diminished in time... and its now someone elses.
So, getting there eventually, has the love and excitement ever faded with any of your cars and is this at least part of the reason you have updated the F1? Because when you have (what some perceive) as the best of the best, what else is there to aspire to...
I speak as someone who has neither a 4k TV nor an iPad. This happened to me on my Mk1 Golf GTI, I loved it, dreamt of it, restored it back to original and made it mine... but then the love faded and the joy of ownership diminished in time... and its now someone elses.
So, getting there eventually, has the love and excitement ever faded with any of your cars and is this at least part of the reason you have updated the F1? Because when you have (what some perceive) as the best of the best, what else is there to aspire to...
I have had a couple cars that somewhat disappointed me (959, one particular GT3), a number that I just didn't use enough to justify keeping, but IIRC only one which I got rid of because I had become tired of it (993 Turbo S).
For me the F1 has timeless looks, a timeless engine and a timeless driving position. One of the main reasons why I have made such an effort to improve the car is because I don't see myself ever tiring of it. I have had it for nearly 15 years, driven it about 35,000 miles, and I look forward to each drive in it as much as I have ever done.
It may help that the F1 really is challenging to drive properly. If a driver takes the F1 for granted, he does so at his peril - as more than one owner has found out the hard way.
Storer said:
Flemke
My last post was rather ambiguous, I apologise.
I was under the impression that McLaren frowned on limited edition cars being purchased by dealers and then sold at a premium (I assume that is a premium in this case). Am I correct, or is this a way of 'bolstering resale values' unofficially?
Paul
Based on what I have seen, you are correct. A car offered at overs is almost certainly a customer car.My last post was rather ambiguous, I apologise.
I was under the impression that McLaren frowned on limited edition cars being purchased by dealers and then sold at a premium (I assume that is a premium in this case). Am I correct, or is this a way of 'bolstering resale values' unofficially?
Paul
flemke said:
I speak as someone who has neither a 4k TV nor an iPad.
I have had a couple cars that somewhat disappointed me (959, one particular GT3), a number that I just didn't use enough to justify keeping, but IIRC only one which I got rid of because I had become tired of it (993 Turbo S).
For me the F1 has timeless looks, a timeless engine and a timeless driving position. One of the main reasons why I have made such an effort to improve the car is because I don't see myself ever tiring of it. I have had it for nearly 15 years, driven it about 35,000 miles, and I look forward to each drive in it as much as I have ever done.
It may help that the F1 really is challenging to drive properly. If a driver takes the F1 for granted, he does so at his peril - as more than one owner has found out the hard way.
appreciate the time taken to answer, I will continue to ponder how to fix my ill advised consumerism... And of course read this thread with keen interest. I have had a couple cars that somewhat disappointed me (959, one particular GT3), a number that I just didn't use enough to justify keeping, but IIRC only one which I got rid of because I had become tired of it (993 Turbo S).
For me the F1 has timeless looks, a timeless engine and a timeless driving position. One of the main reasons why I have made such an effort to improve the car is because I don't see myself ever tiring of it. I have had it for nearly 15 years, driven it about 35,000 miles, and I look forward to each drive in it as much as I have ever done.
It may help that the F1 really is challenging to drive properly. If a driver takes the F1 for granted, he does so at his peril - as more than one owner has found out the hard way.
flemke said:
That possibility had not occurred to me, probably because it seems so incredibly mean. Without paying extra for a special "plate", there is no visible record of a car's chassis number?
Pick me! Pick me!Yes, there is a visible external record of 675 chassis numbers: the last 6 digits of their VIN. This if found in the front windscreen, a door sticker and, in some markets, under the rear registration plate.
As mentioned here or elsewhere, pre-production car VINS are concluded in two forms: 005*** (consecutive to the P11 VIN formation) and 990*** (a classic modern McLaren Automotive pre-production VIN formation, on unique series of P11, P11R and P12 pre-production cars).
Customer cars have the last six digits as 675***, therefore (as mentioned in a previous picture post, so I am not divulging anything not known), yours is 675040.
isaldiri said:
flemke said:
So the company are paying to have 500 (or so ) chassis plates made, but they are saving maybe 50p each for some of them not to indicate the individual chassis number. That is just strange; a technique sometimes employed by a company that is trying to make it possible to build more than the indicated total without that being detected.
Have been told the VIN numbers are in order # 675XXX or something similar matching the chassis numbers and the XP/PP cars have 650 type vins so are easily spotted. So that in theory should prevent too much of a lurch towards said unnamed company ) chassis plates made, but they are saving maybe 50p each for some of them not to indicate the individual chassis number. That is just strange; a technique sometimes employed by a company that is trying to make it possible to build more than the indicated total without that being detected. 
I would highlight that 675LT VINs in the ordinary P11 sequence are only indicated by an 'R' at the 6th digit. It does mean that they have limited themselves to a theoretical 999 customer 675LT, with the Spider included. OR they have to give the Spider a separate VIN sequence.
Ultimately, any cars outwith the 675001-675999 sequence can be considered to be surplus. Unless they create a separate sequence, which would mean that any out of 675001-675500 would be surplus for Coupes.
There are plenty of ways to mask numbers with using such variety in VINs.
/geekiness
cc8s said:
As above, in essence I would highlight that 675LT VINs in the ordinary P11 sequence are only indicated by an 'R' at the 6th digit.
It does mean that they have limited themselves to a theoretical 999 customer 675LT, with the Spider included. OR they have to give the Spider a separate VIN sequence.
Ultimately, any cars outwith the 675001-675999 sequence can be considered to be surplus. Unless they create a separate sequence, which would mean that any out of 675001-675500 would be surplus for Coupes.
There are plenty of ways to mask numbers with using such variety in VINs.
/geekiness
Your "specialist knowledge" is impressive. I would highlight that 675LT VINs in the ordinary P11 sequence are only indicated by an 'R' at the 6th digit. It does mean that they have limited themselves to a theoretical 999 customer 675LT, with the Spider included. OR they have to give the Spider a separate VIN sequence.
Ultimately, any cars outwith the 675001-675999 sequence can be considered to be surplus. Unless they create a separate sequence, which would mean that any out of 675001-675500 would be surplus for Coupes.
There are plenty of ways to mask numbers with using such variety in VINs.
/geekiness
I did not mean to suggest that there was no possible way for anyone to ascertain the chassis number of a vehicle. There is however a difference between a model-specific chassis plate which is intuitively comprehensible to "normal" folks and a 17-digit VIN which is located in an obscure position and is understood by only the cognoscenti such as yourself.
flemke said:
cc8s said:
As above, in essence I would highlight that 675LT VINs in the ordinary P11 sequence are only indicated by an 'R' at the 6th digit.
It does mean that they have limited themselves to a theoretical 999 customer 675LT, with the Spider included. OR they have to give the Spider a separate VIN sequence.
Ultimately, any cars outwith the 675001-675999 sequence can be considered to be surplus. Unless they create a separate sequence, which would mean that any out of 675001-675500 would be surplus for Coupes.
There are plenty of ways to mask numbers with using such variety in VINs.
/geekiness
Your "specialist knowledge" is impressive. I would highlight that 675LT VINs in the ordinary P11 sequence are only indicated by an 'R' at the 6th digit. It does mean that they have limited themselves to a theoretical 999 customer 675LT, with the Spider included. OR they have to give the Spider a separate VIN sequence.
Ultimately, any cars outwith the 675001-675999 sequence can be considered to be surplus. Unless they create a separate sequence, which would mean that any out of 675001-675500 would be surplus for Coupes.
There are plenty of ways to mask numbers with using such variety in VINs.
/geekiness
I did not mean to suggest that there was no possible way for anyone to ascertain the chassis number of a vehicle. There is however a difference between a model-specific chassis plate which is intuitively comprehensible to "normal" folks and a 17-digit VIN which is located in an obscure position and is understood by only the cognoscenti such as yourself.
I shall take all as compliments! That is very true and that is one of the reasons I do what I do. A visible chassis plate inside a car makes finding information much easier as the average punter is likely to take a picture of it.
I think it is interesting and important to keep an eye on the geeky side of things to save others doing the same. I know there is a relatively large community that does it for Ferrari but I only know relatively few interested in McLaren.
flemke said:
Rather I had in mind things such as welds that look like lines of cake frosting that have been applied by a child with a toothpick - terrible workmanship.
Interesting - I recall looking around a 77-ish Lamborghini Urraco that had been towed into a mates workshop and trying to decide whether the appalling welding was down to a poor restoration or just seventies Lamborghini build quality.droopsnoot said:
flemke said:
Rather I had in mind things such as welds that look like lines of cake frosting that have been applied by a child with a toothpick - terrible workmanship.
Interesting - I recall looking around a 77-ish Lamborghini Urraco that had been towed into a mates workshop and trying to decide whether the appalling welding was down to a poor restoration or just seventies Lamborghini build quality.This is from a modern Ferrari:
Bloody hell that welding is a joke! I could weld better than that and I've not done it for years... my brother who can weld aero stuff would probably die of laughter if I showed him that.
They should be ashamed..
I may sound I'm over the top but frankly I would only expect that quality of weld on some cheap Chinese ebay garden furniture not a £100k++ Ferrari.
In fact I'm genuinely quite shocked they would release that..I'd be embarrassed.
They should be ashamed..
I may sound I'm over the top but frankly I would only expect that quality of weld on some cheap Chinese ebay garden furniture not a £100k++ Ferrari.
In fact I'm genuinely quite shocked they would release that..I'd be embarrassed.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff