Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
chris333 said:
flemke said:
McAndy said:
flemke said:
A long time ago, I want to say 2002, I went up to Hinckley, met with Ted Marlow who was a very nice fellow.
I took one out for a drive. I liked the concept, and the car as you suggest performs impressively.
The thing that killed it for me was the looks.
I appreciate that with low volumes it would have been difficult to justify expensive models and moulds. It's therefore understandable that the car is rather slab-sided, but that quality was what put me off.
Fair dos. Given the concept is sound, would you ever consider investing in a new design and moulds for you (and subsequently them)?I took one out for a drive. I liked the concept, and the car as you suggest performs impressively.
The thing that killed it for me was the looks.
I appreciate that with low volumes it would have been difficult to justify expensive models and moulds. It's therefore understandable that the car is rather slab-sided, but that quality was what put me off.
I am still waiting for it.
dobly said:
What I was trying to get at was in your opinion, is the special nature of the early R as successful as a road car, or does the later standard NSX beat it as being more sorted package, especially in the steering, ride and handling departments ?
Sure, the 3.0 in the Type R is special, but is it more usable than the 3.2 of later cars?
Similarly, the steering of the early Type R is a bit special - contrasted with the electrical assistance of the later standard car - which do you prefer?
The Type R seats are the same as in my Type S - just different covers. I find them very comfortable, and very transmissive of what the car is doing underneath you.
That sort of thing.
I wouldn't say that the Gen I Type-R is any more or less sorted than the Gen II standard car. They are both different but the same; an analogy might be a beautiful actress playing two very different roles. She might look a bit different, her manners, mien, and style may diverge, but in essence she is still the same person.Sure, the 3.0 in the Type R is special, but is it more usable than the 3.2 of later cars?
Similarly, the steering of the early Type R is a bit special - contrasted with the electrical assistance of the later standard car - which do you prefer?
The Type R seats are the same as in my Type S - just different covers. I find them very comfortable, and very transmissive of what the car is doing underneath you.
That sort of thing.
Ride of the Type-Rs is quite stiff. In Gen I it is tolerable, in Gen II it is intolerable except on a glass-smooth surface.
Steering: in the R it's a bit heavier than ideal, but I think that is more because the steering wheel is smaller diameter, rather than being related to ratio or caster. Nonetheless it's okay, because you do get a lot of feel and the R is not a car that you're going to be driving all day.
I am a big fan of the weighting of the steering in Gen II standard car, and also its relatively slow ratio, which I consider to be more maturely judged than the risibly fast ratios in some modern sports cars.
Type-R Gen I is as "usable" as standard NSXs are, in the sense that it's intended for a different use from everyday road driving. One would not, however, drive a Type-R every day, whereas a standard car could easily be a daily driver.
As for the seats, one-piece, lightly upholstered "bucket" seats are great if they happen to fit your body. IIRC, the ones in the Type-R are made by Recaro. They are nice for the circuit, although for an extended road drive I'd take the standard car's "normal" seats.
Fatal flaws of Gen II Type-R are a suspension that is, as I say, much too stiff, and it has too narrow gaps between gears, requiring the driver to be changing gear all the time.
I'm not sure that there is much between the effect of the 3.0 in the Gen I R and the effect of the 3.2 in the Gen II standard. The R's lower weight and shorter ratios make up for its lesser power. Also recall that some people, such as LJK Setright, have believed that horsepower is a misleading measure of an engine, and that a better measure is brake mean effective pressure, by which VTEC engines supposedly rate more highly relative to most other engines.
Thanks for the comprehensive replies - much appreciated. I like the non-assisted steering of my Type S (except when parking in a confined space). I have only driven my NSX, not any other models. To me it feels right - not too harsh, certainly not too soft. The NA2 C32B engine is very free to rev, plus it has enough oomph to shift the mass of the car around. I think a Type R of either generation would not be suitable much road driving, as there is too much variation in surface smoothness and quality . My NSX was also specified without traction control, which I understand wasn't the most sophisticated in the first place. The brakes on my car are well matched to the weight of the car (and my driving style) - I haven't got anywhere close to needing more stopping power, and can only praise the ALB that my car has - you just don't notice it is there - it just does its job unobtrusively (unlike the first versions), from what I have read.
You are right on the seats being made by Recaro - they are a unique carbon/kevlar mix, only found on the special NSX models (Types R & S) - and cost a bomb to replace through Honda Japan. They can only be ordered on production of the chassis number, so I am told.
I used to work in Woking - we had a storage and training facility on one of the industrial estates / business parks and whenever I went there, I would see a McLaren F1 or two being driven round, usually to the MOT testing place which iirc was virtually next door to our building - this was from 1990 through to almost the end of the decade, so my memory is a bit sketchy. I always thought how right in scale the F1 was - much like the NSX. Incidentally, I saw Gordon Murray driving his red & black NSX numerous times in and around Woking, at least once with Ron Dennis in the passenger seat - this was probably '91, '92 or possibly '93.
I know it is probably sacrilege, but I wish more cars had the centre driving position & 2 passenger seat layout - it just makes so much sense to me. For this alone I envy you.
You are right on the seats being made by Recaro - they are a unique carbon/kevlar mix, only found on the special NSX models (Types R & S) - and cost a bomb to replace through Honda Japan. They can only be ordered on production of the chassis number, so I am told.
I used to work in Woking - we had a storage and training facility on one of the industrial estates / business parks and whenever I went there, I would see a McLaren F1 or two being driven round, usually to the MOT testing place which iirc was virtually next door to our building - this was from 1990 through to almost the end of the decade, so my memory is a bit sketchy. I always thought how right in scale the F1 was - much like the NSX. Incidentally, I saw Gordon Murray driving his red & black NSX numerous times in and around Woking, at least once with Ron Dennis in the passenger seat - this was probably '91, '92 or possibly '93.
I know it is probably sacrilege, but I wish more cars had the centre driving position & 2 passenger seat layout - it just makes so much sense to me. For this alone I envy you.
Edited by dobly on Sunday 17th July 09:35
Edited by dobly on Monday 18th July 02:36
flemke said:
chris333 said:
flemke said:
McAndy said:
flemke said:
A long time ago, I want to say 2002, I went up to Hinckley, met with Ted Marlow who was a very nice fellow.
I took one out for a drive. I liked the concept, and the car as you suggest performs impressively.
The thing that killed it for me was the looks.
I appreciate that with low volumes it would have been difficult to justify expensive models and moulds. It's therefore understandable that the car is rather slab-sided, but that quality was what put me off.
Fair dos. Given the concept is sound, would you ever consider investing in a new design and moulds for you (and subsequently them)?I took one out for a drive. I liked the concept, and the car as you suggest performs impressively.
The thing that killed it for me was the looks.
I appreciate that with low volumes it would have been difficult to justify expensive models and moulds. It's therefore understandable that the car is rather slab-sided, but that quality was what put me off.
I am still waiting for it.
E65Ross said:
So what's this about the supposed new F1 then? I really hope they don't bring back the name. The F1 wasn't just about performance, but about being a real drivers car, something I fear won't quite be there to the same level with the newer car. Who knows.
The thing most "F1" about the original was that it was made by an F1 team - and I guess the carbon tub (though it's not really a tub in the road car). It's true you sit in the centre, but I've not seen many F1 cars with two passengers 
The most important thing for a 'drivers' car - for me - is a manual gearbox. I would massively prefer a large NA engine, minimal electronic aids and really great brake and steering feel. My guess is that the new car will be a medium sized turbo engine with DSG, loads of electronics, electric steering and effective but uncommunicative carbon-ceramics.
Drivers cars:
- Carrera GT
- Ferrari 550/575
- 911
- NSX
- Caterham
Not drivers cars:
- all McLarens
- all modern Ferrari's
- Bugati
- Mercedes
I'm generalising of course - the 675LT is a great car, but you don't really need to be a skilled driver to drive it. There are some truly great cars from McL, Fez, Bug, AMG - but something is missing when it comes to visceral enjoyment.
Is the 991RS a drivers car - yes and no. Devastatingly effective - I guess it would qualify for me (being a 911 fanboy) because it overcomes the disadvantage of not being manual by being so thrilling and alive. I guess/hope the 911R is even better.
So - will the new-F1 be a drivers car ... probably not. However, I hope they can build something to thrill. If it is designed to be a GT then it will be effortlessly fast - so I guess more Veyron than 911R.
My guess is they'll give it a name and not a number - the problem with numbers is that it needs to include a '1' and F and P are already taken
Probably a very good investment for those 64 people offered a car.
Joe911 said:
The most important thing for a 'drivers' car - for me - is a manual gearbox. I would massively prefer a large NA engine, minimal electronic aids and really great brake and steering feel. My guess is that the new car will be a medium sized turbo engine with DSG, loads of electronics, electric steering and effective but uncommunicative carbon-ceramics.
Drivers cars:
- Carrera GT
- Ferrari 550/575
- 911
- NSX
- Caterham
Not drivers cars:
- all McLarens
- all modern Ferrari's
- Bugati
- Mercedes
I'm generalising of course - the 675LT is a great car, but you don't really need to be a skilled driver to drive it. There are some truly great cars from McL, Fez, Bug, AMG - but something is missing when it comes to visceral enjoyment.
Is the 991RS a drivers car - yes and no. Devastatingly effective - I guess it would qualify for me (being a 911 fanboy) because it overcomes the disadvantage of not being manual by being so thrilling and alive. I guess/hope the 911R is even better.
Surely the 991RS has a lot of the same issues you mention that the 675 has? It's dual clutch with a heap of driver electronic aids and electric steering? in the 991 generation of GT car, engine apart which of course is a superb NA one (when it's not failing in the gt3 anyway Drivers cars:
- Carrera GT
- Ferrari 550/575
- 911
- NSX
- Caterham
Not drivers cars:
- all McLarens
- all modern Ferrari's
- Bugati
- Mercedes
I'm generalising of course - the 675LT is a great car, but you don't really need to be a skilled driver to drive it. There are some truly great cars from McL, Fez, Bug, AMG - but something is missing when it comes to visceral enjoyment.
Is the 991RS a drivers car - yes and no. Devastatingly effective - I guess it would qualify for me (being a 911 fanboy) because it overcomes the disadvantage of not being manual by being so thrilling and alive. I guess/hope the 911R is even better.
), it's not that dissimilar to the Mclaren in many respects being really quite easy to drive very quickly.isaldiri said:
Surely the 991RS has a lot of the same issues you mention that the 675 has? It's dual clutch with a heap of driver electronic aids and electric steering? in the 991 generation of GT car, engine apart which of course is a superb NA one (when it's not failing in the gt3 anyway ), it's not that dissimilar to the Mclaren in many respects being really quite easy to drive very quickly.
Somehow (maybe only through my own prejudices) the 991RS is exciting and interesting - and while the 675 is in many ways the same stuff technically, and is a very fine and fast car to drive - it is the Porsche that is engaging and exciting. Exactly why is hard to judge - certainly the NA engine is wonderful - maybe the 675 is too refined, too ... easy? ), it's not that dissimilar to the Mclaren in many respects being really quite easy to drive very quickly.New McLaren F1... but not like the old one really.... thoughts?
Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
mikey k said:
The prototype discussion is a mine field 
I looked a buying an MSO 650 spider that was the launch car for a run of 50 cars. It had been reworked cosmetically to tidy it up, but there were very little mechanical changes and no change to the odometer. They also refused to recognise it as one of the 50 cars.
I alos recently tried to acquire one of the 675LT spider "factory" cars and was told it was not available
Interstingly I note they are selling a 675LT coupe prototype with full disclosure and no odometer change
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/m...
The above seem acceptable and "above board"
However rebuild a P1 prototype, resetting to odometer and selling it off as new is pushing the boundaries
They ought not to reset the odometer and some how mark the vehicle so it is obvious what it is
BTW Aston have done similar tricks with even less disclosure
Mikey, did I read somewhere that you heard there were only 29 650S MSO? Can you expand on that? WHy, in that case, would they be adamant that the press car was not included in the '50' made? I looked a buying an MSO 650 spider that was the launch car for a run of 50 cars. It had been reworked cosmetically to tidy it up, but there were very little mechanical changes and no change to the odometer. They also refused to recognise it as one of the 50 cars.
I alos recently tried to acquire one of the 675LT spider "factory" cars and was told it was not available
Interstingly I note they are selling a 675LT coupe prototype with full disclosure and no odometer change
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/m...
The above seem acceptable and "above board"
However rebuild a P1 prototype, resetting to odometer and selling it off as new is pushing the boundaries
They ought not to reset the odometer and some how mark the vehicle so it is obvious what it is
BTW Aston have done similar tricks with even less disclosure
cc8s said:
mikey k said:
The prototype discussion is a mine field
I looked a buying an MSO 650 spider that was the launch car for a run of 50 cars. It had been reworked cosmetically to tidy it up, but there were very little mechanical changes and no change to the odometer. They also refused to recognise it as one of the 50 cars.
I alos recently tried to acquire one of the 675LT spider "factory" cars and was told it was not available
Interstingly I note they are selling a 675LT coupe prototype with full disclosure and no odometer change
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/m...
The above seem acceptable and "above board"
However rebuild a P1 prototype, resetting to odometer and selling it off as new is pushing the boundaries
They ought not to reset the odometer and some how mark the vehicle so it is obvious what it is
BTW Aston have done similar tricks with even less disclosure
Mikey, did I read somewhere that you heard there were only 29 650S MSO? Can you expand on that? WHy, in that case, would they be adamant that the press car was not included in the '50' made? I looked a buying an MSO 650 spider that was the launch car for a run of 50 cars. It had been reworked cosmetically to tidy it up, but there were very little mechanical changes and no change to the odometer. They also refused to recognise it as one of the 50 cars.
I alos recently tried to acquire one of the 675LT spider "factory" cars and was told it was not available
Interstingly I note they are selling a 675LT coupe prototype with full disclosure and no odometer change
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/m...
The above seem acceptable and "above board"
However rebuild a P1 prototype, resetting to odometer and selling it off as new is pushing the boundaries
They ought not to reset the odometer and some how mark the vehicle so it is obvious what it is
BTW Aston have done similar tricks with even less disclosure
No idea why they wouldn't include what was probably the first one of the run
Ascot just didn't want to back my request
Edited by mikey k on Thursday 21st July 11:41
buckle88 said:
New McLaren F1... but not like the old one really.... thoughts?
Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
“It applies the F1’s three-seat configuration to a different need: rapid, cross-continental travel with supreme speed and style,” said an insider. “ Oh yea, until the French fuzzies get you !! Incidently, I still have the CAR magazine with the article about the 3 Lambos being driven across the continent at a proper speed, i.e. flat out, from Italy to the UK. Bloody fantastic.Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
Given the seating arrangement, position in the range and intended purpose how about F3 GT?
Price it to compete with a GT4Lusso, give it F1 amount of boot space and they might be on to a winner.
Or (please) ask BMW/Paul Roche to come up with a high revving large capacity V12 sequel, fit the legal minimum of driver aids and technology, not too much downforce/grip and go for the McLaren 911R market. I think Flemke might be interested in that despite the recent bad feelings! And please make it look similar to the autocar renderings...
Would need a different name but if the did the second concept I suspect they could call it McLaren theMcLaren or McLaren TheOne and we wouldn't overly care!
Price it to compete with a GT4Lusso, give it F1 amount of boot space and they might be on to a winner.
Or (please) ask BMW/Paul Roche to come up with a high revving large capacity V12 sequel, fit the legal minimum of driver aids and technology, not too much downforce/grip and go for the McLaren 911R market. I think Flemke might be interested in that despite the recent bad feelings! And please make it look similar to the autocar renderings...
Would need a different name but if the did the second concept I suspect they could call it McLaren theMcLaren or McLaren TheOne and we wouldn't overly care!
buckle88 said:
New McLaren F1... but not like the old one really.... thoughts?
Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
The article did not surprise me. Did McLaren let you know about this Flemke?
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-mcl...
Whether the car will make sense will I hope become clearer in the near future.
robinessex said:
Incidently, I still have the CAR magazine with the article about the 3 Lambos being driven across the continent at a proper speed, i.e. flat out, from Italy to the UK. Bloody fantastic.
Me too, and even though it's been done countless times since, and in much better print and photo quality, that's still a great article.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff