Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
flemke said:
LanceRS said:
I'm sure that Brooklands would be quite obliging, anyone able to arrange the F1?
Well, I suppose that a Concorde is much rarer than an F1. On the other hand, many more people have ridden in Concordes than have ridden in F1s.
Perhaps something to do when the weather gets better in the spring.
Dusty964 said:
SpeckledJim said:
flemke said:
SpeckledJim said:
With the way a three seater sportscar is packaged, and the benefits of central driving position, I'm amazed it hasn't been done again before.
McLaren owned a patent on the seating layout. Not sure if the patent has expired yet.anniesdad said:
BTW, when you say that the Panamera has mastered the design...of fast and comfortable GT's I must ask...are you feeling ok? 
I was not referring to visual design. I meant engineering design: harmonising engine, 'box, handling, internal space and ride comfort in a way that works and will last.flemke said:
Yes, the F1 was conceived as a "GT", but then Gordon couldn't control himself!
The main concession to the GT concept was the tyres - which were a very big concession - but otherwise it's a rather pure driver's car.
As to the ways in which the BP23 will differ, without going into things told to me in confidence and instead relying on what is in the public domain or can be surmised from it, they include:
- F1 was designed with an obsession to minimise weight. That will not be the case in BP23.
- F1 has what was, and possibly still is, the finest, normally aspirated road car engine ever made. BP23's engine will be a variant of the turbo unit in the other modern McLarens. It gets the job done, but is nothing special.
- Part of the purity of the F1 is that it's got a full carbon monocoque with the engine fixed directly to the monocoque and the engine and gearbox functioning as stressed members. It has no sub-frames. Even now, 25 years later, nobody builds road cars that way.
- The F1 is a beautiful car, and nothing else like it or its design "language" was ever made. It is unique. The BP23 will be of a piece with other modern McLarens, making it not unique. As to the beauty of other modern McLarens, and especially future ones, I shall say only that I don't believe they are up there with the F1....
- Contributing substantially to the desirability of the F1 is its heritage. Its top speed as a road car was a step change forward, and the highest for any production road car for many years following. That will not apply to the BP23.
- Even more significant, a modified version of the F1 road car (which unlike the RB/Aston was a genuine road car) won Le Mans outright. That will not be repeated.
Also, the F1 was "lucky" in that it came along at a time when there was a big gap in super-performance road cars. The F40 was agricultural, the 959 had been technologically marvelous but seriously flawed, the XJ220 was as we know a horlix, then there was a big lull until probably the Veyron. In its time and for years after, the F1 had no competition to distract us car nuts away from its specialness.
Thanks flemke. Reading your post above I figured that the car could still be a modern day interpretation of an F1 (I don't think many buyers now would expect a NA engine or that such a closely-related version would race successfully), if not a modernised facsimile of the original. The main concession to the GT concept was the tyres - which were a very big concession - but otherwise it's a rather pure driver's car.
As to the ways in which the BP23 will differ, without going into things told to me in confidence and instead relying on what is in the public domain or can be surmised from it, they include:
- F1 was designed with an obsession to minimise weight. That will not be the case in BP23.
- F1 has what was, and possibly still is, the finest, normally aspirated road car engine ever made. BP23's engine will be a variant of the turbo unit in the other modern McLarens. It gets the job done, but is nothing special.
- Part of the purity of the F1 is that it's got a full carbon monocoque with the engine fixed directly to the monocoque and the engine and gearbox functioning as stressed members. It has no sub-frames. Even now, 25 years later, nobody builds road cars that way.
- The F1 is a beautiful car, and nothing else like it or its design "language" was ever made. It is unique. The BP23 will be of a piece with other modern McLarens, making it not unique. As to the beauty of other modern McLarens, and especially future ones, I shall say only that I don't believe they are up there with the F1....
- Contributing substantially to the desirability of the F1 is its heritage. Its top speed as a road car was a step change forward, and the highest for any production road car for many years following. That will not apply to the BP23.
- Even more significant, a modified version of the F1 road car (which unlike the RB/Aston was a genuine road car) won Le Mans outright. That will not be repeated.
Also, the F1 was "lucky" in that it came along at a time when there was a big gap in super-performance road cars. The F40 was agricultural, the 959 had been technologically marvelous but seriously flawed, the XJ220 was as we know a horlix, then there was a big lull until probably the Veyron. In its time and for years after, the F1 had no competition to distract us car nuts away from its specialness.
However reading your subsequent post where you compare the concept more to an S Class or Panamera it sounds like it may be a long way from where I expected the car to be pitched. There are plenty of people who seem prepared to spend huge amounts of money on the ultimate versions of performance cars but seemingly fewer happy to spend serious money in the luxury/GT market. Rolls Royce prices seem the obvious ceiling in that market and I'm not sure there are too many £2m Rolls out there.
And look what's happened to Maybach. It's slightly stretching the point as a comparison but I'd hate to see McLaren misjudge this one having built such a successful road car brand over the last few years.
lauda said:
flemke said:
Yes, the F1 was conceived as a "GT", but then Gordon couldn't control himself!
The main concession to the GT concept was the tyres - which were a very big concession - but otherwise it's a rather pure driver's car.
As to the ways in which the BP23 will differ, without going into things told to me in confidence and instead relying on what is in the public domain or can be surmised from it, they include:
- F1 was designed with an obsession to minimise weight. That will not be the case in BP23.
- F1 has what was, and possibly still is, the finest, normally aspirated road car engine ever made. BP23's engine will be a variant of the turbo unit in the other modern McLarens. It gets the job done, but is nothing special.
- Part of the purity of the F1 is that it's got a full carbon monocoque with the engine fixed directly to the monocoque and the engine and gearbox functioning as stressed members. It has no sub-frames. Even now, 25 years later, nobody builds road cars that way.
- The F1 is a beautiful car, and nothing else like it or its design "language" was ever made. It is unique. The BP23 will be of a piece with other modern McLarens, making it not unique. As to the beauty of other modern McLarens, and especially future ones, I shall say only that I don't believe they are up there with the F1....
- Contributing substantially to the desirability of the F1 is its heritage. Its top speed as a road car was a step change forward, and the highest for any production road car for many years following. That will not apply to the BP23.
- Even more significant, a modified version of the F1 road car (which unlike the RB/Aston was a genuine road car) won Le Mans outright. That will not be repeated.
Also, the F1 was "lucky" in that it came along at a time when there was a big gap in super-performance road cars. The F40 was agricultural, the 959 had been technologically marvelous but seriously flawed, the XJ220 was as we know a horlix, then there was a big lull until probably the Veyron. In its time and for years after, the F1 had no competition to distract us car nuts away from its specialness.
Thanks flemke. Reading your post above I figured that the car could still be a modern day interpretation of an F1 (I don't think many buyers now would expect a NA engine or that such a closely-related version would race successfully), if not a modernised facsimile of the original. The main concession to the GT concept was the tyres - which were a very big concession - but otherwise it's a rather pure driver's car.
As to the ways in which the BP23 will differ, without going into things told to me in confidence and instead relying on what is in the public domain or can be surmised from it, they include:
- F1 was designed with an obsession to minimise weight. That will not be the case in BP23.
- F1 has what was, and possibly still is, the finest, normally aspirated road car engine ever made. BP23's engine will be a variant of the turbo unit in the other modern McLarens. It gets the job done, but is nothing special.
- Part of the purity of the F1 is that it's got a full carbon monocoque with the engine fixed directly to the monocoque and the engine and gearbox functioning as stressed members. It has no sub-frames. Even now, 25 years later, nobody builds road cars that way.
- The F1 is a beautiful car, and nothing else like it or its design "language" was ever made. It is unique. The BP23 will be of a piece with other modern McLarens, making it not unique. As to the beauty of other modern McLarens, and especially future ones, I shall say only that I don't believe they are up there with the F1....
- Contributing substantially to the desirability of the F1 is its heritage. Its top speed as a road car was a step change forward, and the highest for any production road car for many years following. That will not apply to the BP23.
- Even more significant, a modified version of the F1 road car (which unlike the RB/Aston was a genuine road car) won Le Mans outright. That will not be repeated.
Also, the F1 was "lucky" in that it came along at a time when there was a big gap in super-performance road cars. The F40 was agricultural, the 959 had been technologically marvelous but seriously flawed, the XJ220 was as we know a horlix, then there was a big lull until probably the Veyron. In its time and for years after, the F1 had no competition to distract us car nuts away from its specialness.
However reading your subsequent post where you compare the concept more to an S Class or Panamera it sounds like it may be a long way from where I expected the car to be pitched. There are plenty of people who seem prepared to spend huge amounts of money on the ultimate versions of performance cars but seemingly fewer happy to spend serious money in the luxury/GT market. Rolls Royce prices seem the obvious ceiling in that market and I'm not sure there are too many £2m Rolls out there.
And look what's happened to Maybach. It's slightly stretching the point as a comparison but I'd hate to see McLaren misjudge this one having built such a successful road car brand over the last few years.
Re the new 3-seater, for the moment called "BP23" by McLaren, I did not mean to suggest that it will be a saloon car.
What I meant was that the concept of a GT was a car that was interesting and rewarding to drive long distances whilst one was touring. Years ago when the GT concept emerged, there were no saloon cars that were interesting and rewarding to drive. The only GTs were things such as Astons, some Jags, Ferrari Daytona: that genre.
Nowadays there are some saloon cars that have driving dynamics that 40 years ago not even sports cars could have approached. The old (front-engine) two-passenger GT concept is still around, but there are several proper four-passenger cars that do essentially the same job and do it as well as the two-passenger versions can do.
The BP23 will be mid-engine, meaning that its luggage space will be severely limited. It will be very fast, but it's not a track car, so how fast does one need a GT to be? And it will be fairly radical looking. Whether that will be a good thing or not remains, literally, to be seen.
epom said:
flemke said:
LanceRS said:
I'm sure that Brooklands would be quite obliging, anyone able to arrange the F1?
Well, I suppose that a Concorde is much rarer than an F1. On the other hand, many more people have ridden in Concordes than have ridden in F1s.Perhaps something to do when the weather gets better in the spring.
Dusty964 said:
SpeckledJim said:
flemke said:
SpeckledJim said:
With the way a three seater sportscar is packaged, and the benefits of central driving position, I'm amazed it hasn't been done again before.
McLaren owned a patent on the seating layout. Not sure if the patent has expired yet.
Ali2202 said:
So. No Autobahn-type environments for these playthings = No practical point?
The automotive world has truly been invaded by Kanye Westesque idiocy.
True, but I am afraid that has been the case for many years.The automotive world has truly been invaded by Kanye Westesque idiocy.
They are however perfect for doing 5mph laps around Knightsbridge.
flemke said:
CanAm said:
Or Alfa Romeo in the 30s:-
Lovely, thanks.It appears that, in those days, they were not particularly concerned about what might be behind them.
thegreenhell said:
Exactly the clip I thought of when I saw the comment!Rich_W said:
I'd actually prefer McLaren to attempt a 4door large luxury super saloon. In the mould of S8+/QuattroPorte/Panamera/Estoque With a top speed over 200.
Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
I agree, but I am sure that the costs involved in developing a new platform for such a car would be completely prohibitive for a projected production run in the thousands, not even tens of thousands. Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
Rich_W said:
I'd actually prefer McLaren to attempt a 4door large luxury super saloon. In the mould of S8+/QuattroPorte/Panamera/Estoque With a top speed over 200.
Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
Absolutely completely prohibitively expensive. Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
Making something fast is extremely cheap and dead easy in comparison with making something refined.
There's a very good reason all the small manufacturers are building sports cars, not super saloons.
SpeckledJim said:
Rich_W said:
I'd actually prefer McLaren to attempt a 4door large luxury super saloon. In the mould of S8+/QuattroPorte/Panamera/Estoque With a top speed over 200.
Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
Absolutely completely prohibitively expensive. Just because another 2 door supercar with that 3.8TT lump in it, feels a bit by the numbers for a company like them
Making something fast is extremely cheap and dead easy in comparison with making something refined.
There's a very good reason all the small manufacturers are building sports cars, not super saloons.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff