Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[thegreenhell]

flemke said:

I think we should read the comment as meaning that doors that hinge from the middle are better than doors that do not hinge from the middle, not that the LaF is better than anything from McLaren, because of course it is not.

Except perhaps in terms of engine configuration...

[thegreenhell]

Joe911 said:

- from some angles with the wing up there's something MR2 or Panther Solo about it

That's funny, the first thing I thought when I saw the front quarter view was Panther Solo!

[McAndy]

Joe911 said:

- the 'eyes' are just terrible
- the rotating display is a complete nonsense
- the styling seems too fussy

My thoughts exactly. It looks like a mess to me; unbalanced front to back. I'd like to see the headlight cowls in the same colour as the main body. I've just played with the configurator and you can have them black or carbon. The whole car looks better in a darker colour as it hides the cowls to some extent, and also many of the lines/curves/general mish-mash.

[Olivera]

Joe911 said:

Overall I don't totally hate the styling, it's mostly OK (except the headlights). ... but McL seem to be desperate to trade purity for bling ... because it makes more money.

Sorry but you seem clueless as to why the car looks like it does. It's clear to me that the styling (including headlights) has been heavily determined by aerodynamic requirements. Now you could argue it should look more conventional or pretty, but that would be contriving the design priorities for the exact reason you are arguing against.

[Joe911]

Olivera said:

Sorry but you seem clueless as to why the car looks like it does. It's clear to me that the styling (including headlights) has been heavily determined by aerodynamic requirements. Now you could argue it should look more conventional or pretty, but that would be contriving the design priorities for the exact reason you are arguing against.

"Clueless" - a good place to start - plenty to learn
Nothing more aerodynamic than a bullet - not a lot of bullst on that.

[Rich_W]

flemke said:

Peloton25 said:

Rich_W said:

Doors now hinge in the middle like a LaF which is better.

That's it - you're not allowed to post in the McLaren F1 thread anymore.

>8^)
ER

I think we should read the comment as meaning that doors that hinge from the middle are better than doors that do not hinge from the middle, not that the LaF is better than anything from McLaren, because of course it is not.

Anything?

LaF is far better than the last 3 years of McLaren Honda F1 entries.


Actually LaF is interesting to mention, because it is far from a beautiful car. Of the Trinity, it's the "ugly best friend" But like all ugly girls, it does have amazing talents to make up for it. That engine, especially in FxxK mode sounded EPIC on Top Gear the other night.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcTEHrAUAG4

Joe911 said:

Olivera said:

Sorry but you seem clueless as to why the car looks like it does. It's clear to me that the styling (including headlights) has been heavily determined by aerodynamic requirements. Now you could argue it should look more conventional or pretty, but that would be contriving the design priorities for the exact reason you are arguing against.

"Clueless" - a good place to start - plenty to learn
Nothing more aerodynamic than a bullet - not a lot of bullst on that.

Given all the eye sockets do is channel air onto a low temp rad, (what IS a low temp rad and why does it need extra air?) it's hardly something they couldn't have designed something a bit more elegant to do the same thing.

[Peloton25]

Joe911 said:

Nothing more aerodynamic than a bullet - not a lot of bullst on that.

A bullet doesn't have a powerful internal combustion engine that requires constant airflow and cooling.

It's also just a projectile so the idea of downforce would be irrelevant, and of course highly counter-productive.

>8^)
ER

[Peloton25]

Rich_W said:

what IS a low temp rad and why does it need extra air?

On a modern McLaren the low temp radiators in the nose cycle fluid for the chargecoolers.

The high temp radiators are side-mounted by the engine and cycle engine coolant.

>8^)
ER

[bobo79]

Great thread, thanks to all contributors, in particular Flemke.

Flemke - given that you appear to appreciate the purity of driving experience in the F1 and Rocket, unencumbered as they are by such frivolities as ABS, power steering and so on, what are your opinions of the Lotus Elise? Does it sit in a slightly awkward no-mans land where the performance doesn't quite offer the thrills you seek and the somewhat agricultural build quality doesn't offer the refinement required?

I would think an S1 or early K-series S2 may be up your street in many ways - build quality not withstanding. I know Gordon Murray rates the original Elan as the best handling road car of all time (or least - I understand he does) and the Elise is probably the closest Lotus ever came to matching the purity of the Elan again.

I know I love mine. I'd change a couple of things (I've already changed quite a few), including the awkward styling of the front indictors aped from the Europa.

Talking of which I'm looking forward to seeing the final 720S with the proper headlights and not the joke ones on there at the moment...

[Peloton25]

bobo79 said:

Talking of which I'm looking forward to seeing the final 720S with the proper headlights and not the joke ones on there at the moment...

If that's not sarcasm, the design is finalized and deliveries will begin fairly shortly.

>8^)
ER

[bobo79]

The sarcasm signal can deteriorate in an essentially text-only medium

[Rich_W]

Peloton25 said:

Rich_W said:

what IS a low temp rad and why does it need extra air?

On a modern McLaren the low temp radiators in the nose cycle fluid for the chargecoolers.

The high temp radiators are side-mounted by the engine and cycle engine coolant.

>8^)
ER

So it's Ronspeak for water cooled intercooler

So why not put them in the bigger scoops at the bottom of the bumper? Split the internal ducting, so half goes to the coolers and half goes to the brakes job jobbed and looks neater and also means you keep coherence to the existing/previous McLarens

[Peloton25]

bobo79 said:

The sarcasm signal can deteriorate in an essentially text-only medium

I have long lobbied for a sarcasm font that could be used on the internet - Comic Sans might be appropriate, but then we would have to endure looking at Comic Sans...

Rich_W said:

So it's Ronspeak for water cooled intercooler

The air-to-water intercoolers are located in the engine bay closely coupled to the turbochargers and intake manifold. The low temp radiators that cycle their coolant are located in the nose. You can see the tops of the intercoolers in this early factory photo of the 12C:

Rich_W said:

So why not put them in the bigger scoops at the bottom of the bumper? Split the internal ducting, so half goes to the coolers and half goes to the brakes job jobbed and looks neater and also means you keep coherence to the existing/previous McLarens

Because apparently it works better this way. They have done what you suggest on prior models but have indicated 15% better cooling efficiency with this new car's design versus the 650S it replaces.

>8^)
ER

Edited by Peloton25 on Wednesday 8th March 23:26

[bobo79]

Peloton25 said:

I have long lobbied for a sarcasm font that could be used on the internet - Comic Sans might be appropriate, but then we would have to endure looking at Comic Sans...

Edited by Peloton25 on Wednesday 8th March 23:19

As someone who's day-to-day job involves quite rigorous judgement of typography I would be vehemently opposed to such a policy.

[flemke]

Mikeeb said:

Good morning Flemke.

Quick question that I'm not sure has come up before.

I comes across that a big part of the reason for your modifications was to get rid of the overly tall/soft-walled tyres and the traits they caused. And so amongst other things you had some wheels designed/manufactured.

The LM's suspension/wheel set up would (I believe from what's been posted)get over a big proportion of this and I think give you some decent tyre options. But as you say the fronts are that much too wide messing up an already limited amount of steering lock.

If I recall correctly the LM's wheels were a standard OZ wheel. Would it not have been possible to get OZ to produce some front wheels in a more sensible width?

Is this a route that you considered? If so what prompted you to go the fresh development route you took?

Thanks

Mike

Yes, I considered that. There were a few reasons why ultimately I chose against it.

For one thing, there was no guarantee that OZ would make the wheels for me. Italian companies are not known for the ease with which one can deal with them, and I did not want to get into a tedious, protracted negotiation. I had already been in contact with Momo about making for me a steering wheel that would be identical to the original but in a larger diameter. After many months of delays, Momo said that they could do it, although they didn't really want to do it, and that the cost would be IRO £85,000, which seemed a trifle high. I was not interested in going into a similarly frustrating and fruitless exercise with OZ.

That was not however the most important issue. The need to change wheel sizes was being driven by the need for different tyres, and future trends in tyres were a concern.

At the time that I was looking at this, 2003-04, it was clear that sports car manufacturers were going to larger wheels and tyres. Many had begun to use 19", and Porsche had even gone to 20" for the rears on the CGT. It appeared, and has proved to be the case, that 18" tyres would see little in the way of development or improvement. Furthermore, the supply of 18" (in 345) might become scarce on the ground. I was making a decision that would have to last me (last the car) for decades. Indeed, a few years later Michelin came very close to discontinuing production of the bespoke tyres for the standard F1, which would have caused owners a big problem. I needed a sustainable option.

The engineers doing the analysis of optimal tyre combinations for my car rated the 19" combination superior to the 18" combination, according to their parameter of "corner force stiffness" front-to-rear. They thought that the 19/20 combination would be best of all, but only marginally better than 19/19 (at least in 345-35-19 R and 245(or 235)-30-19 F).

Next consideration was wheel size for accommodating brake rotors. Although by going from the standard 17" to 18" I would gain some extra room for bigger rotors, 19" was going to give me even more room, in effect enabling me to do whatever I might want in order to improve the car's brakes (which are the car's main shortcoming).

Another factor, not crucial but more than nothing, was visual. I have always liked the tall sidewalls of the standard F1, whereas I think the current trend to ultra-narrow sidewalls is silly.

The LM- (or GTR-) type wheel uses a tyre with a rather narrow sidewall. Also, the rolling diameter of the tyre for the LM-type rear wheel is less than the rolling diameter of the standard rear tyre. By going to the LM-type rear wheel and tyre I would be losing both acceleration and rev-limited Vmax. Again, not crucial, but if you had the choice you would avoid.

I ended up choosing the rear tyres designed for the Enzo. They are Bridgestones, and I reckoned that Bridgestone was not likely to discontinue making the tyre for one of Ferrari's signature cars (of which there are 4x as many in existence as there are F1s). I have been happy with that choice, and have never had a problem in buying rear tyres that were made relatively recently.

Regarding the looks, I think these images illustrate how the 18" Michelin tyre on a HDK car looks a bit weedy - too much space within the wheel arch - whereas the 19" Bridgestone on mine fills it out nicely.

[flemke]

thegreenhell said:

flemke said:

I think we should read the comment as meaning that doors that hinge from the middle are better than doors that do not hinge from the middle, not that the LaF is better than anything from McLaren, because of course it is not.

Except perhaps in terms of engine configuration...

My comment was meant facetiously. I dislike Ferrari for many reasons, but I agree that the LaF engine is a great engine.
I have written here before that I wish the concept of the P1 had been the concept that Ferrari used in the LaF - wonderful NA V12, hybrid only in KERS-type energy recovery, no heavy battery apparatus.

[flemke]

Olivera said:

Joe911 said:

Overall I don't totally hate the styling, it's mostly OK (except the headlights). ... but McL seem to be desperate to trade purity for bling ... because it makes more money.

Sorry but you seem clueless as to why the car looks like it does. It's clear to me that the styling (including headlights) has been heavily determined by aerodynamic requirements. Now you could argue it should look more conventional or pretty, but that would be contriving the design priorities for the exact reason you are arguing against.

You believe that the 720S has not been styled, and that its design is the result of pure aerodynamic functionality? I don't think so!

This is closer to being purely functional:



There is a shed-load of subjective, arbitrary styling in the 720S. The problem is that some of it doesn't look good.

[flemke]

Rich_W said:

LaF is far better than the last 3 years of McLaren Honda F1 entries.

Yes, but we're blaming Honda for that!

[flemke]

bobo79 said:

Great thread, thanks to all contributors, in particular Flemke.

Flemke - given that you appear to appreciate the purity of driving experience in the F1 and Rocket, unencumbered as they are by such frivolities as ABS, power steering and so on, what are your opinions of the Lotus Elise? Does it sit in a slightly awkward no-mans land where the performance doesn't quite offer the thrills you seek and the somewhat agricultural build quality doesn't offer the refinement required?

I would think an S1 or early K-series S2 may be up your street in many ways - build quality not withstanding. I know Gordon Murray rates the original Elan as the best handling road car of all time (or least - I understand he does) and the Elise is probably the closest Lotus ever came to matching the purity of the Elan again.

I know I love mine. I'd change a couple of things (I've already changed quite a few), including the awkward styling of the front indictors aped from the Europa.

Talking of which I'm looking forward to seeing the final 720S with the proper headlights and not the joke ones on there at the moment...

I hear you. There is a lot to respect and admire in the Elise/Exige. I might even have one.
My main objection is that the build quality could be better.

[TA14]

flemke said:

Mikeeb said:

Good morning Flemke.

Quick question that I'm not sure has come up before.

I comes across that a big part of the reason for your modifications was to get rid of the overly tall/soft-walled tyres and the traits they caused. And so amongst other things you had some wheels designed/manufactured.

The LM's suspension/wheel set up would (I believe from what's been posted)get over a big proportion of this and I think give you some decent tyre options. But as you say the fronts are that much too wide messing up an already limited amount of steering lock.

If I recall correctly the LM's wheels were a standard OZ wheel. Would it not have been possible to get OZ to produce some front wheels in a more sensible width?

Is this a route that you considered? If so what prompted you to go the fresh development route you took?

Thanks

Mike

Yes, I considered that. There were a few reasons why ultimately I chose against it.

For one thing, there was no guarantee that OZ would make the wheels for me. Italian companies are not known for the ease with which one can deal with them, and I did not want to get into a tedious, protracted negotiation. I had already been in contact with Momo about making for me a steering wheel that would be identical to the original but in a larger diameter. After many months of delays, Momo said that they could do it, although they didn't really want to do it, and that the cost would be IRO £85,000, which seemed a trifle high. I was not interested in going into a similarly frustrating and fruitless exercise with OZ.

That was not however the most important issue. The need to change wheel sizes was being driven by the need for different tyres, and future trends in tyres were a concern.

At the time that I was looking at this, 2003-04, it was clear that sports car manufacturers were going to larger wheels and tyres. Many had begun to use 19", and Porsche had even gone to 20" for the rears on the CGT. It appeared, and has proved to be the case, that 18" tyres would see little in the way of development or improvement. Furthermore, the supply of 18" (in 345) might become scarce on the ground. I was making a decision that would have to last me (last the car) for decades. Indeed, a few years later Michelin came very close to discontinuing production of the bespoke tyres for the standard F1, which would have caused owners a big problem. I needed a sustainable option.

The engineers doing the analysis of optimal tyre combinations for my car rated the 19" combination superior to the 18" combination, according to their parameter of "corner force stiffness" front-to-rear. They thought that the 19/20 combination would be best of all, but only marginally better than 19/19 (at least in 345-35-19 R and 245(or 235)-30-19 F).

Next consideration was wheel size for accommodating brake rotors. Although by going from the standard 17" to 18" I would gain some extra room for bigger rotors, 19" was going to give me even more room, in effect enabling me to do whatever I might want in order to improve the car's brakes (which are the car's main shortcoming).

Another factor, not crucial but more than nothing, was visual. I have always liked the tall sidewalls of the standard F1, whereas I think the current trend to ultra-narrow sidewalls is silly.

The LM- (or GTR-) type wheel uses a tyre with a rather narrow sidewall. Also, the rolling diameter of the tyre for the LM-type rear wheel is less than the rolling diameter of the standard rear tyre. By going to the LM-type rear wheel and tyre I would be losing both acceleration and rev-limited Vmax. Again, not crucial, but if you had the choice you would avoid.

I ended up choosing the rear tyres designed for the Enzo. They are Bridgestones, and I reckoned that Bridgestone was not likely to discontinue making the tyre for one of Ferrari's signature cars (of which there are 4x as many in existence as there are F1s). I have been happy with that choice, and have never had a problem in buying rear tyres that were made relatively recently.

Regarding the looks, I think these images illustrate how the 18" Michelin tyre on a HDK car looks a bit weedy - too much space within the wheel arch - whereas the 19" Bridgestone on mine fills it out nicely.

Thank you for taking the time to reply with this summary. How did your suspension changes/updates work out?