RE: McLaren 675LT: official
Discussion
Matt Bird said:
Mark-C said:
If only it was that good looking!
PH - how about standing out from the crowd by not posting press releases as news?
Ouch. There's not really an awful lot more to say on the car, we had speculated previously and therefore when the official details did come out we wanted to provide as many as possible. Apologies if did read like a copy and paste, we always aim to never, ever do that! Wild metaphor and conjecture to follow soon. Maybe.PH - how about standing out from the crowd by not posting press releases as news?
Matt
Anyway if I can't shoot the messenger who else can I pick on?
Really like the idea of a British track focused car supercar that can better Porsche GT3s as a track tool in both terms or speed, and durability.
When and if I find enough down the back of the couch, I'd have one in bright green, take it to every track day going, and make all those Stuttgart beetle enthusiast weep into their flat sixes
When and if I find enough down the back of the couch, I'd have one in bright green, take it to every track day going, and make all those Stuttgart beetle enthusiast weep into their flat sixes
Sway said:
Bugger! 996 - 997 even...
It's so much more than that - as Flemke has found, as he wanted a 650S with 12C nose - it physically cannot be done as suspension mount are very different, cooling system completely different, engine components differ, etc. Just the suspension pickups alone make it a substantially different vehicle, from a chassis perspective.
VW changed the suspension points on the subframe on the 9N shape Polo towards the end of it's life. Some of the current shape Audi A3 have independent suspension at the rear, some have a simple trailing arm. Doesn't mean it's a fundamentally different car to the other examples and I daresay the EU type approval is only really a paper exercise rather than a "whole new car". Cooling will be different because the nose is different. So again, not a fundamental change in the car. Probably find a 12C radiator doesn't fit properly, or is visible. Not being able to fit a 12C nose to a 650, could be as simple as the multiplug being a different shape on the P1 lights (are they actually the same of you look the same?) My understanding is that there's far less difference between those 2 cars than McLaren would have you believe.
Mclaren have never chased exclusivity at this level - indeed they've been quite candid they need pretty high volumes to cover infrastructure andanot costs. When the Sports Series comes out that'll be even clearer.
Mclaren's business model has changed massively - no more based solely on rarefied 300k plus limited run models. Their long term plan is to rival Porsche sports car volumes (at least, 911 volumes) as much as they can.
That's true but did Porsche start out mass production like that or did they add models at set intervals along the way before they get to the current line up. Compare to F458. There's only 4 versions. Coupe and spyder. Then Coupe and spyder Speciale. A 12C is a very good car. So all they needed to do was make 12C "Racing" and shave the weight, tweak the looks a bit and give it a twist of boost and that would have been brilliant and kept it all going in a cohesive direction. Here's a challenge. Predict the name of the next car to be released?
Probably best to agree to disagree, but one of my big bugbears with motoring journalists (including those on here) is how they've completely misrepresented what Mclaren are doing, and have done (like when they state that the P1/650S/SS engines are the same, or the carbon chassis are the same) - in each case completely and utterly wrong, or at least written in such a way the reader who doesn't know better gets the wrong end of the stick.
I wouldn't say completely and utterly wrong. The problem is because McLaren made a big thing about the Carbotech tub and every car thereafter is pretty similar. Albeit the P1 example has A and B Pillars and a roof. The floor, sides and front section are identical. (Can't see a close up of the joins to the pillars, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them all start life in the same mould) As for the engine. Again, if McLaren had made the P1 engine a different capacity or number of cylinders that would have helped. P1 could have had a TT V8 4 Litres instead of this 3.8 they've settled on. They could have even described it as a "bored out version with bigger Turbos" to help differentiate.
There are (rival) firms who would have had kittens if the same errors had appeared so often about their cars...
Devils Advocate mode in bold aboveIt's so much more than that - as Flemke has found, as he wanted a 650S with 12C nose - it physically cannot be done as suspension mount are very different, cooling system completely different, engine components differ, etc. Just the suspension pickups alone make it a substantially different vehicle, from a chassis perspective.
VW changed the suspension points on the subframe on the 9N shape Polo towards the end of it's life. Some of the current shape Audi A3 have independent suspension at the rear, some have a simple trailing arm. Doesn't mean it's a fundamentally different car to the other examples and I daresay the EU type approval is only really a paper exercise rather than a "whole new car". Cooling will be different because the nose is different. So again, not a fundamental change in the car. Probably find a 12C radiator doesn't fit properly, or is visible. Not being able to fit a 12C nose to a 650, could be as simple as the multiplug being a different shape on the P1 lights (are they actually the same of you look the same?) My understanding is that there's far less difference between those 2 cars than McLaren would have you believe.
Mclaren have never chased exclusivity at this level - indeed they've been quite candid they need pretty high volumes to cover infrastructure andanot costs. When the Sports Series comes out that'll be even clearer.
Mclaren's business model has changed massively - no more based solely on rarefied 300k plus limited run models. Their long term plan is to rival Porsche sports car volumes (at least, 911 volumes) as much as they can.
That's true but did Porsche start out mass production like that or did they add models at set intervals along the way before they get to the current line up. Compare to F458. There's only 4 versions. Coupe and spyder. Then Coupe and spyder Speciale. A 12C is a very good car. So all they needed to do was make 12C "Racing" and shave the weight, tweak the looks a bit and give it a twist of boost and that would have been brilliant and kept it all going in a cohesive direction. Here's a challenge. Predict the name of the next car to be released?
Probably best to agree to disagree, but one of my big bugbears with motoring journalists (including those on here) is how they've completely misrepresented what Mclaren are doing, and have done (like when they state that the P1/650S/SS engines are the same, or the carbon chassis are the same) - in each case completely and utterly wrong, or at least written in such a way the reader who doesn't know better gets the wrong end of the stick.
I wouldn't say completely and utterly wrong. The problem is because McLaren made a big thing about the Carbotech tub and every car thereafter is pretty similar. Albeit the P1 example has A and B Pillars and a roof. The floor, sides and front section are identical. (Can't see a close up of the joins to the pillars, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them all start life in the same mould) As for the engine. Again, if McLaren had made the P1 engine a different capacity or number of cylinders that would have helped. P1 could have had a TT V8 4 Litres instead of this 3.8 they've settled on. They could have even described it as a "bored out version with bigger Turbos" to help differentiate.
There are (rival) firms who would have had kittens if the same errors had appeared so often about their cars...
Lyons said:
Really like the idea of a British track focused car supercar that can better Porsche GT3s as a track tool in both terms or speed, and durability.
When and if I find enough down the back of the couch, I'd have one in bright green, take it to every track day going, and make all those Stuttgart beetle enthusiast weep into their flat sixes
Unlikely since the great part of GT3. Is it's high revving NATURALLY ASPIRATED engine. Something McLaren are unable to fit to their cars When and if I find enough down the back of the couch, I'd have one in bright green, take it to every track day going, and make all those Stuttgart beetle enthusiast weep into their flat sixes
Edited by Rich_W on Wednesday 28th January 21:28
Fair points.
From what flemke and a chap at Mclaren chap at Goodwood have said, it seems it's probably between the two extremes! As said, it doesn't seem to have massively impacted 12C prices (at least more than usual considering their age now, etc.).
The monocell/monocage etc. does have different sills etc. I'm 90% sure. I certainly can't imagine that you could just add a/b pillars and a roof without seriously looking at the layup of the rest of the tub - even if it's the same mould sections that's only half the story with composite structures.
The engine is completely different. I'd imagine that the reason why they're the same capacity and configuration is because Mclaren have deemed them 'optimal', and therefore aren't going to increase bore purely because people can more easily find the differences. It would seem a Ron/Mclaren method of thinking.
As for nomenclature, agreed they're being a bit silly. Although the next one (by which I mean the cheaper one!) will be called Sports Series - although I reckon they'll add a number that relates in some way to the power output...
From what flemke and a chap at Mclaren chap at Goodwood have said, it seems it's probably between the two extremes! As said, it doesn't seem to have massively impacted 12C prices (at least more than usual considering their age now, etc.).
The monocell/monocage etc. does have different sills etc. I'm 90% sure. I certainly can't imagine that you could just add a/b pillars and a roof without seriously looking at the layup of the rest of the tub - even if it's the same mould sections that's only half the story with composite structures.
The engine is completely different. I'd imagine that the reason why they're the same capacity and configuration is because Mclaren have deemed them 'optimal', and therefore aren't going to increase bore purely because people can more easily find the differences. It would seem a Ron/Mclaren method of thinking.
As for nomenclature, agreed they're being a bit silly. Although the next one (by which I mean the cheaper one!) will be called Sports Series - although I reckon they'll add a number that relates in some way to the power output...
I am sure there are quite a few differences under the skin but to the layman it just seems that they are very similar. Yes the press haven't helped by not highlighting those differences but I don't think McLaren have done themselves any favours by making so many models so quickly. I know their ethos is "continual improvement" but to me that just seems like they didn't get the car right in the first place, they released a beta version and are using owners as test drivers to finish the car off properly.
I'd also agree that making the P1 and the 12c\650 have the same engine capacity was a mistake. Again there maybe some differences in the oily bits but at the end of the day they are both fundamentally the same engine, a 3.8 twin turbo V8. The one that sits in the car that costs nearly a million pounds should be differentiated somehow, that's just good marketing sense (yes I know it has the hybrid gubbins attached)
If the goal is to hit the mass market then they need to have a proper model strategy. Buyers, especially some of our Arab and Russian friends like to know what their buying into and that they have the latest and greatest model, not that the car they bought is going to outdated next month. At the moment it just seems a bit slap dash, almost as if they keep finding some spare parts lying around in the shop, throwing it together and calling it another model.
I'd also agree that making the P1 and the 12c\650 have the same engine capacity was a mistake. Again there maybe some differences in the oily bits but at the end of the day they are both fundamentally the same engine, a 3.8 twin turbo V8. The one that sits in the car that costs nearly a million pounds should be differentiated somehow, that's just good marketing sense (yes I know it has the hybrid gubbins attached)
If the goal is to hit the mass market then they need to have a proper model strategy. Buyers, especially some of our Arab and Russian friends like to know what their buying into and that they have the latest and greatest model, not that the car they bought is going to outdated next month. At the moment it just seems a bit slap dash, almost as if they keep finding some spare parts lying around in the shop, throwing it together and calling it another model.
Matt Bird said:
Mark-C said:
If only it was that good looking!
PH - how about standing out from the crowd by not posting press releases as news?
Ouch. There's not really an awful lot more to say on the car, we had speculated previously and therefore when the official details did come out we wanted to provide as many as possible. Apologies if did read like a copy and paste, we always aim to never, ever do that! Wild metaphor and conjecture to follow soon. Maybe.PH - how about standing out from the crowd by not posting press releases as news?
Matt
Sway said:
Bugger! 996 - 997 even...
It's so much more than that - as Flemke has found, as he wanted a 650S with 12C nose - it physically cannot be done as suspension mount are very different, cooling system completely different, engine components differ, etc. Just the suspension pickups alone make it a substantially different vehicle, from a chassis perspective.
Mclaren have never chased exclusivity at this level - indeed they've been quite candid they need pretty high volumes to cover infrastructure andanot costs. When the Sports Series comes out that'll be even clearer.
Mclaren's business model has changed massively - no more based solely on rarefied 300k plus limited run models. Their long term plan is to rival Porsche sports car volumes (at least, 911 volumes) as much as they can.
Probably best to agree to disagree, but one of my big bugbears with motoring journalists (including those on here) is how they've completely misrepresented what Mclaren are doing, and have done (like when they state that the P1/650S/SS engines are the same, or the carbon chassis are the same) - in each case completely and utterly wrong, or at least written in such a way the reader who doesn't know better gets the wrong end of the stick.
There are (rival) firms who would have had kittens if the same errors had appeared so often about their cars...
It's so much more than that - as Flemke has found, as he wanted a 650S with 12C nose - it physically cannot be done as suspension mount are very different, cooling system completely different, engine components differ, etc. Just the suspension pickups alone make it a substantially different vehicle, from a chassis perspective.
Mclaren have never chased exclusivity at this level - indeed they've been quite candid they need pretty high volumes to cover infrastructure andanot costs. When the Sports Series comes out that'll be even clearer.
Mclaren's business model has changed massively - no more based solely on rarefied 300k plus limited run models. Their long term plan is to rival Porsche sports car volumes (at least, 911 volumes) as much as they can.
Probably best to agree to disagree, but one of my big bugbears with motoring journalists (including those on here) is how they've completely misrepresented what Mclaren are doing, and have done (like when they state that the P1/650S/SS engines are the same, or the carbon chassis are the same) - in each case completely and utterly wrong, or at least written in such a way the reader who doesn't know better gets the wrong end of the stick.
There are (rival) firms who would have had kittens if the same errors had appeared so often about their cars...
If you have something that is good, there is no need to chuck it out and start over. If something is already good, why not focus on making it a bit better?
It gets annoying when, from the first, a company will deliberately hold back from making a product as good as they know they could make it, simply in order to retain some of that "goodness" for the next version. No doubt you have noticed how Porsche has magically come up with another additional 15 bhp and 0.1 sec quicker 0-60 time, about once a year for the last 15 years.
The other thing that is annoying is when a company will come out with a "halo" model that is substantially more expensive than anything else in their line, produce a very limited number of units and market the model based on "exclusivity", and then, as soon as that model is sold out, take many of the unique elements from the halo model and put them on their unexclusive, unlimited production models costing a fraction as much. Porsche have done this, Mercedes, Ferrari to some degree, and now McLaren. It's not cool.
flemke said:
If you have something that is good, there is no need to chuck it out and start over. If something is already good, why not focus on making it a bit better?
It gets annoying when, from the first, a company will deliberately hold back from making a product as good as they know they could make it, simply in order to retain some of that "goodness" for the next version. No doubt you have noticed how Porsche has magically come up with another additional 15 bhp and 0.1 sec quicker 0-60 time, about once a year for the last 15 years.
The other thing that is annoying is when a company will come out with a "halo" model that is substantially more expensive than anything else in their line, produce a very limited number of units and market the model based on "exclusivity", and then, as soon as that model is sold out, take many of the unique elements from the halo model and put them on their unexclusive, unlimited production models costing a fraction as much. Porsche have done this, Mercedes, Ferrari to some degree, and now McLaren. It's not cool.
Does it really just come down to that McLaren are carrying out rapid development (like an AGILE Project Management approach) and don't want owners saying "Oi, why did you sell me a car last month with 25PS less than today's cars?"
Simply release each new development as a "special edition" and then build on that for the next one?
I'm not sure this really does McLaren any favours, but as I'm not rich enough to be the target demographic, I guess I'm not the one to answer that.
Anyone who's bought a 650S or MP4/12C new care to comment?
M.
Simply release each new development as a "special edition" and then build on that for the next one?
I'm not sure this really does McLaren any favours, but as I'm not rich enough to be the target demographic, I guess I'm not the one to answer that.
Anyone who's bought a 650S or MP4/12C new care to comment?
M.
marcosgt said:
Does it really just come down to that McLaren are carrying out rapid development (like an AGILE Project Management approach) and don't want owners saying "Oi, why did you sell me a car last month with 25PS less than today's cars?"
M.
It is certainly an interesting and unique approach, I'm just not sure it's very well suited to the car sector. I'm sure there are a few owners who will enjoy their cars for what they are but I am also pretty sure that there are also a lot of owners who just have to have the latest and greatest and I'd assume this is doubly so in the supercar market were these cars are more often than not bought as status symbols. Kind of hard to show off your new McLaren when they keep releasing a "new and improved version" every 5 minutes.M.
Owner 1 "Hey look at my new McLaren, I bought it last month and it's brilliant"
Owner 2 "Last month you say, well look at my NEWER McLaren, it has a new bumper and 25bhp more than yours"
Owner 1 "sigh"
jackpe said:
flemke said:
If you have something that is good, there is no need to chuck it out and start over. If something is already good, why not focus on making it a bit better?
It gets annoying when, from the first, a company will deliberately hold back from making a product as good as they know they could make it, simply in order to retain some of that "goodness" for the next version. No doubt you have noticed how Porsche has magically come up with another additional 15 bhp and 0.1 sec quicker 0-60 time, about once a year for the last 15 years.
The other thing that is annoying is when a company will come out with a "halo" model that is substantially more expensive than anything else in their line, produce a very limited number of units and market the model based on "exclusivity", and then, as soon as that model is sold out, take many of the unique elements from the halo model and put them on their unexclusive, unlimited production models costing a fraction as much. Porsche have done this, Mercedes, Ferrari to some degree, and now McLaren. It's not cool.
You misunderstand.
The Porsche illustrations are not variations of one nominal model, such as the 996 Carrera 2, Carrera 4, Targa, Cabriolet, Turbo, et al.
Rather, they are illustrations of how Porsche have for decades been making variations on the same theme, yet giving each variation a different model name: 911, 930, 964, 993, 996, 997, 991.
They've gone from air-cooling to water-cooling, and they've change the rear suspension linkage. Not a huge amount of change in 50 years!
flemke said:
jackpe said:
flemke said:
If you have something that is good, there is no need to chuck it out and start over. If something is already good, why not focus on making it a bit better?
It gets annoying when, from the first, a company will deliberately hold back from making a product as good as they know they could make it, simply in order to retain some of that "goodness" for the next version. No doubt you have noticed how Porsche has magically come up with another additional 15 bhp and 0.1 sec quicker 0-60 time, about once a year for the last 15 years.
The other thing that is annoying is when a company will come out with a "halo" model that is substantially more expensive than anything else in their line, produce a very limited number of units and market the model based on "exclusivity", and then, as soon as that model is sold out, take many of the unique elements from the halo model and put them on their unexclusive, unlimited production models costing a fraction as much. Porsche have done this, Mercedes, Ferrari to some degree, and now McLaren. It's not cool.
You misunderstand.
The Porsche illustrations are not variations of one nominal model, such as the 996 Carrera 2, Carrera 4, Targa, Cabriolet, Turbo, et al.
Rather, they are illustrations of how Porsche have for decades been making variations on the same theme, yet giving each variation a different model name: 911, 930, 964, 993, 996, 997, 991.
They've gone from air-cooling to water-cooling, and they've change the rear suspension linkage. Not a huge amount of change in 50 years!
You could level the same at pretty much any established sports car- how about 308gtb to 458 speciale?
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Now I'm confused! I think perhaps you chose the wrong illustration? All it shows is the evolution of the 911 turbo from the mid 70s to the late 00s. The only thing the first and last cars have in common is a flat 6, forced induction and a coupe 2+2 body. Along the way everything thing else has changed, engine sizes, gearboxes, driven wheels etc etc
You could level the same at pretty much any established sports car- how about 308gtb to 458 speciale?
I am not aware of another car that over the course of 50 years has changed less, or, perhaps we should say, has there even been another car that has been in production for more than 50 years? Maybe some American cars such as the Corvette, Mustang and Camaro, of which the former has changed radically, the latter two to a similar extent as the 911.You could level the same at pretty much any established sports car- how about 308gtb to 458 speciale?
Overall, this debate is pretty meaningless, and more fool me for getting drawn into it. McLaren have announced a new car. Whether we call it a new model or an old model or something that came too soon or something that we are glad has come and why didn't it come sooner - none of that matters. If a person likes it, fine. If he hates it, fine. The degree to which it resembles other McLaren models is not important. It might make a bit of sense actually to see it, or at least to see a picture of it, before people (not you) lob in their criticisms of it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff