Mumtalakat to take over McLaren

[Forester1965]

HJG said:

A race-bred V8 capable of over 800bhp? Available in two engine sizes - one quite different from the other.

A production-car first 120deg V6.

Designed, engineered, developed and built in Britain

Remind me where the inspiration is lacking, please.

£140k loss per car tells you.

[CLK-GTR]

HJG said:

A race-bred V8 capable of over 800bhp? Available in two engine sizes - one quite different from the other.

A production-car first 120deg V6.

Designed, engineered, developed and built in Britain

Remind me where the inspiration is lacking, please.

The 4.0 shared about 60% of its parts with the 3.8 on launch.

Just tuning the same engine to the nth degree is not inspiration.

[HJG]

CLK-GTR said:

The 4.0 shared about 60% of its parts with the 3.8 on launch.

Just tuning the same engine to the nth degree is not inspiration.

Reiterates my previous post really.

[PinkHouse]

CLK-GTR said:

HJG said:

A race-bred V8 capable of over 800bhp? Available in two engine sizes - one quite different from the other.

A production-car first 120deg V6.

Designed, engineered, developed and built in Britain

Remind me where the inspiration is lacking, please.

The 4.0 shared about 60% of its parts with the 3.8 on launch.

Just tuning the same engine to the nth degree is not inspiration.

Porsche has been using the same engine in their GT cars for over 10 years now. That's the one people fall over themselves to pay overs for, and you don't hear people complaining about that

[supersport]

You only need to sit in a McLaren to realise how special they are.

The fact that the engines are “the same” isn’t an issue. They are incredible machines and to my mind just as exotic and stunning to look at as other supercars.

I also think that they are actually all different. Yes there is a family and family look, come on Porsche same look for 60 years, and that makes each model desirable for different reasons.

[r o n n i e]

I see this post is descending into yet another prime example.

Non-owners feeling irrationally compelled to dump on McLaren, on points that are not unique to McLaren.

Everyone is of course free to share their opinions but I do find it bizarre that rather than putting the kettle on and not wasting energy on something that does not impact them, the trolls always come out to kick McLaren??

Agree with the good points about Ferrari more expertly managing their stock and brand value. They deserve a lot of praise there.

[Soleith]

supersport said:

You only need to sit in a McLaren to realise how special they are.

The fact that the engines are “the same” isn’t an issue. They are incredible machines and to my mind just as exotic and stunning to look at as other supercars.

I also think that they are actually all different. Yes there is a family and family look, come on Porsche same look for 60 years, and that makes each model desirable for different reasons.

They do feel special to sit in. But unfortunately for me (and many others I suspect) the fact that almost every car they do has an AMG v8 TT in various states of tune means that as a package it doesn't feel special enough for the price.

Couple that with ongoing ownership and profitability uncertainty and I just don't feel comfortable splurging that kind of money on one.

[Grey_Area]

Soleith said:

supersport said:

You only need to sit in a McLaren to realise how special they are.

The fact that the engines are “the same” isn’t an issue. They are incredible machines and to my mind just as exotic and stunning to look at as other supercars.

I also think that they are actually all different. Yes there is a family and family look, come on Porsche same look for 60 years, and that makes each model desirable for different reasons.

They do feel special to sit in. But unfortunately for me (and many others I suspect) the fact that almost every car they do has an AMG v8 TT in various states of tune means that as a package it doesn't feel special enough for the price.

Couple that with ongoing ownership and profitability uncertainty and I just don't feel comfortable splurging that kind of money on one.

What engine again.

[HJG]

Grey_Area said:

What engine again.

Lol it gets better and better.
It'll be a Chevy V8 next.
Oh wait....

[CLK-GTR]

PinkHouse said:

Porsche has been using the same engine in their GT cars for over 10 years now. That's the one people fall over themselves to pay overs for, and you don't hear people complaining about that

The 911 is defined by its engine and theyve done a great job of linking the ultra successful GTE programme to the road cars. If United Autosports do the business there is a golden opportunity there... Besides that, what engine did they put in the Carrera GT and 918? The V8 TT is a great engine but it should not have been in the Ultimate series cars. Imo of course.

Anyway, it's all personal opinion. Mclaren are not in the running for me and that's why.

Edited by CLK-GTR on Wednesday 13th March 09:01

[murphyaj]

Soleith said:

But unfortunately for me (and many others I suspect) the fact that almost every car they do has an AMG v8 TT in various states of tune means that as a package it doesn't feel special enough for the price.

You're thinking of Aston Martin, they are the ones that use an AMG V8

[ex-devonpaul]

r o n n i e said:

I see this post is descending into yet another prime example.

Non-owners feeling irrationally compelled to dump on McLaren, on points that are not unique to McLaren.

Everyone is of course free to share their opinions but I do find it bizarre that rather than putting the kettle on and not wasting energy on something that does not impact them, the trolls always come out to kick McLaren??

Agree with the good points about Ferrari more expertly managing their stock and brand value. They deserve a lot of praise there.

Just reminded about this list posted by Gibbo...

Gibbo205 said:

- Corrosion: Mainly appears in rear arches first, then front arches, any competent bodyshop can sort, budget around 1k per arch.
- Leaking dampers: Not sure on cost but budget around 5k per axle
- Engine: Some people have reported need rebuilds at 80k plus, something to mindful off if buying higher mileage, some people see 100k no issue.
- Gearbox issues: An issue with the DCT box, impacts quite a few models, from internal oil seals failing (happened to my 2014 26k mile 458) or sensors failing requiring rebuild, the scary bit budget 8-30k.
- LCD screens in cockpit: They can fail or go funky, big money as in 5k.

Not a great endorsement, but as this was about the 458 then the Tifosi would accept it as "character".

Edited by ex-devonpaul on Wednesday 13th March 12:32

[r o n n i e]

Soleith said:

supersport said:

You only need to sit in a McLaren to realise how special they are.

The fact that the engines are “the same” isn’t an issue. They are incredible machines and to my mind just as exotic and stunning to look at as other supercars.

I also think that they are actually all different. Yes there is a family and family look, come on Porsche same look for 60 years, and that makes each model desirable for different reasons.

They do feel special to sit in. But unfortunately for me (and many others I suspect) the fact that almost every car they do has an AMG v8 TT in various states of tune means that as a package it doesn't feel special enough for the price.

Couple that with ongoing ownership and profitability uncertainty and I just don't feel comfortable splurging that kind of money on one.

Oh dear, you are confusing Aston Martin or Mercedes (both do use AMG engine) with McLaren who have never used the AMG V8.

But hey if that’s your reason for it not feeling special after sitting in one, then they need to up their salesmanship game.

[Forester1965]

Ultimately what some people on the internet think is fairly immaterial. What counts is how many people with the means want to buy them and how many McLaren can produce. If they can't generate or satiate demand profitably, they're going to fail.

My personal view is the MP4-12C wasn't received as well as it might, setting them on a course of trying to run before they could walk.

[willy wombat]

Forester1965 said:

Ultimately what some people on the internet think is fairly immaterial. What counts is how many people with the means want to buy them and how many McLaren can produce. If they can't generate or satiate demand profitably, they're going to fail.

My personal view is the MP4-12C wasn't received as well as it might, setting them on a course of trying to run before they could walk.

I think your point about the MP4-12C is exactly right. When it was launched I test drove one within 24 hours of test driving a 458 and I was a bit underwhelmed by the Mac and loved the Ferrari and that has influenced my opinion of/desire for a Mac ever since.

[Soleith]

Oops my bad! Had assumed it was an AMG but yes that's Aston (which I also am not particularly keen on).

But whether it's an AMG or not, the same unit in almost every car is the problem for me, still coupled with the uncertainty over it's long term viability.

[Hammersia]

I'm not getting into the argument of whether McLarens are good or bad, but the point I've made elsewhere is more about brand value -

I believe as electrification takes over, more components are shared, and new rapid low volume manufacturing techniques are developed (3D metal deposition etc.) all "brands" will find it easier and cheaper to continue producing cars, and we will have some long lost brands (Lancia, Triumph etc.) resurrected.

I would be pretty sure whatever happens that McLaren (and Aston) have enough brand value to continue in some form, they will always make a comeback , some investors will get wiped out of course but others will profit.

Incidentally by the same logic I think it's far from a given that the Ferrari brand value will continue at it's current stratospheric levels. A Ferrari without a Ferrari IC engine, is there the same market size potential as currently? I doubt it, yes Ferrari will have eternal brand value but I'm guessing it will decline a little in the medium term as electrification spreads.

[CLK-GTR]

Hammersia said:

I'm not getting into the argument of whether McLarens are good or bad, but the point I've made elsewhere is more about brand value -

I believe as electrification takes over, more components are shared, and new rapid low volume manufacturing techniques are developed (3D metal deposition etc.) all "brands" will find it easier and cheaper to continue producing cars, and we will have some long lost brands (Lancia, Triumph etc.) resurrected.

I would be pretty sure whatever happens that McLaren (and Aston) have enough brand value to continue in some form, they will always make a comeback , some investors will get wiped out of course but others will profit.

Incidentally by the same logic I think it's far from a given that the Ferrari brand value will continue at it's current stratospheric levels. A Ferrari without a Ferrari IC engine, is there the same market size potential as currently? I doubt it, yes Ferrari will have eternal brand value but I'm guessing it will decline a little in the medium term as electrification spreads.

I think Ferrari will get out of that one via Article 10 of the emissions regulations. Both them and Lamborghini with heavy backing from the Italian government.

[Soleith]

Hammersia said:

I'm not getting into the argument of whether McLarens are good or bad, but the point I've made elsewhere is more about brand value -

I believe as electrification takes over, more components are shared, and new rapid low volume manufacturing techniques are developed (3D metal deposition etc.) all "brands" will find it easier and cheaper to continue producing cars, and we will have some long lost brands (Lancia, Triumph etc.) resurrected.

I would be pretty sure whatever happens that McLaren (and Aston) have enough brand value to continue in some form, they will always make a comeback , some investors will get wiped out of course but others will profit.

Incidentally by the same logic I think it's far from a given that the Ferrari brand value will continue at it's current stratospheric levels. A Ferrari without a Ferrari IC engine, is there the same market size potential as currently? I doubt it, yes Ferrari will have eternal brand value but I'm guessing it will decline a little in the medium term as electrification spreads.

Yes absolutely agreed. Electrification feels odd to me in a Ferrari. Having driven the 296 it is a great car but not for me for several reasons, partly looks but also partly hybridisation. I'm sure the younger people will be fine with it though.

[Streetbeat]

Soleith said:

Had assumed it was an AMG

Did you also assume they were sh*t to drive too????

Im afraid you are the perfect example of the Mclaren troll, never owned one, clearly no knowledge of them but happy to tell everyone why you dont want one, regurgitating "stuff" youve read on the internet or assumed. If you actually spent a little of your wasted ramblings doing some proper research, talking to long standing owners, dare i say even drive one you "might" actually have some constructive cristiscm or at the very least a valued opinion.

In the broader term to said people, if you are more concerned with pub bragging rights over engine configuration and the noise it makes or are too concerned about protecting your hard earned without a bit of depreciation stick to the familiar, but if you actually want a car that has in very a brief time made the competiton have to pull its socks up (Ferrari still not caught up with the 720s 7 years later) perhaps Mclaren is the car for you, irrespective of the "brand".

Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche are well established, how was their first decade in production??