RE: McLaren MP4-12C, Now With Added 'Phwoarr'
Discussion
DJRC said:
Frik said:
It was Richard Porter, ironically in his column in Evo. I'm sure the fact that he was banging the drum against development at the 'ring some time ago and just happens to be the script editor for Top Gear is merely coincidental...
Some of us have been saying it for years.Mrlol said:
P9UNK said:
You are absolutely right, and this was exemplified by the 5th Gear test, the presenters obsessed with sideways when Hamilton and Button were probably feeding back more intelligent input. The 5th Gear test for me is quite a controversial piece of TV in that they really did fail to do any justice to a car that is such an engineering 'tour de force'.
To be honest, the evo review seemed fair to me.It was full of praise for the mclaren, and i fail to see where all this gumpf has come from about them "not getting mclaren"
Mclaren had set the goalposts that this was to be better than the 458. It was in many areas, but wasn't in two key areas. It's lap time wasn't faster round bedford and they complained that it didn't inspire confidence on turn in. The lack of noise, grabby brakes and paddles that were too stiff were minor annoyances.
What seemed totally stupid, was the 5th gear review whereby they went on about how they couldn't drive the car properly and was nothing but negative. The evo review was very balanced imo.
Turbo Harry said:
DJRC said:
Frik said:
It was Richard Porter, ironically in his column in Evo. I'm sure the fact that he was banging the drum against development at the 'ring some time ago and just happens to be the script editor for Top Gear is merely coincidental...
Some of us have been saying it for years.Limpet said:
Of course, owner / driver emotion is probably more critical when dealing with supercars than with any other type of car, due to a supercar being a largely emotional purchase. Practically, and with the odd exception of financial investment, there is often no good reason to own one at all. They are cars you own or aspire to because they are deeply desirable.
I wouldn't claim to have experienced either car, or even have the driving ability to be able to split them if I were given the opportunity, but I can't help feeling a bit sorry for McLaren. The criticisms of this car are in the one area you can't quantify or measure, and therefore can't easily improve. The tweaks mentioned in this article may solve the problem, it may not. How do you define "soul" and "character"? Surely it's a personal thing.
True. It seems to have a 'soul' a car needs to catch fire or have bits fall off. I wouldn't claim to have experienced either car, or even have the driving ability to be able to split them if I were given the opportunity, but I can't help feeling a bit sorry for McLaren. The criticisms of this car are in the one area you can't quantify or measure, and therefore can't easily improve. The tweaks mentioned in this article may solve the problem, it may not. How do you define "soul" and "character"? Surely it's a personal thing.
Edited by Limpet on Tuesday 19th July 16:17
E21_Ross said:
i found the noise was delayed, it was the 911 turbo which mkaes hardly any noise at all. mclaren sounds nice on start up here IMO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YJVAagU9yY
sounded nice on the TG track too IMO. 911 turbo sounds very, very dull. a C2S sounds leagues better.
Well, that sounds good to me. I could live with that!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YJVAagU9yY
sounded nice on the TG track too IMO. 911 turbo sounds very, very dull. a C2S sounds leagues better.
otolith said:
Turbo Harry said:
DJRC said:
Frik said:
It was Richard Porter, ironically in his column in Evo. I'm sure the fact that he was banging the drum against development at the 'ring some time ago and just happens to be the script editor for Top Gear is merely coincidental...
Some of us have been saying it for years.toppstuff said:
I have to say that EVO are not doing themselves any favours. Frankly, they come across as rather self-important and smug rather than independent champions of the performance car and driver.
And I must say that they singularly fail to "get" McLaren and its ethos. For me, this is the most disappointing thing of all.
There is room in the market ( one hopes ) for a performance car that is the antithesis of Ferrari.
I think McLaren is looking to fill that gap, providing a car with the daily usability of a 911 while setting new standards of performance and safety. In this respect, McLaren seem to have nailed it on the first attempt. It is very disappointing that the motoring press fails to recognise this.
Back to the car - The changes clearly amount to little more than a bit of tweaking. In a more sane world, changes like these may even have been implemented without a fanfare. Instead, EVO and their ilk have driven the narrative of the story for their own ends. In the desire to get a controversial cover headline, they have created a story and appointed themselves as the story teller and the hero.
Top Gear is often berated for its inaccuracy and for Clarkson's nonsense ( quite rightly , his take on the XKR S and GTR was inaccurate, inconsistent and complete rubbish) but it seems to me that EVO and the "proper" motoring journalists are not that different. Under the earnest analysis and supposed journalistic integrity, I think they are just as inconsistent.
Perhaps we should remember that they are journalists first and foremost. But when they make themselves part of the story , then the game is up. EVO has lost credibility in my opinion.
Have you driven the XKR S or the GT-R then?And I must say that they singularly fail to "get" McLaren and its ethos. For me, this is the most disappointing thing of all.
There is room in the market ( one hopes ) for a performance car that is the antithesis of Ferrari.
I think McLaren is looking to fill that gap, providing a car with the daily usability of a 911 while setting new standards of performance and safety. In this respect, McLaren seem to have nailed it on the first attempt. It is very disappointing that the motoring press fails to recognise this.
Back to the car - The changes clearly amount to little more than a bit of tweaking. In a more sane world, changes like these may even have been implemented without a fanfare. Instead, EVO and their ilk have driven the narrative of the story for their own ends. In the desire to get a controversial cover headline, they have created a story and appointed themselves as the story teller and the hero.
Top Gear is often berated for its inaccuracy and for Clarkson's nonsense ( quite rightly , his take on the XKR S and GTR was inaccurate, inconsistent and complete rubbish) but it seems to me that EVO and the "proper" motoring journalists are not that different. Under the earnest analysis and supposed journalistic integrity, I think they are just as inconsistent.
Perhaps we should remember that they are journalists first and foremost. But when they make themselves part of the story , then the game is up. EVO has lost credibility in my opinion.
toppstuff said:
But the "loud , outlandish sideways supercar" thing is already covered by Ferrari and Lamborghini. For some people this is the "be all and end all of supercar ownership" as you put it. And its well covered.
Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
Exactly. Well said that man.Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
Walton said:
toppstuff said:
But the "loud , outlandish sideways supercar" thing is already covered by Ferrari and Lamborghini. For some people this is the "be all and end all of supercar ownership" as you put it. And its well covered.
Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
Exactly. Well said that man.Mclaren are taking their own path. And the press have effectively tried to benchmark them to the same old criteria and criticised them for not doing the same thing. The Mclaren IS different ( to a 458 for example) . But different does not equal second best.
The disappointing thing is that the press fail to understand this. When they go blathering on about passion and all that guff, while testing sideways on a track a car they did not spend their own money on, they are not speaking for a significant minority of potential buyers. There are people who want something different and EVO is not speaking for them, but instead falling for the usual supercar cliches - the very cliches that some people want to avoid.
Turbo Harry said:
As depressing as it may seem, almost all supercar owners just want a posing pouch. McLaren are banking on the few per cent who don't to represent a viable market. Only time will tell whether this is a wise strategy. Didn't work for honda, but McLaren are taking things to a different level. Best of luck to 'em.
Erm... I think I am right in saying the next 3 years production is already sold out. That sounds viable to me.Mclaren MP4-12C the car designed by sandles with socks engineers for sandles with socks engineers yawn!
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
TVRWannabee said:
Turbo Harry said:
As depressing as it may seem, almost all supercar owners just want a posing pouch. McLaren are banking on the few per cent who don't to represent a viable market. Only time will tell whether this is a wise strategy. Didn't work for honda, but McLaren are taking things to a different level. Best of luck to 'em.
Erm... I think I am right in saying the next 3 years production is already sold out. That sounds viable to me.
IMO, for what mclaren wanted this car to do, they've absolutely nailed it. they weren't out there for a car which is the most fun on track going sideways etc. they specifically said they wanted to build something very, very fast AND comfortable and useable for a daily driver.
in that sense (i.e. what mclaren billed the car for) it appears to have the 458, and the rest of the cars out there, licked). not only is it faster, it's more comfortable, more practical and more economical than just about anything close to it.
it's about time people started realising this car for what mclaren built it for.
fuchsiasteve said:
Mclaren MP4-12C the car designed by sandles with socks engineers for sandles with socks engineers yawn!
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
It's an airbrake, retard. But you're too cool for school, aren't you, so you wouldn't know about geeky sNo contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
t like that. 
Turbo Harry said:
I find there's an inverse relationship between those people who claim the Nurburgring is ruining cars and those who have any experience of the testing procedures undertaken there.
Really?Just that I dont recall ever comming across anybody in the last 5yrs of a similar opinion and until May started saying it I can tell you it was a very lonely place being an Anti-Ring person.
So then, who else are these ppl who have been saying this stuff for a while? It aint been too many on here thats for sure lad.
fuchsiasteve said:
Mclaren MP4-12C the car designed by sandles with socks engineers for sandles with socks engineers yawn!
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
top trolling that is, sir!! you're right, there is no contest between the 458 and the McLaren don't recall people mocking the air brake on the mclaren F1, the SLR, or the bugatti veyron? i'd take this McLaren all day long over the 458, just look at the 458's geeky and messy interior. i'll take the macca with it's classy interior and it's understated looks thank you very much.
fuchsiasteve said:
Mclaren MP4-12C the car designed by sandles with socks engineers for sandles with socks engineers yawn!
No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
Why are you named after a flower? I didn't think flowers grew under bridges?No contest between the Ferrari 458 italia and the geek mobile from Woking. One has the curves, passion, noise and the other is just a naff copy without all the flair and a stupid panel that keeps popping up when you brake (WHY??? answers on a postcard geeks).
Can't believe they made it without thinking that it might need to make a great noise either? kind of sums it up.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff