Anyone feel sorry for McLaren? What could they do different?

[TankRS]

AndrewW-G said:

Whilst driving through traffic in Knutsford this afternoon, in the distance over on the other side of the road, I spotted McLaren Knutsford’s orange demo car. . . . . Caught out in the wild, it's a striking looking car . . . . I barely noticed the Ferrari SL California a couple of cars in front of it

This could be mclarens secret then!?
On a track it's just another supercar, but in it's natural habitat on the road is where it comes good? Not that I'm likely to see one round my neck of South Wales anytime soon!

You'd be forgiven for not noticing the ugly California.

[AndrewW-G]

LuS1fer said:

AndrewW-G said:

Whilst driving through traffic in Knutsford this afternoon, in the distance over on the other side of the road, I spotted McLaren Knutsford’s orange demo car. . . . . Caught out in the wild, it's a striking looking car . . . . I barely noticed the Ferrari SL California a couple of cars in front of it

I saw a California yesterday and that's not a good-looking car on any day of the week. I look forward to seeing a Mclaren in the wild though suspect it can only be judged parked amongst its peers rather than a horde of BMW 3-series.

It was knutsford, it was wall to wall RR Sports, Bentley GTs and Audi Q7's with naff wheels

[Wills2]

300bhp/ton said:

Forgetting all this...

I can't be the only one who thought the Macca looked fab in that yellow colour on TG?

No, but it looked fab in that orange colour on TG.

[Alfa numeric]

TankRS said:

I still hold the value that the car should make you feel good, and if the mclaren fails to deliver this feeling to so many road testers then the car fails, no matter what it's compared too.

This is the nub- I completely agree with you but McLaren didn't set out to do that- they set out to make the fastest, most confortable supercar ever. In that they've succeeded.

Trouble is because of that it's apparently lacking the indefinable element that make people like you and me buy a supercar in the first place.

[braddo]

Alfa numeric said:

TankRS said:

I still hold the value that the car should make you feel good, and if the mclaren fails to deliver this feeling to so many road testers then the car fails, no matter what it's compared too.

This is the nub- I completely agree with you but McLaren didn't set out to do that- they set out to make the fastest, most confortable supercar ever. In that they've succeeded.

Trouble is because of that it's apparently lacking the indefinable element that make people like you and me buy a supercar in the first place.

But you don't. McLaren doesn't need to worry about you or me, or teenagers' bedroom walls, when deciding how to pitch their product.

[andyroo]

Did anyone else notice the colour coded chin on the mclaren in the top gear studio? It made the front end look much better.

Having seen one in the flesh, I can tell you they look much better than you think. I reckon the design is a grower.

I also think that this 'soul' business is just the way a car quickens the pulse. If it feels like it could spit you off the road at any moment it's going to feel exciting!

[busta]

braddo said:

But you don't. McLaren doesn't need to worry about you or me, or teenagers' bedroom walls, when deciding how to pitch their product.

Exactly my point earlier. Whatever we think, or even the journalists think, is largely irrelevant. The MC4-12C only needs to appeal to 1000 people who can actually afford one and it will be a success. They won't struggle.

[otolith]

I think most of the criticism being levelled at the McLaren is simply that it isn't a Ferrari. It isn't even trying to be a Ferrari, it's trying to be a McLaren. It is accepted that one has different expectations of a Porsche or a Lamborghini than of a Ferrari - and likewise McLaren will have to carve out their own niche. There is absolutely no point in McLaren trying to out-Ferrari Ferrari and there is no point in judging the MP4-12C on the assumption that it is trying to do so.

[Alfanatic]

andyclax1 said:

Thats a rumour spread by manufacturers providing shoddy workmanship,there is no drama ,only embaressment when you are broken down in a super car,and when its happened once in your dream car,all you can hear are the rumblings and suspicous noises,never mind the howl of the engine.Give me a car that i can use without worrying about how much it will cost when i break it.
I suppose porsches have the least problems,although i have had my fair share,so i will give the 12c go,as i think their customer sevice so far has been better than anyones,Ok that has to be proved beyond dought when the cars are up and running,but i have no worry there at the moment.
so if you want to do 15k a year in a supercar i think this is the car for you

Really? So everyone was duped into thinking an F40 is more dramatic than a 959 by clever marketing? It's a myth that one of those two cars, of similar performance, is more exciting to look at, and more of an event to drive, than the other?

The R8 managed to be not only sober looking and reliable, but also to be praised to the skies because it feels good to drive, by all the same journalists who are unimpressed with the MP4. Is it that hard to accept that there's something about the MP4's dynamics that is taking some of the pleasure out of going so quickly or driving a sportscar?

Audi, of all companies, can get it right. McLaren have got a whole lot of brand new technology between the driver and the road, and they've got the technology doing what its supposed to do in terms of keeping the car on the road at speed, and keeping the car comfortable at a cruise, but it sounds like they haven't got the feel of the technology right yet, that it's too intrusive, too clumsy, too obvious. Instead of enriching the driving experience, it's interrupting it.

Perhaps it's just early days and MP4 v2.0 will be more cohesive.

[Rich_W]

andyclax1 said:

I think you will find it wont be far off 18 seconds faster round the ring,then who will look the idiot

I want the full on board video ala NSX-R or Zonda R for accurate proof. Not some McLaren press release (lie) though. Like when they denied the helicopter and TV crew that were at the ring when they tried to set a lap time was "nothing to do with them"

[PaulFontaine]

What i've read is that the technology on the Mac is so advanced it has a bit of a learning curve and once mastered handily whip the Ferrari of this I have no doubt. While to me it is attractive but does lack that "wow" factor

[JBL930]

Did they do any concept stuff? I think manufacturers that do concept cars end up with better looking motors, like the fashion industry, the stuff you see on the catwalk is outlandish, but what hits the shops has the best accents of it, it's the same idea.....

I love the McLaren, it is a tad plain in the styling department, but i do think it's a lovely car. I'm not a Ferrari fan, but when you look at some of the concept/possible production stuff, you can't help but admit it's beautiful...

[isaldiri]

andyclax1 said:

exactly the same width as a gallardo,and only 1,1/2 inches wider than a turbo,not that wide for a supercar,easily small enough for A and B roads

I'm not sure I'm entirely in agreement there. It is listed as having the same width but that's without mirrors. The mirrors on the 12C are pretty sizeable and the total width with them comes up to 2.2m or thereabouts if I remember correctly which would put it in the 430 size range. That's going to be rather wince worthy driving on a fast A/B road whenever another car passes by, I know I used to do a lot of that!

[nickythesaint]

I don't think it'll affect sales much. Its so much more exclusive as a brand, which appeals to people in that market place. If I was in that market place I'd probably rather have the McLaren. Its not a track day car is it, so are you really going to miss out in real world driving?

And lets face it, within 12 months, they'll be an "R" version or some variations which are more hardcore. Then probably an update on the existing model.

[AT]

I suspect this car will be a massive success. I have two friends that are considering a deposit (bankers, yes I know!) that would never consider the Ferrari given the image associations. Those with the cash to buy such a machine do not want this "soul" thing, they want the best, in my experience. The MC badge delivers the image they want and in almost every objective measue this is the better car. Fortunatly these individuals decide how well this car does, not journalists who could never afford such a vehicle.

[andyclax1]

isaldiri said:

andyclax1 said:

exactly the same width as a gallardo,and only 1,1/2 inches wider than a turbo,not that wide for a supercar,easily small enough for A and B roads

I'm not sure I'm entirely in agreement there. It is listed as having the same width but that's without mirrors. The mirrors on the 12C are pretty sizeable and the total width with them comes up to 2.2m or thereabouts if I remember correctly which would put it in the 430 size range. That's going to be rather wince worthy driving on a fast A/B road whenever another car passes by, I know I used to do a lot of that!

looks like i might have a problem then !,but this car was designed for british roads,and seen as it fits in my standard size garage then i wont feel the need to hold back on A+B roads as thats all i have around me,im lucky i live in north yorkshire.

[R500POP]

JBL930 said:

There is a hint of Speed Twelve in the front of that beast.

[NoelWatson]

Harry Flashman said:

It was Ferrari price, not Porsche price, though - I think? I think that's what killed it. You buy a Porsche because it's a good car. You buy a Ferrari because it's theatre. The NSX was an unhappy halfway house - Porsche sensible, Ferrari price.

Think price was pretty much on a par with the Porsche

[LuS1fer]

NoelWatson said:

Harry Flashman said:

It was Ferrari price, not Porsche price, though - I think? I think that's what killed it. You buy a Porsche because it's a good car. You buy a Ferrari because it's theatre. The NSX was an unhappy halfway house - Porsche sensible, Ferrari price.

Think price was pretty much on a par with the Porsche

NSX was something like £78000-£82000. Fairly sure the 911 was cheaper and a Ferrari even now is what? 110k?

[NoelWatson]

LuS1fer said:

NoelWatson said:

Harry Flashman said:

It was Ferrari price, not Porsche price, though - I think? I think that's what killed it. You buy a Porsche because it's a good car. You buy a Ferrari because it's theatre. The NSX was an unhappy halfway house - Porsche sensible, Ferrari price.

Think price was pretty much on a par with the Porsche

NSX was something like £78000-£82000. Fairly sure the 911 was cheaper and a Ferrari even now is what? 110k?

NSX was 60k in 2002.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/used-prices/Valuatio...

Think it was 70k prior to that. 52k when first launched

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsVerdi...

355 was 83k

http://www.autocar.co.uk/ferrari/f355/

993 was 54k

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsHisto...

348 was 80k

http://www.lotusespritworld.com/ERoadtests/PCOTY_D...