RE: McLaren upgrades MP4-12C to 625hp
Discussion
DrBezza said:
Anyway talking of upgrades, who's to say Ferrari didnt secretly "pep" the 458 after introduction. I remember how the 2010 cars were a bit spikey on the limit, I recall the 458 losing the Autocar handling day because of this...the 2011 car (or at least the one that turned up at EVO, CAR etc for road tests agains the MP4-12C) was clearly a bit faster in a straight line and around the bends...Ferrari just didnt make a public announcement that they had tweaked one or two things when they had clearly done something to improve on it!....
If anything I would say its the other way round - I've had 3 458s and the first early car was by far the fastest and most sorted of them. Thing with Ferrari (and tbh every other manufacturer) is that the press car are not the same as customer cars.
If Mclaren can be accused of anything its their underestimate of how far their competitors would tweak their cars to win a magazine test
dmitsi said:
One of us has developed a 3.8 twin turbo engine, was it you? If you increase the boost at peak power you go over hardware limits. I know the exact boost limits this car runs to, I also know the turbine in temp limits, I also know what degree of spark you put into engine before you hit DBL. To counteract you would adjust the spark/fueling to make it run at a safe condition, finding the best mix of boost spark and fueling takes a lot of calibration. So to say you just increase the boost is showing a lack of understanding of true engine development.
I know you can just increase boost to get more power, what I'm saying is that isn't always possible when you are fine tuning something so highly tuned.
You are just reiterating what iv already said. If mclaren have kept the same turbos/coolers then they have increased Boost pressure to get a bigger number agreed?. With one eye on intake temps, turbo temps granted but that goes without saying. What ' hardware limits ' are you talking about, and who do you work for?. I know you can just increase boost to get more power, what I'm saying is that isn't always possible when you are fine tuning something so highly tuned.
I think McLaren will have certainly already planned for much more power from their engine. During development they will have developed numerous maps for the engine to see what they can achieve with it. In my opinion 625ps was a map they simply have on the shelf, along with others, producing more power.
The map sounds like a classic example of producing an engine that was capable of producing the numbers with consummate ease, my guess is that the map on current customer cars is actually newer than the one they intend to role out in October.
i.e Marketing/PR "600PS is a nice round figure, keep the 625PS map for later use in case we need a lift in sales."
Very nice car, but still wary about buying one, I'll be waiting till the end of the year to see what happens.
The map sounds like a classic example of producing an engine that was capable of producing the numbers with consummate ease, my guess is that the map on current customer cars is actually newer than the one they intend to role out in October.
i.e Marketing/PR "600PS is a nice round figure, keep the 625PS map for later use in case we need a lift in sales."
Very nice car, but still wary about buying one, I'll be waiting till the end of the year to see what happens.
markcoznottz said:
You are just reiterating what iv already said. If mclaren have kept the same turbos/coolers then they have increased Boost pressure to get a bigger number agreed?. With one eye on intake temps, turbo temps granted but that goes without saying. What ' hardware limits ' are you talking about, and who do you work for?.
I work for Ricardo. I don't agree, because it's not the case, I wasn't reiterating what you'd said. I was responding to your flippant remark about letting you know about fueling spark etc. Hardware limits are turbine temp limits, boost limits, Chargecooler limits. the list is endless. All I tried to explain was that it's not as simple as just increasing boost to deliver this power upgrade. I've avoided even commenting on this car on here for over three years, but felt obliged to explain it's a bit more work to achieve this power. This is all I have to say on the matter, I'm confident I know what I'm talking about.
k me there are a lot of cynical tWOW! Seriously, its been a long time since a car has left me breathless and feeling like a teenager all over again. I dont know what it is about the above picture on the main page but WOW! Just, WOW!
I've been a big fan of the R8 for some time since I saw a few years back in the window (white with carbon blades) in NYC, it took my breathe away as this Mclaren just has. I vowed that if I ever have the money the R8 in white would be my ultimate supercar next to my Esprit.
But the McLaren every day has seemed to have been wrapping its brilliance around me.
Is there any comparison against the McLaren and the V10 R8? I would only buy the V8 R8 though even if I could afford the V10.
I've been a big fan of the R8 for some time since I saw a few years back in the window (white with carbon blades) in NYC, it took my breathe away as this Mclaren just has. I vowed that if I ever have the money the R8 in white would be my ultimate supercar next to my Esprit.
But the McLaren every day has seemed to have been wrapping its brilliance around me.
Is there any comparison against the McLaren and the V10 R8? I would only buy the V8 R8 though even if I could afford the V10.
It's all very well huffing and puffing that the McLaren is a fantastic product and all that but it is an inescapable fact that the MP4/12C was released to customers before it was finished. The ongoing IRIS issues in particular have made McLaren look silly, even out of their depth.
This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
rohrl said:
It's all very well huffing and puffing that the McLaren is a fantastic product and all that but it is an inescapable fact that the MP4/12C was released to customers before it was finished. The ongoing IRIS issues in particular have made McLaren look silly, even out of their depth.
This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
so why do McLaren get more stick than Ferrari?This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
I have to say, despite the fact they build these down the road from me, I NEVER think of McLaren as British.
To me they personify the faceless, multinational company - Lotus (even Malaysian owned) exude Britishness, but there's a coldness to McLaren that has never appealed to me, both as an F1 team (since the first P4 days anyway) and a road car manufacturer. I don't question their success, and maybe that's what it takes, but I got much more pleasure from Maldanado's recent GP win than I do from Jenson or Lewis winning.
The suggestion that you have to like the MP4-12C (snappy name or what!) JUST because it's British is nonsense.
Plenty of people say they like or don't like Ferraris, I'm sure you'll find Italians who prefer the Lamborghinis or even Porsches to the 458, but even if ALL Italians profess a liking for EVERY Ferrari, it doesn't mean every Brit HAS to love the McLaren!
No matter how good it is (and it does seem, rather oddly given Ron's OCD, to have been released unfinshed!) it's not the most visually exciting car, breaking no new ground that I can see (The F1 was at least different with it's 3 seater layout, even if it wasn't quite the first many claim) and looking (dare I say it?) a bit like a generic supercar-replica kit in outline (I'm sure the detail engineering is nothing like that).
It's all a moot point as to whether I like it or not as, even with a Euromillions win, I probably wouldn't ever buy a car like this, but the lovers should just accept that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and that questioning the looks or completeness of the car's development isn't grounds for the person expressing such views to be declared stateless!
M
To me they personify the faceless, multinational company - Lotus (even Malaysian owned) exude Britishness, but there's a coldness to McLaren that has never appealed to me, both as an F1 team (since the first P4 days anyway) and a road car manufacturer. I don't question their success, and maybe that's what it takes, but I got much more pleasure from Maldanado's recent GP win than I do from Jenson or Lewis winning.
The suggestion that you have to like the MP4-12C (snappy name or what!) JUST because it's British is nonsense.
Plenty of people say they like or don't like Ferraris, I'm sure you'll find Italians who prefer the Lamborghinis or even Porsches to the 458, but even if ALL Italians profess a liking for EVERY Ferrari, it doesn't mean every Brit HAS to love the McLaren!
No matter how good it is (and it does seem, rather oddly given Ron's OCD, to have been released unfinshed!) it's not the most visually exciting car, breaking no new ground that I can see (The F1 was at least different with it's 3 seater layout, even if it wasn't quite the first many claim) and looking (dare I say it?) a bit like a generic supercar-replica kit in outline (I'm sure the detail engineering is nothing like that).
It's all a moot point as to whether I like it or not as, even with a Euromillions win, I probably wouldn't ever buy a car like this, but the lovers should just accept that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and that questioning the looks or completeness of the car's development isn't grounds for the person expressing such views to be declared stateless!
M
DrBezza said:
In answer to the bloke a few posts back who was a bit upset at what he saw as a pro brit bias from people like me and others, can I just clarify that everyone's entitled to an opinion good or bad, but what upsets me is the sneering cynicism some people have when discussing the McLaren, which is surely one of our finest engineering companies... by all means constructively criticise, but some people just take delight in slating what is after all a damn fine car that just has one or two flaws that can be ironed out over time...
Much of the motoring media just didnt seem to "get" the McLaren and remember that really bad reviews can cost british jobs if the Mac bombs. From what Ive read and heard from owners on here, its better than its been credited for...
'Eh? You start by saying everyone is entitled to their opinion, but then immediately contradict that by saying we shouldn't complain about any flaws, now matter what their preceived scale. Exactly my point Much of the motoring media just didnt seem to "get" the McLaren and remember that really bad reviews can cost british jobs if the Mac bombs. From what Ive read and heard from owners on here, its better than its been credited for...
McLaren have gone down a very specific path of making the car a complete weapon in terms of ability & usability (I agree they've done a great job there), but in doing so and styling it the way they have, it's always going to be quite a niche product, more so than traditional out and out, brash, scary supercars. As such, it always risks getting the type of mixed reactions it's received over the last 12mths.
As for issues and things not working at launch, it happens to every car maker, so McL are not on their own there. All car makers have dropped clangers and moved on... as with them, this storm in a tea cup will be forgotten about by next week
E38Ross said:
rohrl said:
It's all very well huffing and puffing that the McLaren is a fantastic product and all that but it is an inescapable fact that the MP4/12C was released to customers before it was finished. The ongoing IRIS issues in particular have made McLaren look silly, even out of their depth.
This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
so why do McLaren get more stick than Ferrari?This has nothing to do with Ferrari and the fact that the 458 tended to catch fire. That's not relevant. Ferrari are another company.
Maybe, and this is purely conjecture, people give Ferrari the benefit of the doubt becaue they have a 60-odd year history of producing road cars while McLaren don't and McLaren also made a rod for their own back by over-promising before the launch.
rohrl said:
I don't know or particularly care. Remember the shoeing Hoover got when they promised free £500 trans-Atlantic flights to anyone who bought a £200 vacuum cleaner? That's not relevant either. It just seems to be impossible to discuss the McLaren MP4/12C on Pistonheads without someone piping up about the Ferrari 458.
Maybe, and this is purely conjecture, people give Ferrari the benefit of the doubt becaue they have a 60-odd year history of producing road cars while McLaren don't and McLaren also made a rod for their own back by over-promising before the launch.
LOL @ your first parahraph Maybe, and this is purely conjecture, people give Ferrari the benefit of the doubt becaue they have a 60-odd year history of producing road cars while McLaren don't and McLaren also made a rod for their own back by over-promising before the launch.
To be honest, these days no one is immune from a panning if they drop a clanger and Ferrari have had their share of bad press in recent yrs. The difference just seems to be the defensiveness of folks on PH
Storm. Tea cup.rohrl said:
It just seems to be impossible to discuss the McLaren MP4/12C on Pistonheads without someone piping up about the Ferrari 458.
Of course it is. The 2 cars are probably the most natural competitors since the old Scooby & Evos. Why wouldnt you compare one with its direct rival?
dmitsi said:
markcoznottz said:
You are just reiterating what iv already said. If mclaren have kept the same turbos/coolers then they have increased Boost pressure to get a bigger number agreed?. With one eye on intake temps, turbo temps granted but that goes without saying. What ' hardware limits ' are you talking about, and who do you work for?.
I work for Ricardo.....
Davey S2 said:
Of course it is. The 2 cars are probably the most natural competitors since the old Scooby & Evos.
Why wouldnt you compare one with its direct rival?
Because I might want to talk about McLaren and the MP4/12C in its own right.Why wouldnt you compare one with its direct rival?
It's as if someone started a thread in the Food section about dry roasted peanuts and some posters kept trying to discuss Bombay mix. Alright, they're next to each other on the shelf at Tesco but they're a different product.
Ferrari could have released the 458 as a self-assembly kit on fire, literally alight, and it would have not one jot or tittle to do with the MP4/12C. MP4/12C is a stupid name for a car as well.
rohrl said:
MP4/12C is a stupid name for a car as well.
I simply don't understand all this talk of people moaning about the name. Lets face it, 458 and 599 etc are just a couple of numbers cobbled together and Ferrari aside BMW E30 M3 for example is again just a bundle of letters and numbers when you see on paper. Neither IMO are any different to MP4 12C so why the beef with the McLaren? 
E38Ross said:
maybe so, but people don't moan about something like "997 911 GT3 RS 4.0" which isn't exactly catchy either.
Whilst I don't actually care much about the name, I would point out that the McLaren name is utterly meaningless, especially when compared to Porsche.In your example, 911 GT3 RS 4.0 means:
911 (model series) GT3 (originally meaning it was the FIA GT3 homologation car) RS (RennSport) 4.0 (Engine Capacity).
If you take the McLaren name for it's road car, MP4/12C:
MP4 ( Malboro Project 4 Team) 12 (Chassis design 12 from the MP4 team) C (revision C).
It makes a lot of sense in terms of the F1 cars with us now being on MP4/27 which is the 27th car that Ron Dennis's 'Project 4' Team has designed....but in terms of the car...it's clinical b****cks!
This was always going to be difficult for McL, so it's no surprise some folks take issue with it. For a company that don't have much history with road cars to fall back on, getting a quality / meaningful name was always going to be a struggle. I can see how they've arrived at this name, but it's still pretty uninspring to use a compressed media format extension, followed by what sounds like a shoe size. Unless they'd just come out with a really catchy name, they weren't exactly spoiled for choice in their back catalogue.
This is where other established makers get a benefit. 911 will always be iconic, as will anything with GT or RS in it's badge. BMW have many yrs of M-cars for that to always work and be immediately obvious to the punter. Ferrari have a history of using parts of the car's vital stats to make the name, etc, etc.
This is where other established makers get a benefit. 911 will always be iconic, as will anything with GT or RS in it's badge. BMW have many yrs of M-cars for that to always work and be immediately obvious to the punter. Ferrari have a history of using parts of the car's vital stats to make the name, etc, etc.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff