Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[VladD]

lauda said:

Animal said:

flemke said:

Showing up in something as indescribably OTT as a Valkyrie would make me feel like a complete tool. Then again, if the P15 is as in-your-face as say the P1GTLM (and I believe that it will be), one will be halfway to Valkyrie-levels of toolishness anyhow.

Why? Would you really feel self-conscious about driving the car of your choice at a track day, whatever it may be?

I do the odd triathlon and bike race. I'm not particularly good but I enjoy it and I know my limits.

I turn up on my pretty modest bike (which I happen to really like and which is always meticulously clean on race day) and I've got some half-decent kit that I'm comfortable in.

Some of my co-competitors turn up on bikes that cost more than my car, in the same skin suits that the pro teams use and with aero helmets. Some of them are very quick and just about justify the cost and mild ridiculousness of their equipment. Some of them are slower than me and, to use flemke's term, look like tools.

Clearly everyone is free to race on whatever bike they want, wearing whatever kit they want. It's no skin off my nose.

However, if you'd have been better off saving a few kilos by avoiding Gregg's rather than spending £'000s on a bike that looks highly ostentatious and is capable of things that its rider clearly isn't, you probably shouldn't be surprised that some people might think you're a bit foolish.

I think that's missing the point a bit. The argument above is that anybody turning up on a bike worth thousands is a tool.

[SpeckledJim]

Monty Python said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Nah. Its an american version.

Left Hand Drive would be pants in the UK.

Very funny....


While on the topic of the F1 (what else), one thing I always notice is the rev counter needle doesn't move smoothly - what's the reason for this?

Do you mean it sticks, or it moves very quickly (because the engine has essentially no flywheel, so darts around)

[Joe911]

SpeckledJim said:

Do you mean it sticks, or it moves very quickly (because the engine has essentially no flywheel, so darts around)

It moves in small increments - it 'ticks' round - more digital than analogue. I quite like it.

[SpeckledJim]

Joe911 said:

It moves in small increments - it 'ticks' round - more digital than analogue. I quite like it.

Really? Weird. Never known that in any other car. Did they design their own rev pointer thingy mechanism?

[thegreenhell]

It looks like a chronometric movement, or a digital representation of one.

[frankenstein12]

I was thinking while driving home today about something that's probably been discussed.

If Flemke were ever to sell his car it would sell for more than most of the other standard road cars out there for two reasons.

1 so far as I am aware its the only one with those wing mirrors and two due to the performance improvements he has done to it. I suppose it may also increase the value that it is so well known publicly???

The question would then be what sort of value would it have especially over other F1's ?

My other thought is that I watched a video of it being detailed on YouTube the other day and if I was ever fortunate enough to be able to buy an F1 and Flecked car was up for sale I wouldn't be able to bring myself to buy it as A due to its uniqueness I would not want to change anything on it and B I am not sure I could live with the wheels and paint options, the black wheels and dark blue paint just don't work for me.

No offence meant to you Flemke we are all different I just personally rarely like all dark cars including dark interior finish and dark external paint. I can see the argument for dark wheels as they hide dirt and brake dust

[lucido grigio]

frankenstein12 said:

I was thinking while driving home today about something that's probably been discussed.

If Flemke were ever to sell his car it would sell for more than most of the other standard road cars out there for two reasons.

1 so far as I am aware its the only one with those wing mirrors and two due to the performance improvements he has done to it. I suppose it may also increase the value that it is so well known publicly???

The question would then be what sort of value would it have especially over other F1's ?

My other thought is that I watched a video of it being detailed on YouTube the other day and if I was ever fortunate enough to be able to buy an F1 and Flecked car was up for sale I wouldn't be able to bring myself to buy it as A due to its uniqueness I would not want to change anything on it and B I am not sure I could live with the wheels and paint options, the black wheels and dark blue paint just don't work for me.

No offence meant to you Flemke we are all different I just personally rarely like all dark cars including dark interior finish and dark external paint. I can see the argument for dark wheels as they hide dirt and brake dust

Modifications ,however minor often put people off and could de-value it.

[bobo79]

All the mods on his car to my knowledge can be undone.

Funnily enough these threads have probably given it a documented provenance other examples can only dream of...

[SydneyBridge]

Originality is where the value is.

[SpeckledJim]

High miles too.

[Don1]

Also his isn't the only one with the 'high' mirrors.

But definitely agreed - much better for me to have a known (even with the accident!), well driven and intelligently modified car for me to use and enjoy than a garage queen.

Originality normally does mean higher prices, but even at the peak of my 'collection', they were all for use, not as a system of tying up money.

[flemke]

Storer said:

Flemke

Forgive me if you have already answered this but my advancing years see brain cells receding!

Have you had the chance to drive the Aston Vulcan on track and if so what do you think of it?



Paul

No, I have not. Don't think I know anyone who has one.
For me,the best thing about the car is the rear lights. Probably annoying on a practical level, but they look great.

[Strudul]

flemke said:

No, I have not. Don't think I know anyone who has one.
For me,the best thing about the car is the rear lights. Probably annoying on a practical level, but they look great.

Looks like it's reversed into a load of carrots...

[flemke]

Animal said:

flemke said:

Showing up in something as indescribably OTT as a Valkyrie would make me feel like a complete tool. Then again, if the P15 is as in-your-face as say the P1GTLM (and I believe that it will be), one will be halfway to Valkyrie-levels of toolishness anyhow.

Why? Would you really feel self-conscious about driving the car of your choice at a track day, whatever it may be?

Because most normal people would be incapable of extracting anywhere near the maximum performance of the car. If I cannot get the car to do what it is designed to do, then why should I be using it in the first place? For most owners, I suspect, the answer would be, "To show off to other people that I can afford it." For me, that's a bad answer.

Yes, I will grant that few of us are capable of extracting the last bit of performance from any car, but it is a question of degree. The Vulcan has been so compromised (in practicality and looks) in order to maximise its circuit performance that one could say that its only reason for existence is that maximum performance. Yet if the driver is incapable of scratching the surface of that potential performance, in using the car he would be merely posing.

If one were capable of extracting (close to) the maximum performance of the car, one would be focused on driving it at the track. Yet I think Aston have said that the build-run of the road version is sold out whilst the smaller build-run of the uncompromised track version still has cars available. Tells us something about what people intend to do with the cars, no?

[flemke]

VladD said:

Animal said:

flemke said:

Showing up in something as indescribably OTT as a Valkyrie would make me feel like a complete tool. Then again, if the P15 is as in-your-face as say the P1GTLM (and I believe that it will be), one will be halfway to Valkyrie-levels of toolishness anyhow.

Why? Would you really feel self-conscious about driving the car of your choice at a track day, whatever it may be?

I have to agree. I can't see turning up in a Valkyrie any different to turning up in a F1 or P1.

As I wrote above, it's a question of degree. Relative to the F1, P1, 918, etc, the Valkyrie is so far out there in how different it looks, how unattractive it looks, and how much its design has been influenced by purely aerodynamic considerations that have almost no relevance below >100 mph.

The car's USP is that it will supposedly be a no-holds-barred racing car for the road, faster around a circuit than even a current Formula One car, etc. Contrast that with the F1's design brief, which was unambiguously to make a great road car, not a great racing car. Likewise consider what Porsche did with the 918: if they had wanted to offer as a road car their fastest possible vehicle, they would have offered a version of the 919. Instead, the 918 is relatively "normal".

So, yes, those road cars are very expensive, and to some extent anyone going out in public in one might be showing off his(her) wealth, but equally he could be using the car for the purpose for which it was designed. For almost every if not indeed every single Valkyrie owner, he would not be using the car for the purpose for which it was designed, because he is not capable of doing so.

[flemke]

VladD said:

lauda said:

Animal said:

flemke said:

Showing up in something as indescribably OTT as a Valkyrie would make me feel like a complete tool. Then again, if the P15 is as in-your-face as say the P1GTLM (and I believe that it will be), one will be halfway to Valkyrie-levels of toolishness anyhow.

Why? Would you really feel self-conscious about driving the car of your choice at a track day, whatever it may be?

I do the odd triathlon and bike race. I'm not particularly good but I enjoy it and I know my limits.

I turn up on my pretty modest bike (which I happen to really like and which is always meticulously clean on race day) and I've got some half-decent kit that I'm comfortable in.

Some of my co-competitors turn up on bikes that cost more than my car, in the same skin suits that the pro teams use and with aero helmets. Some of them are very quick and just about justify the cost and mild ridiculousness of their equipment. Some of them are slower than me and, to use flemke's term, look like tools.

Clearly everyone is free to race on whatever bike they want, wearing whatever kit they want. It's no skin off my nose.

However, if you'd have been better off saving a few kilos by avoiding Gregg's rather than spending £'000s on a bike that looks highly ostentatious and is capable of things that its rider clearly isn't, you probably shouldn't be surprised that some people might think you're a bit foolish.

I think that's missing the point a bit. The argument above is that anybody turning up on a bike worth thousands is a tool.

Not exactly.
To continue the cycling example, it would be that anyone turning up on a bike that was worth a staggering amount of money relative to really nice bikes, a bike that made extreme compromises to comfort and to beauty in order to achieve a rarefied purpose that was far, far beyond the capabilities of that particular rider, would look like a tool.
I have done a reasonable amount of cycling, and have some nice bikes, but there is no way that I would even think about riding something such as this:



Kevin Dawson, Alex Dowsett, Matt Bottrill - fine. For someone such as I, however, it would be a joke, as in: "Whom do I think I am fooling?"

[frankenstein12]

bobo79 said:

All the mods on his car to my knowledge can be undone.

Funnily enough these threads have probably given it a documented provenance other examples can only dream of...

Whether they can be undone is to miss the point though. For example Rowan Atkinsons car will always retain a higher value due to its provenance in the fact he someone famous owned it and B it is also famous for having been crashed twice rather publicly oh and C the fact it has been regularly used and maintained.

If someone were to buy it and then change the colour it would reduce the value as it would no longer be the original Rowan Atkinson car.

Flemkes cars value is different as I see it as although he is not famous in the way Antkinson is nor has he stacked his car repeatedly his car is famous on this forum, it is also highly improved and modified in one of the core areas the F1 attracts criticism which is in the brakes which no other F1 has been so far as I am aware.

If someone bought Flemkes car and removed the brake mods it would therefore lose value for the fact that although it would be back to stock it would actually be a lesser car oddly I would think. The fact the car is as distinctive as it is by the paint details means repainting it but keeping the brake mods techincally devalues it as it is less identifiable as Flemkes car with the brake improvements..

[h0b0]

flemke said:

No, I have not. Don't think I know anyone who has one.
For me,the best thing about the car is the rear lights. Probably annoying on a practical level, but they look great.

I've just washed my car. I only wash it because my local automatic place has rollers for the wheels that would destroy my wheels. It's safe to say I wouldn't be using the local automatic place for the Aston pictured. But, If my car had rear lights like those pictures I think I'd have to sell it once they got dirty.

On a practical note, do you store the F1 at a place that cleans it for you? Do Mclaren do a good job of cleaning it at the time of service? Do they offer courtesy cars? Or, are you super cautious and only clean it your self. (The final option is that you get it re-sprayed so often one colour doesn't get chance to get dirty)

[flemke]

frankenstein12 said:

I was thinking while driving home today about something that's probably been discussed.

If Flemke were ever to sell his car it would sell for more than most of the other standard road cars out there for two reasons.

1 so far as I am aware its the only one with those wing mirrors and two due to the performance improvements he has done to it. I suppose it may also increase the value that it is so well known publicly???

The question would then be what sort of value would it have especially over other F1's ?

My other thought is that I watched a video of it being detailed on YouTube the other day and if I was ever fortunate enough to be able to buy an F1 and Flecked car was up for sale I wouldn't be able to bring myself to buy it as A due to its uniqueness I would not want to change anything on it and B I am not sure I could live with the wheels and paint options, the black wheels and dark blue paint just don't work for me.

No offence meant to you Flemke we are all different I just personally rarely like all dark cars including dark interior finish and dark external paint. I can see the argument for dark wheels as they hide dirt and brake dust

When all was said and done, I think my car would sell for roughly what they all sell for. A car sold last year for well above the market for normal cars, but that was a prototype with a unique provenance.

Regarding the factors that you and others mention, I think they tend to balance out.

- Re high mirrors, five cars have them. Mine (040) was the first to have them. Ron saw the car during production and had the factory do the same to his (050). Then about a year later the guy who was having 071 built for him had it done. The other two cars are Ralph Lauren's. I know at least one of his cars had them retrofitted, rather than from new; not sure about the other.

- Re accident, the damage was cosmetic (mostly bodywork) and, as normal with carbon fibre, looked worse than it actually was. It might have a slightly negative effect, but no more than that, if any. You might be surprised at the number of F1s that at some point have suffered cosmetic damage (or worse) but in most cases have not been publicised. If Rowan Atkinson could easily sell his car notwithstanding that it had been in three accidents including one in which the engine was torn loose from the firewall and came to rest 50 feet away from the chassis, I am not worried about my car having needed a new piece of bodywork.

- Re modifications, as has been said, people will always pay more for originality. I have all the original bits, and if I were to sell the car all those bits would be available for the new owner to reinstall.
I think it would depend on what the new owner intended to do with the car. If that were merely to keep it idle in a collection, then he would (one presumes) prefer it in its original state. If instead that were actually to drive it, he would be wise to use the car in its improved spec and keep the original bits in storage as I have done. When I got my car, the previous owner had in fact had the factory change the springs and dampers to improve the handling. I kept that car that way until I made my own changes. Originality is a nice, quaint notion for historical or sentimental purposes, but not for something that is less good in practice because it was flawed at the start and has not been improved.

- Higher mileage definitely impacts value, although less so when cars are 25 years old. Cars that never get driven are mechanically less good than are ones that have been used (properly), but most people seem not to appreciate that. For example, Gordon Murray told me that the F1's engine does not develop its peak power until it has been used for approx 20,000 miles, by which time it will produce approx 20-25 bhp more than new. In the context of an engine that, according to Paul Rosche, would not need a rebuild until it had been used for "at least 250,000 kms", I myself would rather have the more powerful used engine than the less powerful brand-new one, but many other folks prefer the idea of new to the reality of better.

- Regarding looks, as you say, on one level (the one that creates the market) that is a matter of purely personal taste. You don't care for dark cars - cool.
Relative to most folks, I have a lot of experience in design, and it took me 10 years of living with my car before I finally chose its current paint scheme. I have seen in the flesh I'd guess about 50 of the 100 F1s in existence, and of course seen images of almost all the rest. Fwiw, I think my car is the best looking of all. I am not the only person connected with McLaren who thinks that, but obviously that does not determine the market. If I were to sell my car, there would be many people who would prefer the original, boring (even at the time!) silver bodywork and silver wheels. I am confident that there would be other people, however, who would see my car as being better looking than the rest whilst also being different from the rest in a mature rather than juvenile way. (I exclude from that comment my car's interior, which is in the process of being changed.) In any case, many, perhaps half, of the cars that change hands get resprayed to the new owner's preference. Although that was a relatively expensive undertaking 15 years ago, nowadays with the cars' being worth as much as they are it is a relatively inexpensive job.

As I say, I think all the above roughly balance out. If my car were to be offered for sale today, I think it would go for about the same as almost any other would do.

[HIAO]

flemke said:

..there is no way that I would even think about riding something such as this:

At least not without pedals.