Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[E65Ross]

RE McLaren and driver enjoyment etc, it's my understanding from reviews that they seem to be doing the best job of things like "feel" better than the rest at road speeds....?

[hyphen]

Flemke, an unusual question, which is your hottest car? And cabin temp in general.

Was looking at a vid from another PHer and he was saying how his 675lt lets in so much engine heat into the cabin that regardless of winter temperatures, he can be found in a T-shirt, and anything smarter is pointless as he comes out dripping of sweat.

Find the same?

[hurstg01]

I just noticed in the TH advert for #27R, in the last picture he has the 3 Manuals; the Gearbox Workshop Manual (that has the photocopied front cover, not the proper one ), the Engineers Manual and the GTR Parts list folder.

Guess I'll wait for the next Longtail to come up for sale to see if the seller / buyers wants them off me as they're gathering dust in my collection [they do get dusted off every once in a while when I need to reply to a technical question on the longtail I can't remember the answer to..]

[Ayahuasca]

p1stonhead said:

flemke said:

p1stonhead said:

K50 DEL said:

flemke said:

CanAm said:

flemke said:

Well, I was entirely open with the factory about my intentions. I decided to sell the P1 after they lied/broke their promises about it.
I decided to sell the 675LT after they lied/broke their promises about it.
I decided to sell the MSO HS because it's right-hand drive and not usable on public roads in the US.

Despite the unattractiveness of the P15, it sounds like it could be great to drive: I have not completely given up on modern McLarens.

You have to ask yourself, "Would Bruce have done it this way?".

As Sway says, NFW.

Flemke

You've mentioned a couple of times that McLaren lied about the cars - is it possible for you to say what those lies were?

I presume;

P1 is the top of the range super limited edition.
Here is a P1 GTR.
Here is a P1LM.

675LT is top of the range super limited edition.
Here is a 675LT spider.

Correct, but the rot really started when, shortly after they had built the last of the 375 P1s, they took 15 of the P1 prototypes, stripped them down to the tubs, chucked out all the other parts and remade the cars from scratch with "visual" carbon-fibre bodywork, and sold them to customers. Thus in one go the edition was not 375 but rather 390.
McLaren tried to justify this first by saying that these cars were not exactly the same because they had the visual CF, but that was total BS because on the first 375 the visual carbon fibre was always an option - it was just that almost no one was stupid enough to choose it.
McLaren then tried to justify the extra 15 cars on the basis that they had not made any new "chassis" beyond what had existed after the 375th normal car had been built. That was a lame, pseudo-legalistic smokescreen. If McLaren had sold the 15 cars as unimproved prototypes, with big miles on the odometer, experimental parts, ill-fitting bodywork and the rest typical of well-used prototypes, that would have been fair enough. But McLaren did exactly the opposite. They effectively took the only part of the car that was like new, the tub, and built a whole new car around it, and delivered that car to the buyer with delivery mileage. That's a new car, not a well-worn prototype that's been gathering dust in a warehouse.

We were told that the P1 road car was the ultimate, the absolute best that McLaren were capable of making, and that its successor would not appear for at least another 8-9 years.

Thus we were surprised when McLaren announced the P1 GTR. Nobody complained initially when they announced the GTR. We were told that they would be making "20-25" GTRs, strictly for track use, not road-legal. Okay, that's not going to affect the P1 market very much. But when it turned out that the GTR was not merely a P1 devoid of airbags, reversing light, a horn and a glass windscreen but was rather a souped-up, quite special version of the road car, with 9% more power and some spectacular bodywork, one had to wonder why those additive features had not been available, if only as extra-cost options, on the road-going P1. Nonetheless that concern was mitigated because they would be making only "20-25", and of course those cars would not be road-legal.

With those reassurances, one could at least be tentatively confident that the GTR would not be a direct competitor to the P1.

Dean Lanzante decided to get into the game by offering a way to road-legalise the GTR. It was his right to do that, and for owners to partake of his offering. McLaren couldn't help that.

However, it subsequently emerged that McLaren were actively cooperating with and assisting Lanzante in making the GTRs road-legal. By doing so, McLaren were able to sell a lot more GTRs. They ended up selling a total of 63 GTRs - a far cry from the 20-25 they had indicated. Beyond the sheer numbers, however, the sticking point was that McLaren Automotive were involved in the production of a P1-variant road car - in direct conflict with their contention that the GTR was "track-only", not in competition with the P1 and therefore the build numbers of the two models should not be added together.

McLaren had promised 375 P1s. By my count, they sold to customers 453 P1s, or more than 20% more than promised.

I related in a post not far above this one the story of the 675LT. They promised "500" and ended up selling 1115. The lack of integrity there was pretty self-evident.

Thanks for going into depth on that. I’d say you have a right to be annoyed if you were promised one thing and then the goalposts kept being moved.

McLaren offer a car, claiming it is their best yet.

Customer buys car.

McLaren subsequently make an even better car.

Customer gets annoyed.

Boo hoo. Did he expect the designers and engineers to take an 8 or 9 career break from designing and engineering to the best of their abilities? If you were happy with the car when you bought it why does the fact that there is now a better car affect your enjoyment of the car you bought?

[flemke]

Jordan210 said:

Flemke if I remember correctly you had/have an SLS Black series. Have you had a chance to drive a AMG GT R and how do they compare

I have not driven the GT R. I had one on order, actually, but recently I cancelled it for various reasons.
The Black Series is a rewarding car to drive, great fun although impractical.
I think I related before on here how one day I drove the P1 and stepped from that into the Black Series. After a few miles in the Black Series I thought, "I'd rather be driving this than the P1."

[flemke]

E65Ross said:

RE McLaren and driver enjoyment etc, it's my understanding from reviews that they seem to be doing the best job of things like "feel" better than the rest at road speeds....?

That's what they say, and was the reason why I was persuaded to get the P1. I must admit that I was not bowled over by the steering or brake feel on that car, or on the 675.
The factory tell me that they have learned a lot and that the P15 will be noticeably better. The P15's body weight will obviously make it feel better overall, but I'll have to wait until later this year to judge whether its control weightings and feel are improved.

[flemke]

hyphen said:

Flemke, an unusual question, which is your hottest car? And cabin temp in general.

Was looking at a vid from another PHer and he was saying how his 675lt lets in so much engine heat into the cabin that regardless of winter temperatures, he can be found in a T-shirt, and anything smarter is pointless as he comes out dripping of sweat.

Find the same?

Hottest? Hottest would def be some racing cars, but amongst road cars it can get pretty sticky after a couple of hours in the F1 with passengers, even with the upgraded air-con on full blast.
Overall I guess I'd have to say a 993 RS Clubsport, which has no air-con and no insulation between the engine/gearbox and the passenger compartment.

[flemke]

Ayahuasca said:

p1stonhead said:

flemke said:

p1stonhead said:

K50 DEL said:

flemke said:

CanAm said:

flemke said:

Well, I was entirely open with the factory about my intentions. I decided to sell the P1 after they lied/broke their promises about it.
I decided to sell the 675LT after they lied/broke their promises about it.
I decided to sell the MSO HS because it's right-hand drive and not usable on public roads in the US.

Despite the unattractiveness of the P15, it sounds like it could be great to drive: I have not completely given up on modern McLarens.

You have to ask yourself, "Would Bruce have done it this way?".

As Sway says, NFW.

Flemke

You've mentioned a couple of times that McLaren lied about the cars - is it possible for you to say what those lies were?

I presume;

P1 is the top of the range super limited edition.
Here is a P1 GTR.
Here is a P1LM.

675LT is top of the range super limited edition.
Here is a 675LT spider.

Correct, but the rot really started when, shortly after they had built the last of the 375 P1s, they took 15 of the P1 prototypes, stripped them down to the tubs, chucked out all the other parts and remade the cars from scratch with "visual" carbon-fibre bodywork, and sold them to customers. Thus in one go the edition was not 375 but rather 390.
McLaren tried to justify this first by saying that these cars were not exactly the same because they had the visual CF, but that was total BS because on the first 375 the visual carbon fibre was always an option - it was just that almost no one was stupid enough to choose it.
McLaren then tried to justify the extra 15 cars on the basis that they had not made any new "chassis" beyond what had existed after the 375th normal car had been built. That was a lame, pseudo-legalistic smokescreen. If McLaren had sold the 15 cars as unimproved prototypes, with big miles on the odometer, experimental parts, ill-fitting bodywork and the rest typical of well-used prototypes, that would have been fair enough. But McLaren did exactly the opposite. They effectively took the only part of the car that was like new, the tub, and built a whole new car around it, and delivered that car to the buyer with delivery mileage. That's a new car, not a well-worn prototype that's been gathering dust in a warehouse.

We were told that the P1 road car was the ultimate, the absolute best that McLaren were capable of making, and that its successor would not appear for at least another 8-9 years.

Thus we were surprised when McLaren announced the P1 GTR. Nobody complained initially when they announced the GTR. We were told that they would be making "20-25" GTRs, strictly for track use, not road-legal. Okay, that's not going to affect the P1 market very much. But when it turned out that the GTR was not merely a P1 devoid of airbags, reversing light, a horn and a glass windscreen but was rather a souped-up, quite special version of the road car, with 9% more power and some spectacular bodywork, one had to wonder why those additive features had not been available, if only as extra-cost options, on the road-going P1. Nonetheless that concern was mitigated because they would be making only "20-25", and of course those cars would not be road-legal.

With those reassurances, one could at least be tentatively confident that the GTR would not be a direct competitor to the P1.

Dean Lanzante decided to get into the game by offering a way to road-legalise the GTR. It was his right to do that, and for owners to partake of his offering. McLaren couldn't help that.

However, it subsequently emerged that McLaren were actively cooperating with and assisting Lanzante in making the GTRs road-legal. By doing so, McLaren were able to sell a lot more GTRs. They ended up selling a total of 63 GTRs - a far cry from the 20-25 they had indicated. Beyond the sheer numbers, however, the sticking point was that McLaren Automotive were involved in the production of a P1-variant road car - in direct conflict with their contention that the GTR was "track-only", not in competition with the P1 and therefore the build numbers of the two models should not be added together.

McLaren had promised 375 P1s. By my count, they sold to customers 453 P1s, or more than 20% more than promised.

I related in a post not far above this one the story of the 675LT. They promised "500" and ended up selling 1115. The lack of integrity there was pretty self-evident.

Thanks for going into depth on that. I’d say you have a right to be annoyed if you were promised one thing and then the goalposts kept being moved.

McLaren offer a car, claiming it is their best yet.

Customer buys car.

McLaren subsequently make an even better car.

Customer gets annoyed.

Boo hoo. Did he expect the designers and engineers to take an 8 or 9 career break from designing and engineering to the best of their abilities? If you were happy with the car when you bought it why does the fact that there is now a better car affect your enjoyment of the car you bought?

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

[SpeckledJim]

flemke said:

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

I can't help wondering why you keep going back then?

[Ayahuasca]

flemke said:

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

Is it not what companies do? How many F40s did Ferrari say they were going to produce? How many cylinders did Jaguar say the XJ220 engine would have? If it was fraud and efectively theft as you say, have you reported it to the police?

[flemke]

SpeckledJim said:

flemke said:

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

I can't help wondering why you keep going back then?

Yes, I am wondering the same.

The way it happened was that some time ago they offered me a P15 allocation slot which I provisionally accepted (deposit was returnable).
Since then I reached the conclusion that I probably would not buy another new car from them. There was never any question of my entirely terminating my relationship with the company, with which I have dealt for many years and intend to continue to deal as it related to my F1. The company are quite aware of my opinions on different things that "they" (a small number of senior managers of the modern company, with whom I do not normally have to deal) have done. I told them that I would probably not buy another car from them, but I figured that I would at least wait and see what the P15 looked like.
Contemporaneously, a good friend of mine was also allocated a P15, about which he has been very enthusiastic.
Once they unveiled the P15 in early December, I thought it was ugly and called the dealer who had taken my deposit (all orders must be routed through a dealer) in order to cancel. He didn't get the message and did not return my call. Then came Christmas when everybody was busy with other stuff.

In early January I still had not heard back from the dealer, but I was invited to come to MTC to look at a P15 and discuss possible spec. Here again, I figured why not, won't do any harm, I might learn something. I asked my friend with the other allocation if he wanted to join me, and he flew 3,000 miles each way in order to do so.
He was still keen on the car, and as I looked at it I liked the challenge of trying to make such an inherently unattractive car look if not good at least tolerable. My friend was telling me, "You have got to get this car, we'll have a blast in them...." I didn't want to let him down; as I say I liked the challenge; I love driving lightweight cars and this, relative to similar things, will certainly be light weight. Also, once it's delivered, I don't expect to lose much if any money on it for the first year or two. Therefore I went ahead and confirmed my order.

Maybe getting the P15 will prove to have been a mistake, but I still support McLaren in racing, I expect always to have a relationship with them based on my F1, I value my friendships with the guys there below the senior management level, and all these reasons contributed to my giving them another try.

[flemke]

Ayahuasca said:

flemke said:

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

Is it not what companies do? How many F40s did Ferrari say they were going to produce? How many cylinders did Jaguar say the XJ220 engine would have? If it was fraud and efectively theft as you say, have you reported it to the police?

"Is it (lying) not what companies do"?
Obviously it is what some companies, or more precisely what some people at some companies, do, but I was in business for many years, was involved in many thousands of transactions and deals, and I think/hope it is fair to say that I never lied to anybody. It was very rare that people who worked for me told a lie, but anyone who did would have been either given warning or sacked.

No, I have not reported it to the Police. It's up to me how I handle the situation, and there is more than one way to deal with it. Anyhow, the whole world (automotive community) knows how the company conducted itself in these circumstances. In effect, through its known actions, the company blew the whistle itself, and its behaviour has been illuminated further and recorded in both traditional and social media.

[hyphen]

Ayahuasca said:

Is it not what companies do? How many F40s did Ferrari say they were going to produce? How many cylinders did Jaguar say the XJ220 engine would have? If it was fraud and efectively theft as you say, have you reported it to the police?

Can you let me know which company(s) you are involved with so I can give them a wide berth

[Pericoloso]

flemke said:

E65Ross said:

Never been a fan of the long tail version to be honest. Much prefer the original.

Indeed!

Long tail also failed to take the prize at Le Mans too.

[Ayahuasca]

flemke said:

Ayahuasca said:

flemke said:

Your pseudo-synopsis is a misleading caricature of what actually happened.

1.) Perhaps you don't mind being lied to, or mind dealing with people whom you trusted but who are prepared to lie to you and don't bother even to apologise after the fact, but I do mind.

2.) Their lies cost me and other people a lot of money. What the company did was fraudulent and, effectively, theft. Perhaps you don't mind being cheated out of money, but I do mind.

Is it not what companies do? How many F40s did Ferrari say they were going to produce? How many cylinders did Jaguar say the XJ220 engine would have? If it was fraud and efectively theft as you say, have you reported it to the police?

"Is it (lying) not what companies do"?
Obviously it is what some companies, or more precisely what some people at some companies, do, but I was in business for many years, was involved in many thousands of transactions and deals, and I think/hope it is fair to say that I never lied to anybody. It was very rare that people who worked for me told a lie, but anyone who did would have been either given warning or sacked.

No, I have not reported it to the Police. It's up to me how I handle the situation, and there is more than one way to deal with it. Anyhow, the whole world (automotive community) knows how the company conducted itself in these circumstances. In effect, through its known actions, the company blew the whistle itself, and its behaviour has been illuminated further and recorded in both traditional and social media.

I didn't mean that all companies lie, but they all have a duty to consider shareholder return, they all chase new opportunities, and they all try to balance competing stakeholder needs, and none of them (as far as I am aware) has a contract with their customers that future products will not be improved.

Should I be annoyed because Gillette sold me a Mach 3 razor on the basis that it was "the best a man can get", then they had the cheek to come out with the Gillette Fusion?

It looks like you thought you had a one-way bet on the car's value, so I can understand why you might be irritated when it didn't turn out as planned, but theft and fraud are heavy calibre words to be deploying. Just my thoughts anyway.

[Ayahuasca]

hyphen said:

Ayahuasca said:

Is it not what companies do? How many F40s did Ferrari say they were going to produce? How many cylinders did Jaguar say the XJ220 engine would have? If it was fraud and efectively theft as you say, have you reported it to the police?

Can you let me know which company(s) you are involved with so I can give them a wide berth

What if I said Ferrari and Jaguar?

They are the examples I used.

Feel free to give them a wide berth.

[hurstg01]

Pericoloso said:

flemke said:

E65Ross said:

Never been a fan of the long tail version to be honest. Much prefer the original.

Indeed!

Long tail also failed to take the prize at Le Mans too.

2nd though in 1997, so not too shabby

[AMDBSVNick]

hurstg01 said:

2nd though in 1997, so not too shabby

May as well be last as second

[flemke]

Ayahuasca said:

I didn't mean that all companies lie, but they all have a duty to consider shareholder return, they all chase new opportunities, and they all try to balance competing stakeholder needs, and none of them (as far as I am aware) has a contract with their customers that future products will not be improved.

Should I be annoyed because Gillette sold me a Mach 3 razor on the basis that it was "the best a man can get", then they had the cheek to come out with the Gillette Fusion?

It looks like you thought you had a one-way bet on the car's value, so I can understand why you might be irritated when it didn't turn out as planned, but theft and fraud are heavy calibre words to be deploying. Just my thoughts anyway.

Parents have a duty to provide for their children, but, barring force majeure, that does not entitle them to commit crimes, to act unethically, or to cause harm to others when acting (they believe) on their children's behalf. In life it is rare to find an obligation that unexceptionably dominates all circumstances, and I am aware of no instance of such an obligation in business.

The "I was just doing it for the shareholders" defence goes only so far, and in fact not very far - especially when the employee-manager will personally benefit from his own dubious actions. This is before we get to the question of whether indeed it is the best long-term interests of the shareholders to act in such as way that the reputation of the company is tarnished, and before we get to the question of whether all shareholders can be presumed to care about nothing but financial return even if it is achieved by unethical means.

You are focusing on the fact that McLaren may have built a "better" car earlier than they said they would do. Their greater offence, as far as I am concerned, was in breaking their word - on multiple occasions - about how many of a certain car they would build.

Nonetheless, let's look at your example of Gillette and razor blades.

Of course, one would expect that Gillette, and McLaren, would over time improve their products. That is fine and in fact is a good thing.

But extending your example of the razor blades, suppose that you owned a shop. Gillette come out with the Mach 3. The CEO of Gillette then makes public statements, as well as direct statements to private audiences of customers, that this will be the best razor that Gillette will produce, and will not be superseded, for the next 10 years, and that furthermore production of the Mac 3 blades will run for just a few months. In other words, if you want the best blades Gillette will make for the next 10 years, you will have to buy them soon.

You are willing to run the risk that a competing company will come out with a more desirable blade, but you wouldn't want to run the risk that Gillette themselves will do so. Gillette have promised you that they will not.

On that basis, you buy say 5,100 packages of Mach 3 blades, of which in the next 10 years you expect to use 100 packages personally and sell the other 5,000 packages in your shop.

Lo and behold, after the passage of just 6 months, Gillette announce the Fusion - a new "best razor in the world". You still have about 95 unused packages of Mach 3 at home and another 4,750 unsold packages in your shop.

Okay, now you can still use the 95 packages of blades at your home, although if you had not been told that no better blade was coming you would not have sunk the money into a decade's supply of blades, because otherwise there would have been the normal potentiality that a better blade might be forthcoming sooner than in 10 years' time.

Likewise, you have the 4,750 unsold packages at your shop. Sure, you can sell them, but you probably cannot sell them at the price and in the numbers necessary to get your money back, or the money that you reasonably could have expected to earn, now that there is a newer and better blade available.

You may recall that with the P1, it took McLaren more than 6 months from when the car was announced until the order book was filled. It was far from being a "one-way bet".

The 675LT sold out more quickly, although in my case I committed to buying a car when it was first described to me over the telephone. I was one of the first people to commit to buying one and, again, when I did so it was far from being a one-way bet.

We can debate the exact meaning of "lie" and "fraud", but there is no question that McLaren made specific, unambiguous public representations about both the P1 and the 675LT coupe, their customers paid them a great deal of money based on those representations, and McLaren subsequently elected to do things that were in direct conflict with what they had previously said.

The fact that, within McLaren, before they latterly broke their word there was considerable debate and unease about whether they should do those things at all says a lot: that they knew beforehand that those things were wrong, and that, to the senior decision-makers, it was just a question of whether they could get away with them.

[AlmostUseful]

AMDBSVNick said:

hurstg01 said:

2nd though in 1997, so not too shabby

May as well be last as second

When I buy it on Saturday after winning the Euromillions i’ll Let Hurstg01 have a drive of it but you won’t be allowed. How dare you diss my new car history like that!