Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
Caddyshack said:
A few people who drove Flemke's F1 and then drove the CGT said the CGT was the better drive (My friend Tim R drove them around the roads near the ring and the F1 scared him whereas he loved the CGT - I think he had a fair bit of seat time in both)
EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
Not a massive surprise given the development periods EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
Tbf the F1 had a different design philosophy from the outside anyway - the worlds greatest GT, it's astonishing performance just happening to be a byproduct of an outstanding and overachieving engine married to incredible detail in the design making it so light and compact. It had three seats for a reason. The CGT & F50 were more conventionally designed as out and out super sportscars, with all the compromises that entails. You could argue (as Flemke has!) that the F1 driving experience was compromised by it's chassis philosophy - too soft, lateral yaw, tall tyres, etc - which probably made it more habitable long distance.
Patrick Bateman said:
This may well have been asked before but have you ever considered lending your car to Harry Metcalfe for the day...?
A Harry's Garage on the McLaren F1 would be pinnacle.
I am not sure that I would "lend" (as in, "Off you go, see you in a few hours!") it to anyone.A Harry's Garage on the McLaren F1 would be pinnacle.
I cannot recall what year it was, maybe 2006, but back when evo were doing their 100th issue, they had a readers' poll to determine what were the best or mostest or something cars. After the results were in, they did two features on examples of the ten cars. One feature was a track test at Bedford (where I made the comment to Richard Meaden; also where, as someone above referenced, we met up with Gordon and I gave him the ride from there back to his home in Surrey). The other was a two day group test up in Yorkshire.
Harry was the central figure in the latter event. He organised where we kept the cars, where we stayed, and what roads we used. A few of the evo guys came out with me in the F1. I recall Richard's and Jethro's coming with me. John Barker definitely did not come out with me. I cannot recall whether Harry did or did not do so.
I don't know what this "Harry's Garage" thing is. I suppose I should check it out.
flemke said:
I don't know what this "Harry's Garage" thing is. I suppose I should check it out.
It's the youtube channel of Harry Metcalfe which capitalises on his genial nature and enthusiast of petrol driven vehicles (in the main). The video on the SL600 is a great watch, as are many others. It's one that I return to time and again - he isn't self-obsessed. lauda said:
I’ve just read John Barker’s piece in Octane this month on the evolution of Ferrari’s supercars from the 288 GTO to the LaFerrari (and a very good piece it is too, accompanied by stunning photography).
When discussing the F50, he notes that it’s ‘way better’ to drive than it’s contemporary, the McLaren F1.
Flemke, I know you don’t think the standard F1 is perfect but have you ever driven an F50? If so, would you consider it a better drive (ignoring brand, build quality and other factors that you’d consider as an owner but would be less important for someone who just wanted to drive the better car) than the F1, in both original spec and taking account of the modifications you’ve made to yours?
The two cars were designed to quite different briefs, so you cannot necessarily say that one is "better" than the other. When discussing the F50, he notes that it’s ‘way better’ to drive than it’s contemporary, the McLaren F1.
Flemke, I know you don’t think the standard F1 is perfect but have you ever driven an F50? If so, would you consider it a better drive (ignoring brand, build quality and other factors that you’d consider as an owner but would be less important for someone who just wanted to drive the better car) than the F1, in both original spec and taking account of the modifications you’ve made to yours?
At one stage, back in 2000, I thought about buying an F50 instead of an F1 (the F1 was my first choice, but at the time none was for sale anywhere). I went out to Bob Houghton's to see an F50 that he had for sale. I did not drive it.
There were things about the F50 that were very appealing (such as the engine and the seats), but the bonnet was too ugly and that monstrosity of a rear wing was just beyond the pale - it was a deal-breaker.
In general, I have found myself disagreeing with John Barker's car reviews probably more often than I have disagreed with the opinions of any other car reviewer. That doesn't mean that I'm right and he's wrong, but clearly we appreciate different things.
I'll offer an opinion on the F50 from a different expert. Back when the CGT was a new car, I was having dinner with that car's project manager. He was relating how he made some of the most fundamental decisions about the car.
He told me that, at first, Porsche were considering mounting the engine solidly to the chassis. To get a sense of how this would work in the real world, the project manager (IIRC, Michael Holscher) borrowed a customer's F50. He was loaned the car for an hour to drive around the German countryside.
He said that, after he had driven the F50 for only 15 minutes, it was obvious to him that "Porsche could not build a road car that was so harsh and unpleasant." He turned around and drove back to the starting point, handing back the car 30 minutes before it was due. He said that, although it might sound crazy that he would volunteer to give up the chance to drive an F50 for another half-hour, he was very happy to get out of the car and never have to get back into it again.
I can assure you that I have never felt that way about the F1!
Caddyshack said:
A few people who drove Flemke's F1 and then drove the CGT said the CGT was the better drive (My friend Tim R drove them around the roads near the ring and the F1 scared him whereas he loved the CGT - I think he had a fair bit of seat time in both)
EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
The CGT and F1, like the F50 relative to the F1, are quite different. EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
All I can say, having driven a lot of miles in both, is that although the CGT is faster around the track, driving the F1 is much more involving. If I had 100 chances to drive either car, i would choose the F1 95 times and the CGT 5 times.
Driving the F1 is like driving nothing else, whereas all the other cars (within my experience) are variations of each other.
flemke said:
I am not sure that I would "lend" (as in, "Off you go, see you in a few hours!") it to anyone.
Not even swapsies for my car for an hour?Oh well, £2 on a EuroMillions ticket it is then (more chance in that than me becoming sufficiently bright enough and hard working to earn the chance).
flemke said:
Caddyshack said:
A few people who drove Flemke's F1 and then drove the CGT said the CGT was the better drive (My friend Tim R drove them around the roads near the ring and the F1 scared him whereas he loved the CGT - I think he had a fair bit of seat time in both)
EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
The CGT and F1, like the F50 relative to the F1, are quite different. EVO had the CGT and F1 at Bedford and Gordon Murray hitched a ride home in the F1
I think this is all public knowledge as has been in the Mag so not breaking any confidences (but will delete if Flemke wants me to)
All I can say, having driven a lot of miles in both, is that although the CGT is faster around the track, driving the F1 is much more involving. If I had 100 chances to drive either car, i would choose the F1 95 times and the CGT 5 times.
Driving the F1 is like driving nothing else, whereas all the other cars (within my experience) are variations of each other.
vincegail said:
Went to see the "So British" exhibition in Autoworld museum Brussels today. I would be very annoyed if my 20 million quid car would have a blemished rearview mirror. Are those not stock items from a '80s or '90s regular middle class car? Can it not be replaced or repared?
Lovely thing, it was BMW's own car on the stand I haven't driven either, but have been driven in both.
From a passengers point of view, as that is more likely an event than a drivers point of view for me anyway, the F1 was more special. The CGT made the hairs on the back of my neck rise up, but the F1 made me smile more and lasts my memory better, especially when the driver was testing his new brakes and then being followed a little later by the boys in blue for a while....;) (I think they just wanted a look rather than writing a ticket).
Both sounds were beautiful :the V10 a higher pitch than the throatier V12, and when I was in a road-converted GTR the gearbox whine was raucous especially 'at speed', but what surprised me most when out in any of the F1's was the deceleration when you are off the throttle, more than I was expecting.
When I was in the CGT it was only a short ride, a pootle round town and a quick blast along a few country roads [coincidentally ending up at a storage place that had some F1's in it] but I loved the experience and theatre of it.
From a passengers point of view, as that is more likely an event than a drivers point of view for me anyway, the F1 was more special. The CGT made the hairs on the back of my neck rise up, but the F1 made me smile more and lasts my memory better, especially when the driver was testing his new brakes and then being followed a little later by the boys in blue for a while....;) (I think they just wanted a look rather than writing a ticket).
Both sounds were beautiful :the V10 a higher pitch than the throatier V12, and when I was in a road-converted GTR the gearbox whine was raucous especially 'at speed', but what surprised me most when out in any of the F1's was the deceleration when you are off the throttle, more than I was expecting.
When I was in the CGT it was only a short ride, a pootle round town and a quick blast along a few country roads [coincidentally ending up at a storage place that had some F1's in it] but I loved the experience and theatre of it.
vincegail said:
Went to see the "So British" exhibition in Autoworld museum Brussels today. I would be very annoyed if my 20 million quid car would have a blemished rearview mirror. Are those not stock items from a '80s or '90s regular middle class car? Can it not be replaced or repared?
Did anywhere say how long the exhibition is on for?
Odd question for the day - I am very curious about the passenger seating position and long distance comfort in the F1. If the driver is "making progress" how do passengers typically brace themselves for corners and braking? Do they raise their feet so that their toes are above the carbon fibre inner chassis spars and push themselves back into the seat thereby wedging themselves securely?
In those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
In those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
F1natic said:
Odd question for the day - I am very curious about the passenger seating position and long distance comfort in the F1. If the driver is "making progress" how do passengers typically brace themselves for corners and braking? Do they raise their feet so that their toes are above the carbon fibre inner chassis spars and push themselves back into the seat thereby wedging themselves securely?
In those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
Can't vouch for all of your question, but having been lucky enough to spend a couple of hours in the right hand seat of an F1, including some cross country stuff, it's quite compact in there so you're fairly wedged in anyway. IIRC the seats aren't massively bolstered but you have the drivers seat to your left front and the door aperture wraps over your head on the right so you never feel like your having to brace against the bulkhead. Then the engine gets going, the induction noise smashes into your ears, and you forget EVERYTHING. I suspect sitting there for 8hrs would be just fineIn those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
F1natic said:
Odd question for the day - I am very curious about the passenger seating position and long distance comfort in the F1. If the driver is "making progress" how do passengers typically brace themselves for corners and braking? Do they raise their feet so that their toes are above the carbon fibre inner chassis spars and push themselves back into the seat thereby wedging themselves securely?
In those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
The most time I have spent in the car in one day was about 14 hours (IIRC), about evenly split between driving and passenger. In those cases where the trip is more relaxed what distance can passengers handle typically before a rest stop and stretch is required?
I am not surprised that every video I have seen from the passengers viewpoint typically is out the front windshield or back at their grinning faces.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean about raising one's feet. As has been said, the tight point for a passenger (at least for one who is not fat) is at the shoulders - you're pretty well squeezed in there, with little scope for being thrown around. This is in the context of a road car on road tyres being driven on public roads. As a passenger, after a couple of hours you'd probably like a break in order to climb out and stretch. As a driver, you can probably go through a full tank of fuel before you reach that point. With its open shoulders, the driver's seat is much more comfortable than the passengers' seats are.
Thank you for the insight. The reference to the foot position in my question is related to the passenger seats having no fore-aft adjustment. To my eye the foot panel is intentionally large and inclined to allow those with longer legs to position their feet up higher and therefore have a longer leg reach. My expectation in high corner force situations is that pushing against the foot panel pushes the passenger back firmly into the seat and increases their feeling of stability, but as pointed out not something that is foremost in their minds with the induction roar next to their ears. Fortunate individuals!
F1natic said:
Thank you for the insight. The reference to the foot position in my question is related to the passenger seats having no fore-aft adjustment. To my eye the foot panel is intentionally large and inclined to allow those with longer legs to position their feet up higher and therefore have a longer leg reach. My expectation in high corner force situations is that pushing against the foot panel pushes the passenger back firmly into the seat and increases their feeling of stability, but as pointed out not something that is foremost in their minds with the induction roar next to their ears. Fortunate individuals!
In the area extending forward of the passenger seats, the floor is first flat but then ramps up at an angle (being the obverse of the front wheel-wells). The angle accommodates different length legs. It's never been a problem for me or, as far as I know, the people I might normally take out for a ride.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff