RE: New McLaren Senna revealed
Discussion
coyft said:
Of course they will all find buyers, whether they all sell at list is another matter.
My point was that they are not all pre sold. People merely have an option to buy one.
My point was that they are not all pre sold. People merely have an option to buy one.
They will all sell at list.
Happy to change the wager if you like.
You won’t find one of these selling below list on the secondary market within the next 12 month’s.
Quickmoose said:
SteveO220 said:
Does it please the eye? Not at first. Does it please the brain? Absolutely. Will it, therefore, in time please the eye? Absolutely.
Can I see some examples of ugly things that have become beautiful just because time passes?I'm fairly confident ugly stays ugly in the same way beautiful is always beautiful... but, I'm always up for a challenge and not big enough to admit when I'm wrong...
When the F40 came out you could say, well that ain't a looker compared to the 288, but if you saw one now we all love the simple wedge shape with lack of aero "bits"
Same argument goes for F1 cars through the years of course. Mind you that is extreme, they do vary in lovelyness or pig uglyness, depending. But that is F1, no points for beauty. This is the way the top performing road cars are going.
Slower cars can afford to be more attractive to the eye. Hence why simple aero cars like Singer 911 or modern day E type creations still look fantastic. They are not pushing the envelope.
Edited by Gandahar on Sunday 10th December 13:10
Gandahar said:
See my point on 288GTO, F40, F50 and Enzo.
When the F40 came out you could say, well that ain't a looker compared to the 288, but if you saw one now we all love the simple wedge shape with lack of aero "bits"
Same argument goes for F1 cars through the years of course. Mind you that is extreme, they do vary in lovelyness or pig uglyness, depending. But that is F1, no points for beauty. This is the way the top performing road cars are going.
Slower cars can afford to be more attractive to the eye. Hence why simple aero cars like Singer 911 or modern day E type creations still look fantastic. They are not pushing the envelope.
I know its subjective but ..no.When the F40 came out you could say, well that ain't a looker compared to the 288, but if you saw one now we all love the simple wedge shape with lack of aero "bits"
Same argument goes for F1 cars through the years of course. Mind you that is extreme, they do vary in lovelyness or pig uglyness, depending. But that is F1, no points for beauty. This is the way the top performing road cars are going.
Slower cars can afford to be more attractive to the eye. Hence why simple aero cars like Singer 911 or modern day E type creations still look fantastic. They are not pushing the envelope.
Edited by Gandahar on Sunday 10th December 13:10
Those Ferraris were all poster cars. I very much doubt this will be.
And personally (again subjectively) I didn't fall for the F50 or Enzo when they came out and I haven't changed my mind.
F1 can and does abide by the same rules.
Overall, this "Senna" is getting slated for it's lack of style.
Everyone recognises aesthetic quality within the brief it's trying to fill. road or track, you can have a bit of quircky to buck the trend or change direction, but proportion and detail retain visual rules.
As mooted elsewhere
F1
F1 LM
P1
P1 LM
Bruno (since there's no way it should be named after Ayrton! )
Gumpert went bankrupt in 2012. Official figures are hard to find, but estimate at less than 100. Probably nearer 50.
Not that many billionaires who are prepared to overlook ugly.
Though when they rised from the ashes they made something a lot less ugly. (which I don't think ever reached production)
Problem here is that the other manufacturers can make non ugly cars. Even LaF over long nose doesn't detract from the car as a whole. On the Bruno, it's ANOTHER fault.
F1
F1 LM
P1
P1 LM
Bruno (since there's no way it should be named after Ayrton! )
Gumpert went bankrupt in 2012. Official figures are hard to find, but estimate at less than 100. Probably nearer 50.
Not that many billionaires who are prepared to overlook ugly.
Though when they rised from the ashes they made something a lot less ugly. (which I don't think ever reached production)
Problem here is that the other manufacturers can make non ugly cars. Even LaF over long nose doesn't detract from the car as a whole. On the Bruno, it's ANOTHER fault.
Quickmoose said:
suffolk009 said:
Itsallicanafford said:
Chaps, you have got to think like a billionaire, not a millionaire...you already have all the pretty HyperCars cars, it really doesn't matter what it looks like, this is your track car, for turning up a Spa, with a full support team and racing driver and then being about able to exploit 7/10th of the permanent and wipe the floor with everything else (10/10ths is for the racing driver when you are a passenger)...this is not your only car you trailer to Brans Hatch behind your jeep Cherokee...
Well observed, and spot on.
Did either of you read the actual article?
So rich bloke will have his Senna taken to the alps in the back of a closed truck, along with some of his other nice cars for his friends cars. They'll have a weekend jogging up and down the passes, expensive claret and big cigars. They make noises in the tunnels, and may even get some wheelspin coming out of the hairpins.
To suggest that owners will be "using" a car with this level of performance on any actual road is absurd. With the best will in the world, you won't be generating too much of the potential downforce at 70mph.
Which is why they'll be doing all that stuff at Spa.
Good to see they've got their little disclaimer in about it now being quickest at the ring. The embarrassment after getting beaten by Porsche last time round must have been awful, I'd love to have been a fly on the wall at the board meeting after that shameful debacle.
"The P1 will be do Nordschliefe in less than 7 minutes and will be the faster than our rivals".
"Did it do it in less than 7 minites?"
"Yes."
"Was it faster than the Porsche 918?"
"It was so fast we're not even going to tell you how fast it was, or provide any evidence of our lap time".
They must think the public are stupid. I know that ultimately cars like this are posing pouch trinkets but to have the 918 being so much more luxurious and still being quicker must have been a blow. Ferrari stay out of these pissing contests in case they come up short against their rivals, I wonder if McLaren will follow suit. I've got a lot of respect for Porsche putting their car out there so we could see what it was really capable of. On paper you'd expect it to be the slowest of the big 3 of that generation but the hidden lap time from McLaren seems to suggest otherwise.
"The P1 will be do Nordschliefe in less than 7 minutes and will be the faster than our rivals".
"Did it do it in less than 7 minites?"
"Yes."
"Was it faster than the Porsche 918?"
"It was so fast we're not even going to tell you how fast it was, or provide any evidence of our lap time".
They must think the public are stupid. I know that ultimately cars like this are posing pouch trinkets but to have the 918 being so much more luxurious and still being quicker must have been a blow. Ferrari stay out of these pissing contests in case they come up short against their rivals, I wonder if McLaren will follow suit. I've got a lot of respect for Porsche putting their car out there so we could see what it was really capable of. On paper you'd expect it to be the slowest of the big 3 of that generation but the hidden lap time from McLaren seems to suggest otherwise.
This car won't perform in the Alps with overhangs and ride height like that.
Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
Quickmoose said:
Gandahar said:
See my point on 288GTO, F40, F50 and Enzo.
When the F40 came out you could say, well that ain't a looker compared to the 288, but if you saw one now we all love the simple wedge shape with lack of aero "bits"
Same argument goes for F1 cars through the years of course. Mind you that is extreme, they do vary in lovelyness or pig uglyness, depending. But that is F1, no points for beauty. This is the way the top performing road cars are going.
Slower cars can afford to be more attractive to the eye. Hence why simple aero cars like Singer 911 or modern day E type creations still look fantastic. They are not pushing the envelope.
I know its subjective but ..no.When the F40 came out you could say, well that ain't a looker compared to the 288, but if you saw one now we all love the simple wedge shape with lack of aero "bits"
Same argument goes for F1 cars through the years of course. Mind you that is extreme, they do vary in lovelyness or pig uglyness, depending. But that is F1, no points for beauty. This is the way the top performing road cars are going.
Slower cars can afford to be more attractive to the eye. Hence why simple aero cars like Singer 911 or modern day E type creations still look fantastic. They are not pushing the envelope.
Edited by Gandahar on Sunday 10th December 13:10
Those Ferraris were all poster cars. I very much doubt this will be.
And personally (again subjectively) I didn't fall for the F50 or Enzo when they came out and I haven't changed my mind.
F1 can and does abide by the same rules.
Overall, this "Senna" is getting slated for it's lack of style.
Everyone recognises aesthetic quality within the brief it's trying to fill. road or track, you can have a bit of quircky to buck the trend or change direction, but proportion and detail retain visual rules.
Strangely, from the front, the insectoid front headlights / hole for aero, looks less insectoid than than 720S to me, a bit of 650 melded into it.
Quickmoose said:
This car won't perform in the Alps with overhangs and ride height like that.
Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
The thing is that this is quite cheap compared to a Chiron or Pagani, no need for billionaires. Funny how a high 6 figure sum can seem quite good value for money.Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
Gandahar said:
Quickmoose said:
This car won't perform in the Alps with overhangs and ride height like that.
Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
The thing is that this is quite cheap compared to a Chiron or Pagani, no need for billionaires. Funny how a high 6 figure sum can seem quite good value for money.Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
Replace the word billionaire with "owner"
It isn't ugly because of engineering, or some of the funny details like the side windows, or the headlights or because of some clever aero.
It's ugly because the proportions of almost every single bit look wrong in some way in comparison to all the other bits.
Funny proportions of some bit or another (like headlights/front end) seems a bit of a theme at the moment but it takes a special sort to get everything to simultaneously shout *WRONG* at the observer.
And don't blame an engineer for this, an engineered solution would always have a functional rightness to it even if it looked a bit odd I'd some way. This sort of wrongness takes years of training as a stylist.
It's ugly because the proportions of almost every single bit look wrong in some way in comparison to all the other bits.
Funny proportions of some bit or another (like headlights/front end) seems a bit of a theme at the moment but it takes a special sort to get everything to simultaneously shout *WRONG* at the observer.
And don't blame an engineer for this, an engineered solution would always have a functional rightness to it even if it looked a bit odd I'd some way. This sort of wrongness takes years of training as a stylist.
Quickmoose said:
Can I see some examples of ugly things that have become beautiful just because time passes?
I'm fairly confident ugly stays ugly in the same way beautiful is always beautiful... but, I'm always up for a challenge and not big enough to admit when I'm wrong...
Well, virtually everything that proves its worth over time. Whether architecture (Goldfinger; Corbusier) or cars (F40, F50, Enzo) or art (Rothko, Pollock) or music (Stravinsky, Cage, Glass). Breakthrough feats of ingenuity can only be fully understood in retrospect.I'm fairly confident ugly stays ugly in the same way beautiful is always beautiful... but, I'm always up for a challenge and not big enough to admit when I'm wrong...
The 'Senna' has more in common with the F1 GTR Longtail to my mind. That is not a particularly pretty car either, but we forgive some of its slightly cartoonish characteristics for the value they add to the overall package.
Good aero does - I am afraid - tend to require longish overhangs which may not suit the visual designer, but very much please the user of the product.
SteveO220 said:
Quickmoose said:
Can I see some examples of ugly things that have become beautiful just because time passes?
I'm fairly confident ugly stays ugly in the same way beautiful is always beautiful... but, I'm always up for a challenge and not big enough to admit when I'm wrong...
Well, virtually everything that proves its worth over time. Whether architecture (Goldfinger; Corbusier) or cars (F40, F50, Enzo) or art (Rothko, Pollock) or music (Stravinsky, Cage, Glass). Breakthrough feats of ingenuity can only be fully understood in retrospect.I'm fairly confident ugly stays ugly in the same way beautiful is always beautiful... but, I'm always up for a challenge and not big enough to admit when I'm wrong...
The 'Senna' has more in common with the F1 GTR Longtail to my mind. That is not a particularly pretty car either, but we forgive some of its slightly cartoonish characteristics for the value they add to the overall package.
Good aero does - I am afraid - tend to require longish overhangs which may not suit the visual designer, but very much please the user of the product.
F40 was attractive and well proportioned from the get go....and I never held the F50/Enzo in high regard.
Goldfinger was and is unattractive
Corbusier...better
Its telling that when people think of McLaren road cars...its always F1....The GTR car too.
The LeMans long tails, not so much
and now it repeats, the 675LT...thumbs up
The Senna... come on.... it won't race and garner a back catalogue of remarkable wins
That profile, the detailing - despite its function - its properly foul.
It'll hardly be seen
And when it is seen, we'll still wince in 40 years as we have today,
At best this is an experiment.... but Aston and Mercedes have already proven, such tech and aero can have style attached...
Rich_W said:
As mooted elsewhere
P1
P1 LM
Bruno (since there's no way it should be named after Ayrton! )
I think the problem I have with it is that it looks very disjointed, like it's been reversed into a wall too fast or something. The proportions of the rear half don't match those of the front half. As you can see from the above photos, the P1 has quite a long nose and front half, but that is matched with an equally long and sleek rear. Maybe not so much in the overhang, but certainly in the distance between the cabin and rear axle.P1
P1 LM
Bruno (since there's no way it should be named after Ayrton! )
I know it's function over form, and by hypercar standards it's positively cheap, but I think it's not unreasonable at this price point to demand function and form. Other cars have proved it's possible.
Quickmoose said:
Gandahar said:
Quickmoose said:
This car won't perform in the Alps with overhangs and ride height like that.
Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
The thing is that this is quite cheap compared to a Chiron or Pagani, no need for billionaires. Funny how a high 6 figure sum can seem quite good value for money.Billionaires will track the Senna GTR (yeah right)
Billionaires will drive the Senna...of course they will....
So in effect for your run of the mill millionaire/billionaire...they'll neither use this for the road or track....you wouldn't track it because you have the GTR
you wouldn't 'road' it because you'll damage it.
Replace the word billionaire with "owner"
...so now Lambo/Ferrari/Porsche/McLaren make 300 ugly as sin, mega wow trinket laden tech fest for only £1m...and they're all sold already..
and?
Paint a painting...its designed to make you look and think...hang it on a wall and do that.
Build a building...designed to allow you live in it and perhaps consider how it does that..... move in and do that
Write a piece of music...designed to make you listen and feel.... so you turn it on and listen
Make an amazing desirable car that performs beyond all others...... but make it goping and put it in dry storage...that's a fail in my book.
and?
Paint a painting...its designed to make you look and think...hang it on a wall and do that.
Build a building...designed to allow you live in it and perhaps consider how it does that..... move in and do that
Write a piece of music...designed to make you listen and feel.... so you turn it on and listen
Make an amazing desirable car that performs beyond all others...... but make it goping and put it in dry storage...that's a fail in my book.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff