RE: McLaren Senna on the road!
Discussion
isaldiri said:
Rich_W said:
a) I cant see this being faster than a P1.
It is almost guaranteed that it will be faster. Hth.991 GT2 RS is faster round the 'ring than the 918.
Non-hybrids are faster than hybrids. Makes the whole hybrid thing a complete nonsense.
I'd still take a 918 over anything though.
gigglebug said:
So basically you really were making yourself look stupid then weren't you.
The writer was merely highlighting the fact that the change of colour has altered his perception of the cars looks and nothing more than that. This is because for him even if all of the aero, which let's face it McLaren themselves, have attributed to making the Senna their most "brutal" car ever they haven't exactly gained the universal praise from the public due to their aesthetics. The fact that they are now less prominent, when compared to the orange launch car, has had a positive effect in the authors view.
What he wasn't doing, and what you chose to mock him for completely out of context because your mental aptitude wasn't sufficient enough to keep up, was "getting wet" (how childish are you?) from imagining the cars performance in relation to the scenario that the photo placed the car within. How ignorant would you have to be to extrapolate from the article that the author was trying to provided an informed opinion on it's aerodynamics ability to effect it's on road performance?
Asking people to judge what is right in front of them isn't hard Rob is it? Well not unless the person asked is you it would appear.
The irony is strong with this one...The writer was merely highlighting the fact that the change of colour has altered his perception of the cars looks and nothing more than that. This is because for him even if all of the aero, which let's face it McLaren themselves, have attributed to making the Senna their most "brutal" car ever they haven't exactly gained the universal praise from the public due to their aesthetics. The fact that they are now less prominent, when compared to the orange launch car, has had a positive effect in the authors view.
What he wasn't doing, and what you chose to mock him for completely out of context because your mental aptitude wasn't sufficient enough to keep up, was "getting wet" (how childish are you?) from imagining the cars performance in relation to the scenario that the photo placed the car within. How ignorant would you have to be to extrapolate from the article that the author was trying to provided an informed opinion on it's aerodynamics ability to effect it's on road performance?
Asking people to judge what is right in front of them isn't hard Rob is it? Well not unless the person asked is you it would appear.
Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 6th January 21:09
Lets start by saying thank you for the insults of "stupid". I'll store that for later, since you started that.
You've attempted to weasel your way out of the point presented by parroting some material, which, sadly for you, is not the point being referred to.
But to really bend your mind, let me use your own words..."from imagining the cars performance in relation to the scenario that the photo placed the car within".
Do you even realise, that you have essentially agreed with the point I was making, all the while the backdrop of "stupid" is hanging over your head? Because, yes, you DO need to use your imagination. The car is not on a track. It is not setting performance benchmarks. It is not on a skidpan testing lateral acceleration. It is not setting a ring time. It is, in fact, on the m25.
So when you see it on the m25, and you are being asked, what do you see, (what is right in front of you) what would you say?
So now we return to the first stone being cast by a f
kwit who doesnt realise he's just proved my point with his own words unbeknownst to himself. Seriously mate, do us a favour, drop the attitude of calling people names because you disagree, and try to stick to the points, lest you be properly called a dropkick.anniesdad said:
991 GT2 RS is faster round the 'ring than the 918.
Non-hybrids are faster than hybrids. Makes the whole hybrid thing a complete nonsense.
Depends if you think the hybrid thing was all about performance. If Porsche had wanted to build a pure performance focused (in the way the 2rs is for instance) hybrid I reckon it would have been a different car to how the 918 turned out. And if you put the N2 tyre from the 2rs on the 918 chances are that gap would be much smaller I suspect....Non-hybrids are faster than hybrids. Makes the whole hybrid thing a complete nonsense.
big_rob_sydney said:
The irony is strong with this one...
Lets start by saying thank you for the insults of "stupid". I'll store that for later, since you started that.
You've attempted to weasel your way out of the point presented by parroting some material, which, sadly for you, is not the point being referred to.
But to really bend your mind, let me use your own words..."from imagining the cars performance in relation to the scenario that the photo placed the car within".
Do you even realise, that you have essentially agreed with the point I was making, all the while the backdrop of "stupid" is hanging over your head? Because, yes, you DO need to use your imagination. The car is not on a track. It is not setting performance benchmarks. It is not on a skidpan testing lateral acceleration. It is not setting a ring time. It is, in fact, on the m25.
So when you see it on the m25, and you are being asked, what do you see, (what is right in front of you) what would you say?
So now we return to the first stone being cast by a fkwit who doesnt realise he's just proved my point with his own words unbeknownst to himself. Seriously mate, do us a favour, drop the attitude of calling people names because you disagree, and try to stick to the points, lest you be properly called a dropkick.
No Rob it really is you that is persisting in being stupid. The fact that you do not realise it only confounds the stupidity. I have not tried to weasel out of anything and I am certainly not agreeing with your stupidity. Let me remind you of your incompetence;Lets start by saying thank you for the insults of "stupid". I'll store that for later, since you started that.
You've attempted to weasel your way out of the point presented by parroting some material, which, sadly for you, is not the point being referred to.
But to really bend your mind, let me use your own words..."from imagining the cars performance in relation to the scenario that the photo placed the car within".
Do you even realise, that you have essentially agreed with the point I was making, all the while the backdrop of "stupid" is hanging over your head? Because, yes, you DO need to use your imagination. The car is not on a track. It is not setting performance benchmarks. It is not on a skidpan testing lateral acceleration. It is not setting a ring time. It is, in fact, on the m25.
So when you see it on the m25, and you are being asked, what do you see, (what is right in front of you) what would you say?
So now we return to the first stone being cast by a f
kwit who doesnt realise he's just proved my point with his own words unbeknownst to himself. Seriously mate, do us a favour, drop the attitude of calling people names because you disagree, and try to stick to the points, lest you be properly called a dropkick.big_rob_sydney said:
The aerodynamics make it sensational to drive...?
On the m25?? Past cameras on a gantry???
What crack have you been smoking.
On the m25?? Past cameras on a gantry???
What crack have you been smoking.
big_rob_sydney said:
No, Ross, aerodynamics are pointless on a "road car" which is being driven at the NSL or lower, particularly when it has to be driven around other stboxes hemming it in, and being driven by OAP's.
By all means, explain to us how the aerodynamics make it sensational to drive, when its stuck mindlessly droning past cameras at 70mph on the m25.
tboxes hemming it in, and being driven by OAP's.By all means, explain to us how the aerodynamics make it sensational to drive, when its stuck mindlessly droning past cameras at 70mph on the m25.
big_rob_sydney said:
The writer is getting wet about its performance, and the context is precisely what has been discussed IN THE ARTICLE.
Now you see, because of your inherent stupidity, you believe that the author, and subsequently those who questioned you, has made the point of suggesting that the cars aerodynamics would make it sensational to drive within the context of the scenario that the picture in the article dictates ie driving at the national speed limit on the M25. But of course this is clearly not what the author, or indeed those who subsequently questioned your stupidity, was implying. Only a stupid person would have thought that in the first place and then attempted to carry on arguing against a point which wasn't even being made.
I'll reiterate the authors intended notion that the change of colour to the car in the photo, irrelevant to its location, has masked some of the aerodynamic details which although have been attributed to making it sensational to drive within the context to which it has been conceived for, the track, have been met with less than universal praise for their aesthetics.
Now I, and I expect most others on here, have a full understanding of this because we are not stupid.
You I guess have not, and probably will not, understand this because you are clearly stupid.
E65Ross said:
RE the name, did people moan this much about the Ferrari Enzo? I can't remember.
I seem to recall they did. Plus levy similar 'it looks too angular/crap' comments at the Enzo. (Note: anecdotal...I just remember the comments around that time).I must admit to not loving the Enzo (and still not my fave Ferrari in looks terms), but with the Enzo, time has been very kind to it and these days I'd have one in the blink of an eye. (Having seen a few in RL, the proportions work better...even if it is wider than a house).
I also remember back in the day, people saying the F40 looked stupid. That the rear wing was ridiculous, etc. etc. The F50's looks were also divisive. And yet I look at both of those cars now and think they are both beautiful things in the context of what they are. (Of course there are prettier cars, but in functional looks terms...wow)
Whist I don't really have a problem with the name, I genuinely don't see myself softening over my dislike of the Senna's looks. I still maintain that if the P1 had been called the Senna, I'd have coveted that car even more than I already do...strangely! Ha ha. What an irrational thing, but there you go!
WCZ said:
E65Ross said:
RE the name, did people moan this much about the Ferrari Enzo? I can't remember.
no but everyone hated the styling just as they did with the La Ferrari tooFor me, I'm warming to the Senna, in the latest photos the proportions look to be much more balanced than the red launch car suggested. It's not going to win any beauty contests but if it's fast with the aero being functional, the way it looks won't be mentioned on the leader board.
Ferrari Enzo, isn't a bad name I spose...but it was and is, not a good looking car...I feel it's brave, which in itself is a good thing, like Bangle's stuff... makes you think differently, and that should be applauded even if the result doesn't make you want it.
Using the same logic however, a McLaren Ron, would be a bad idea
A McLaren Senna, isn't a bad name in itself.... it's just I don't think it should be attributed to a road car......
A Ferrari Schumacher would be ok too...track only IMO again, not road related.
Ferrari LaFerrari is an atrocious name, but MUCH better looking and head turning in a good way, yes it has a large front overhang, but it's aero isn't as contrived, and the rest of the proportions are far FAR better, no ridiculous wing etc
I agree with previous poster... the P1 (or better yet P1 GTR...or betterer yet the F1) would have worn the Senna badge with more ease.
Using the same logic however, a McLaren Ron, would be a bad idea
A McLaren Senna, isn't a bad name in itself.... it's just I don't think it should be attributed to a road car......
A Ferrari Schumacher would be ok too...track only IMO again, not road related.
Ferrari LaFerrari is an atrocious name, but MUCH better looking and head turning in a good way, yes it has a large front overhang, but it's aero isn't as contrived, and the rest of the proportions are far FAR better, no ridiculous wing etc
I agree with previous poster... the P1 (or better yet P1 GTR...or betterer yet the F1) would have worn the Senna badge with more ease.
Quickmoose said:
Ferrari Enzo, isn't a bad name I spose...but it was and is, not a good looking car...I feel it's brave, which in itself is a good thing, like Bangle's stuff... makes you think differently, and that should be applauded even if the result doesn't make you want it.
Using the same logic however, a McLaren Ron, would be a bad idea
A McLaren Senna, isn't a bad name in itself.... it's just I don't think it should be attributed to a road car......
A Ferrari Schumacher would be ok too...track only IMO again, not road related.
Ferrari LaFerrari is an atrocious name, but MUCH better looking and head turning in a good way, yes it has a large front overhang, but it's aero isn't as contrived, and the rest of the proportions are far FAR better, no ridiculous wing etc
I agree with previous poster... the P1 (or better yet P1 GTR...or betterer yet the F1) would have worn the Senna badge with more ease.
I agree except the original Zonda nailed the 'cab forward, long low rear' look far more effectively and 4 or 5 years (?) before the Enzo. IMO post GT3, 675LT and P1, McLaren have seriously lost their way with the 'functional' styling. I really hope the 720s and this mess don't hint at any design elements of the BP23...Using the same logic however, a McLaren Ron, would be a bad idea
A McLaren Senna, isn't a bad name in itself.... it's just I don't think it should be attributed to a road car......
A Ferrari Schumacher would be ok too...track only IMO again, not road related.
Ferrari LaFerrari is an atrocious name, but MUCH better looking and head turning in a good way, yes it has a large front overhang, but it's aero isn't as contrived, and the rest of the proportions are far FAR better, no ridiculous wing etc
I agree with previous poster... the P1 (or better yet P1 GTR...or betterer yet the F1) would have worn the Senna badge with more ease.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff