RE: McLaren Senna on the road!
Discussion
I keep veering from a total dislike for it to accepting the looks of it, but that top picture sends me directly to the former view.
I think viewing it as an extreme 720 is best, rather than viewing it as an all new model. I keep thinking it is what the Lotus 340r was to the Elise. Both based on the same under pinning's but one is catering for a different niche.
Saw my first 720 on the road the other day in dark grey and it looked fantastic. For virtually the same performance I'd take one of those over this and save myself a fortune. You'd never use 100% of the 720 performance anyway... road or track!
Also feel the 'McLaren Senna' name should really have been saved for something bespoke and utterly amazing... a la Aston Valkyrie.
I think viewing it as an extreme 720 is best, rather than viewing it as an all new model. I keep thinking it is what the Lotus 340r was to the Elise. Both based on the same under pinning's but one is catering for a different niche.
Saw my first 720 on the road the other day in dark grey and it looked fantastic. For virtually the same performance I'd take one of those over this and save myself a fortune. You'd never use 100% of the 720 performance anyway... road or track!
Also feel the 'McLaren Senna' name should really have been saved for something bespoke and utterly amazing... a la Aston Valkyrie.
HighwayStar said:
octane83 said:
Gandahar said:
Actually Senna would have loved this. If it was faster.
Do you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
This is not a race carDo you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
t of a thing. If it was a converted race car, like the new Ford GT for example, then it'd have some credibility. As it is, it's just a horrid turd. HighwayStar said:
octane83 said:
Gandahar said:
Actually Senna would have loved this. If it was faster.
Do you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
This is not a race carDo you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
Of course it is...
Because the kind of owner who seeks the ultimate track weapon with almost unlimited disposable buys one car to do both jobs, and not mutiple cars for each......
As has been pointed out many times there are many vehicles out there that would do similar lap times or better for less, that you could exploit at 10/10ths without worrying about damamging your investment. This is, like other high end 'track focused' stuff, compromised in both disciplines.
A few people 'get that' and hence don't understand the need for such a 'brutal' lack of style.
Ferrari seem to have the hang of it.... jeez even the Ford GT does a better job...
Having said that of course McLaren only needed a few people to make it a 'success'..... I bet they all track it, I bet they rag the crap out of it for all the thousands of miles they'll put on them...
Quickmoose said:
Having said that of course McLaren only needed a few people to make it a 'success'..... I bet they all track it, I bet they rag the crap out of it for all the thousands of miles they'll put on them...
fblm said:
I appreciate these guys have their own exclusive trackdays and precious few make it on rma/goldtrack type days, let alone the cheaper ones, but I wonder just how many of these 500 will ever be enjoyed on track... 50?
More than have ever got anywhere near their Veyron's top speed, or indeed have exploited the USP of many ultra exclusive hypercars etc.Manufacturers are currently able to exploit more than enough ultra-wealthy types to carve various niches in the market for them to add to their collection, I don't see the Senna any differently and I don't see it as a bad thing if it keeps these companies in the black. Is the Senna really any more ridiculous or pointless as the Vulcan, Valkryie or Project One?
ukaskew said:
More than have ever got anywhere near their Veyron's top speed, or indeed 6have exploited the USP of many ultra exclusive hypercars etc.
Manufacturers are currently able to exploit more than enough ultra-wealthy types to carve various niches in the market for them to add to their collection, I don't see the Senna any differently and I don't see it as a bad thing if it keeps these companies in the black. Is the Senna really any more ridiculous or pointless as the Vulcan, Valkryie or Project One?
I don't think any of them are ridiculous or pointless, not using them is though!Manufacturers are currently able to exploit more than enough ultra-wealthy types to carve various niches in the market for them to add to their collection, I don't see the Senna any differently and I don't see it as a bad thing if it keeps these companies in the black. Is the Senna really any more ridiculous or pointless as the Vulcan, Valkryie or Project One?
I think McLaren have hit the nail on the head with maximising the ROI on this.
Clearly they started with a conversation with Lego and said - “you build the model and we’ll make the car the same, that way you can then release the model and it’ll be exactly the same as the car, not like your GT3RS model which looks crap”
Thus ensuring future royalties for years to come and allowing us mere mortals to own one too.
Ps I’ve seen that car in the flesh and yes it’s minging
Clearly they started with a conversation with Lego and said - “you build the model and we’ll make the car the same, that way you can then release the model and it’ll be exactly the same as the car, not like your GT3RS model which looks crap”
Thus ensuring future royalties for years to come and allowing us mere mortals to own one too.
Ps I’ve seen that car in the flesh and yes it’s minging
I think McLaren have hit the nail on the head with maximising the ROI on this.
Clearly they started with a conversation with Lego and said - “you build the model and we’ll make the car the same, that way you can then release the model and it’ll be exactly the same as the car, not like your GT3RS model which looks crap”
Thus ensuring future royalties for years to come and allowing us mere mortals to own one too.
Ps I’ve seen that car in the flesh and yes it’s minging
Clearly they started with a conversation with Lego and said - “you build the model and we’ll make the car the same, that way you can then release the model and it’ll be exactly the same as the car, not like your GT3RS model which looks crap”
Thus ensuring future royalties for years to come and allowing us mere mortals to own one too.
Ps I’ve seen that car in the flesh and yes it’s minging
tubs said:
The styling is very challenging ,of that everyone is in agreement i think.......however I suspect the majority of people will suddenly change their minds when a comparative lap time is published...It is called the Senna after all so it will be bloody fast , thats for sure.
A fast ugly car is still an ugly car.I get the impression people on here don't understand that things should be judged based in how they perform at their intended function. It's meant to be a seriously quick road car with aerodynamics as its a large feature. They don't comment on the performance and just say how it's ugly.
It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
E65Ross said:
I get the impression people on here don't understand that things should be judged based in how they perform at their intended function. It's meant to be a seriously quick road car with aerodynamics as its a large feature. They don't comment on the performance and just say how it's ugly.
It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
Sadly there are many examples that disprove your point. SCG003 is a good example of how you can make a car both seriously fast on track yet look wonderful on road. LaFerrari also pulls off this trick. And on and on. It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
This is just a styling disaster. It doesn’t have to be ugly to generate downforce but somehow McLaren have managed that in spectacular fashion. An own goal that will make the all time Too 10 list of automotive fails.
Quickmoose said:
HighwayStar said:
octane83 said:
Gandahar said:
Actually Senna would have loved this. If it was faster.
Do you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
This is not a race carDo you think he cared what his race cars looked like?
That's for the viewers.
Of course it is...
Because the kind of owner who seeks the ultimate track weapon with almost unlimited disposable buys one car to do both jobs, and not mutiple cars for each......
As has been pointed out many times there are many vehicles out there that would do similar lap times or better for less, that you could exploit at 10/10ths without worrying about damamging your investment. This is, like other high end 'track focused' stuff, compromised in both disciplines.
A few people 'get that' and hence don't understand the need for such a 'brutal' lack of style.
Ferrari seem to have the hang of it.... jeez even the Ford GT does a better job...
Having said that of course McLaren only needed a few people to make it a 'success'..... I bet they all track it, I bet they rag the crap out of it for all the thousands of miles they'll put on them...
Having something seriously fast on track which you can drive on the road still has some appeal.
The Senna will be quicker on track and I’ll bet a better road car than the Ford GT too.
subirg said:
E65Ross said:
I get the impression people on here don't understand that things should be judged based in how they perform at their intended function. It's meant to be a seriously quick road car with aerodynamics as its a large feature. They don't comment on the performance and just say how it's ugly.
It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
Sadly there are many examples that disprove your point. SCG003 is a good example of how you can make a car both seriously fast on track yet look wonderful on road. LaFerrari also pulls off this trick. And on and on. It's like saying a Caterham is crap because it's noisy on the motorway, or that a Rolls Royce Phantom is crap because it can't go off road.
This is just a styling disaster. It doesn’t have to be ugly to generate downforce but somehow McLaren have managed that in spectacular fashion. An own goal that will make the all time Too 10 list of automotive fails.
Maldini35 said:
You’d be surprised how many wealthy people really value the opportunity to drive these type of cars on the road. Even if you can afford and old Le Mans car, taking it out for a spin when the mood takes you involves weeks of planning (booking a track, booking the tech team to get the car running and delivered to the circuit etc.).
Having something seriously fast on track which you can drive on the road still has some appeal.
The Senna will be quicker on track and I’ll bet a better road car than the Ford GT too.
Go on then....I'll bite show me the facts about how many wealthy people track their investmemts ...Having something seriously fast on track which you can drive on the road still has some appeal.
The Senna will be quicker on track and I’ll bet a better road car than the Ford GT too.
I'm aware the top flight marques have preferred buyer track programmes with support... for thes uber models...an almost indescribably small amount of people....
while youre at it, let me know what percentage have the skills/talent/licence to extract the final nth degrees required to best the next best uber track/road car...
You missed my Ford GT point too...a major downforce trackable car that does not offend they eyes.
At least some recognise this is an ugly brutal compromised fast car.
I mean anyone can see it'll be mega, McLaren don't do anything else,
They normally have an eye for style though...
F1, F1 GTR, P1, P1 GTR...etc
and (seperate point) its nothing like a Caterham 7 being rubbish on the motorway or a Rolls being bad offroad...
A comparabile argument is about whether the Caterham or Rolls are offensive to anyone with eyes.. ... doing what they do best
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff