RE: Prior Convictions: McLaren Senna, road warrior

[isaldiri]

fblm said:

I heard it was lapping Silverstone around 2:09 this week in Chris Harris's hands; does anyone know what a road legal Radical RXC GT will do it in?

Very likely faster than the McSenna. I'd far rather drive a Senna to Paul Ricard from the UK than a RXC though!

[JMF894]

No it's no oil painting but....................................... yes please!

Once inside, drive it, absorb everything your senses can and forget about the exterior.

I guess driving enthusiasts are different to car enthusiasts.

[andyj007]

yes but once youve driven it a few times, got used to the speed, the novelty has worn off your left with the hideous maintenance and running cost and one god damn deformed ugly car.. hardly something to pull the sheets off and get all giddy.. therefore these cars are only going to be owned by those who see bragging rights as the number 1 priority.. lucky for us, there a little too expensive for the vast majority of the you tube buy a car, brag about it and flog it off, after about 1.5 weeks of ownership brigade..

the reason it annoys so much i guess, is that its so frustrating, they have the know how , skill and experience to make this same car, with the same performance but look absolutely beautiful..
i dont get this form function b**loks after watching the mclaren documentary, they seem to be stuck way up there own backsides.. a bit rudderless...
i would hazard a guess that the leading designer, senior management probably convinced themselves its looks absolutely beautiful,
only after the first public disclosure where 80% of the public were omg its so ugly did the form over function quotes come out..
its on par with the epic fail by Gerry McGovern, stuck in his own little world he thought the offset range rover numberplate was beautiful too.
and then tried to blame it on the type of numberplate.........what a berk..
as a previous poster said, you wouldnt see ferrari throwing something half baked like this out of their design office they have more class that that..
im not saying its a wonderful piece of technology, its just a very poor execution of the packaging that lets its down..
the potential was there for it to be poster car..
what a shame..

[anonymous-user]

andyj007 said:

yes but once youve driven it a few times, got used to the speed, the novelty has worn off your left with the hideous maintenance and running cost and one god damn deformed ugly car.. hardly something to pull the sheets off and get all giddy.. therefore these cars are only going to be owned by those who see bragging rights as the number 1 priority.. lucky for us, there a little too expensive for the vast majority of the you tube buy a car, brag about it and flog it off, after about 1.5 weeks of ownership brigade..

the reason it annoys so much i guess, is that its so frustrating, they have the know how , skill and experience to make this same car, with the same performance but look absolutely beautiful..
i dont get this form function b**loks after watching the mclaren documentary, they seem to be stuck way up there own backsides.. a bit rudderless...
i would hazard a guess that the leading designer, senior management probably convinced themselves its looks absolutely beautiful,
only after the first public disclosure where 80% of the public were omg its so ugly did the form over function quotes come out..
its on par with the epic fail by Gerry McGovern, stuck in his own little world he thought the offset range rover numberplate was beautiful too.
and then tried to blame it on the type of numberplate.........what a berk..
as a previous poster said, you wouldnt see ferrari throwing something half baked like this out of their design office they have more class that that..
im not saying its a wonderful piece of technology, its just a very poor execution of the packaging that lets its down..
the potential was there for it to be poster car..
what a shame..

Some utter bks in that I’m afraid not least of all the value judgment on the owners.

I suspect McLaren care much more about selling cars to satisfied and repeat customers than they do posters for bedroom walls.

[Kenny Powers]

In fairness not everyone wants “beautiful” cars. Looks are subjective. Some people will think it looks great. Some others will think it looks amazing. Others will think it looks ugly, brutal and functional, which may appeal to them. Others won’t care what it looks like.

It’s also arrogant to presume what other people can and can’t do with their own property - drive it/store it/pamper it/grow tomatoes in it. There’s obviously a market for this, and those that buy it will be very happy. Not sure why some people seek to suck their enjoyment out of it by hating it and judging what its owners will do with it, when it would be easier to ignore it if the hate runs that deep.

Only my opinion of course

[ProCo2020]

Just back from officiating at a Sprint at Goodwood and the yellow car was in the public car park and I was drooling over it, and took a number of very poor iPhone pics.

After the event had a chat with a 720S owner who was competing on the event in his McLaren, great to see people actually using these cars and not cruising the Kings Road.

[Shabs]

I saw this convoy leaving woking and was pleasantly surprised that they look a great deal better in real life. Also, yellow is a colour that really suits these IMO

[anonymous-user]

Brooking10 said:

Some utter bks in that I’m afraid not least of all the value judgment on the owners.

I suspect McLaren care much more about selling cars to gullible and wealthy customers than they do posters for bedroom walls.

Fixed that for you sir, HTH......

Maybe you could tell the class why they chose Bruno Senna to "develop" the car instead of any of the somewhat legendary drivers they actually employed since 1994, I just can't put my finger on it?

I think the car is dreadful looking regardless of form over function that gets trotted out by the fanboys, the rear wing looks like someone left the pin the tail on the donkey sheet out after the McLaren xmas party and one of the designers included it.....
I thought McLaren were all about brand, then someone throws up this car.
Let's hope it is quicker than a road legal whatever around silverstone, because that's really relevant when you want to use it on anywhere other than a track, mind you maybe that's the plan, then people won't stare at the obscure kit car as you power down Wilmslow high street/ Kensington/ Sandbanks









Fanboys incoming..............................

[thegreenhell]

14-7 said:

Whoever, is writing, these, articles lately needs to, perhaps, get some training so, they know when, to, use, a comma.

Nope, not a comma out of place in this one.

[anonymous-user]

NorfolkInClue1 said:

Brooking10 said:

Some utter bks in that I’m afraid not least of all the value judgment on the owners.

I suspect McLaren care much more about selling cars to gullible and wealthy customers than they do posters for bedroom walls.

Fixed that for you sir, HTH......

Maybe you could tell the class why they chose Bruno Senna to "develop" the car instead of any of the somewhat legendary drivers they actually employed since 1994, I just can't put my finger on it?

I think the car is dreadful looking regardless of form over function that gets trotted out by the fanboys, the rear wing looks like someone left the pin the tail on the donkey sheet out after the McLaren xmas party and one of the designers included it.....
I thought McLaren were all about brand, then someone throws up this car.
Let's hope it is quicker than a road legal whatever around silverstone, because that's really relevant when you want to use it on anywhere other than a track, mind you maybe that's the plan, then people won't stare at the obscure kit car as you power down Wilmslow high street/ Kensington/ Sandbanks









Fanboys incoming..............................

Yawn.

Don’t buy one then or bother reading about it if it bothers you so much.

HTH.

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 5th August 11:48

[Maldini35]

andyj007 said:

you wouldnt see ferrari throwing something half baked like this out of their design office they have more class that that..
.

Really???

I don’t hate Ferrari (I’m an owner) but to hold up modern day Ferrari as the exemplar of beautiful design seems baffling to me (it it of course subjective).
Of the current Ferrari range, only the 488 is attractive and even the 488 is less attractive than the 458 came before (again all IMO).

- The LaFerrari has a huge front overhang and bulky rear and reminds me of the Pink Panther car.



The 812 has a huge, high and bulky rear end and genric styling that looks more Japanese than Italian thoroughbred:



The GT4 Lusso is practical but with the elongated wheelbase, hard to describe as pretty:



And the Portofino, whilst inoffensive, it looks utterly generic, a bit hefty and certainly no bedroom poster candidate:




Not to say that these aren’t all good cars which are fun to drive and bring much pleasure to their owners but judged purely on aesthetics none would make selection as a poster for me.

I don’t want to be over defensive of the Senna but I personally love the styling. There are plenty of generic super cars out there and I like the fact it is so different and striking. I also love the Ferrari 250LM (not generally regarded as a beauty) maybe because it to was built for a purpose rather than any particular aesthetic.

Edited by Maldini35 on Sunday 5th August 12:47

[coldel]

Me and some mates were on a road trip down to Italy last week and this passed us going in the other direction on a French motorway. We were all gawping, it looked stunning in the flesh.

[sidesauce]

andyj007 said:

yes but once youve driven it a few times, got used to the speed, the novelty has worn off your left with the hideous maintenance and running cost and one god damn deformed ugly car.. hardly something to pull the sheets off and get all giddy.. therefore these cars are only going to be owned by those who see bragging rights as the number 1 priority.. lucky for us, there a little too expensive for the vast majority of the you tube buy a car, brag about it and flog it off, after about 1.5 weeks of ownership brigade..

the reason it annoys so much i guess, is that its so frustrating, they have the know how , skill and experience to make this same car, with the same performance but look absolutely beautiful..
i dont get this form function b**loks after watching the mclaren documentary, they seem to be stuck way up there own backsides.. a bit rudderless...
i would hazard a guess that the leading designer, senior management probably convinced themselves its looks absolutely beautiful,
only after the first public disclosure where 80% of the public were omg its so ugly did the form over function quotes come out..
its on par with the epic fail by Gerry McGovern, stuck in his own little world he thought the offset range rover numberplate was beautiful too.
and then tried to blame it on the type of numberplate.........what a berk..
as a previous poster said, you wouldnt see ferrari throwing something half baked like this out of their design office they have more class that that..
im not saying its a wonderful piece of technology, its just a very poor execution of the packaging that lets its down..
the potential was there for it to be poster car..
what a shame..

Personally, I'm glad it annoys you. Unlike you, I really, really like the look of this car and it is far better to be polarising than to be boring (something McLaren have definitely been accused of in the past).

[Maldini35]

andyj007 said:

yes but once youve driven it a few times, got used to the speed, the novelty has worn off your left with the hideous maintenance and running cost and one god damn deformed ugly car.. hardly something to pull the sheets off and get all giddy.. therefore these cars are only going to be owned by those who see bragging rights as the number 1 priority.. lucky for us, there a little too expensive for the vast majority of the you tube buy a car, brag about it and flog it off, after about 1.5 weeks of ownership brigade..

the reason it annoys so much i guess, is that its so frustrating, they have the know how , skill and experience to make this same car, with the same performance but look absolutely beautiful..
i dont get this form function b**loks after watching the mclaren documentary, they seem to be stuck way up there own backsides.. a bit rudderless...
i would hazard a guess that the leading designer, senior management probably convinced themselves its looks absolutely beautiful,
only after the first public disclosure where 80% of the public were omg its so ugly did the form over function quotes come out..
its on par with the epic fail by Gerry McGovern, stuck in his own little world he thought the offset range rover numberplate was beautiful too.
and then tried to blame it on the type of numberplate.........what a berk..
as a previous poster said, you wouldnt see ferrari throwing something half baked like this out of their design office they have more class that that..
im not saying its a wonderful piece of technology, its just a very poor execution of the packaging that lets its down..
the potential was there for it to be poster car..
what a shame..

A subjective opinion.
Hardly a surprising one given the conservative designs coming out of your architecture business. It appears that you see beauty exclusively in the familiar and traditional.
Not one of life’s pioneers it seems.
Nothing wrong with that of course but it perhaps makes your opinions on radical car design a little predictable.

[anonymous-user]

isaldiri said:

fblm said:

I heard it was lapping Silverstone around 2:09 this week in Chris Harris's hands; does anyone know what a road legal Radical RXC GT will do it in?

Very likely faster than the McSenna. I'd far rather drive a Senna to Paul Ricard from the UK than a RXC though!

Undoubtedly true but then it is 5 times the price. Can't wait to see some proper times.

[Swampy1982]

Maldini35 said:

A subjective opinion.
Hardly a surprising one given the conservative designs coming out of your architecture business. It appears that you see beauty exclusively in the familiar and traditional.
Not one of life’s pioneers it seems.
Nothing wrong with that of course but it perhaps makes your opinions on radical car design a little predictable.

//Mikedrop

[Rich_W]

Maldini35 said:

A subjective opinion.
Hardly a surprising one given the conservative designs coming out of your architecture business. It appears that you see beauty exclusively in the familiar and traditional.
Not one of life’s pioneers it seems.
Nothing wrong with that of course but it perhaps makes your opinions on radical car design a little predictable.

Ahh the Ad hom attack. So Classy!

TBH Contemporary or classical designs tends to age better. The 12C was a fairly conservative design, but after the weirdness McLaren have chucked out recently, looks reasonable.


I'm with Andy on this car (and I have similar thoughts about the 720S and the botched facelift that is the 650s) Both LT's, silly name aside, look great though.

I think part of the problem for McLaren Cars is where they came from.







All mega cars, all cars that Id be happy to have residing in the garage. Crucially, all are far more cohesive design than the new Woking products.

I also agree with the point made earlier that McLaren seem to have believed their own hype. And have gotten overly defensive about their design choices.
The no LSD thing still looks odd, especially when I cant think of another major player that doesn't put one in (you get one in a C63s and that's "just" a saloon car) yet they aren't going to change their minds.
The Form over Function for the Senna is a reaction to people saying it's hideous.
The eye sockets on the 720s were "for cooling" when again clearly there are more elegant ways to keep cooling air going places. P1 doesn't have them and that has more HP.

And of course rising above all that for some owners is the "We will only make 375 P1s, never make a 675LT Spyder" issues


It reminds me of Ron Dennis refusing to accept that as the F1 team fell backwards on the grid that he needed to lower the price for sponsors. Almost a "we're so amazing, why should we care what others think"

It's curious.


TopGear drove a Senna from Estoril to Monaco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEfS-JanNJQ

[Maldini35]

Rich_W said:

I also agree with the point made earlier that McLaren seem to have believed their own hype. And have gotten overly defensive about their design choices.
The no LSD thing still looks odd, especially when I cant think of another major player that doesn't put one in (you get one in a C63s and that's "just" a saloon car) yet they aren't going to change their minds.
The Form over Function for the Senna is a reaction to people saying it's hideous.
The eye sockets on the 720s were "for cooling" when again clearly there are more elegant ways to keep cooling air going places. P1 doesn't have them and that has more HP.

It reminds me of Ron Dennis refusing to accept that as the F1 team fell backwards on the grid that he needed to lower the price for sponsors. Almost a "we're so amazing, why should we care what others think"

It's curious

What is curious is why you have such an axe to grind with regards McLaren?

I genuinely don’t know if there is any truth in the comment made previously about you being rejected at interview for a position at McLaren but it would certainly make sense given you pop up on every McLaren thread to put the boot in.

Obviously you have no obligation to confirm or deny but it might bring some clarity / help restore some credibility.

[noble12345]

https://youtu.be/9nRGt1VYTic?t=12m31s

The Senna is a really special Hypercar and although its built for corners and is not trying to be beautiful, its still wayyy better looking than a Lafably designed Fer or lardy ass 918.

Lafer looks like a wimp thats been kicked in the nose and bled all over its front splitter, the side intake looks like a strip of seaweed thrown on the car, the rear donkey dk on the back has been sliced into for a number plate and omg why is its rear spoiler like a window licker on a sweet shop window? And dont even get me started on the messily hand painted matt grey crap all over those cars.

McLaren is above Ferrari and Porsche and this Senna is in Pagani & Koenigsegg league for sure.

Whether you like the Senna or hate it, its good that now McLaren are here theres now more quality and choice. Competition breeds excellence

[isaldiri]

Maldini35 said:

A subjective opinion.
Hardly a surprising one given the conservative designs coming out of your architecture business. It appears that you see beauty exclusively in the familiar and traditional.
Not one of life’s pioneers it seems.
Nothing wrong with that of course but it perhaps makes your opinions on radical car design a little predictable.

Maldini35 said:

I genuinely don’t know if there is any truth in the comment made previously about you being rejected at interview for a position at McLaren but it would certainly make sense given you pop up on every McLaren thread to put the boot in.

While it's your prerogative to leap up to defend Mclaren on just about any topic, having to resort to the above is pretty pathetic. Always easier to have a go at the person than have to debate some of the points brought up I suppose.