RE: McLaren GT | Driven

[av185]

br d said:

Different strokes.
I have owned both Ferrari and Lambo N/A cars and while they were great fun they didn't match the McLarens.

And the whole manual gearbox malarkey is a mystery to me, philistine that I am. Manual boxes are for driving around London in my vans, when I'm thrashing a supercar about I want both hands firmly on the wheel. I honestly want the experience to be in my guts, not in my head.

Each to their own but surely you have got this the wrong way round.

Auto boxes are best in traffic/congestion and 'manuel' boxes for driving the open road and ultimate interaction.

Thing is with paddle changes every gear is the same there's no skill required anyone can drive fast and the novelty wears off in a few miles. Whereas with 'manuel' there is far greater skill and driver involvement required to extract the best performance. The Henry Catchpole analogy of auto gearboxes as instant coffee and 'manuel' as fresh proper coffee is a perfect one imo.

I have both gearboxes on a selection of cars btw but find I am liking paddleshift less and less. It is boring. And anyone can drive one even those with no driving skills whatsoever.

But if I need to drive into Manchester I would take a paddleshift car. To sit in traffic.

If I am driving across country or for pleasure I would take one with a proper gearbox for greater interaction and driving pleasure.

Maybe this is where McLaren are going wrong.

I sold my 570S for this very reason. It was boring.

A n.a. proper sounding rev hungry engine with a 'manuel' gearbox would hugely broaden their appeal instead of the same old stuff. Perhaps McLaren should take a leaf out of Porsches book and their success by going against the norm.

Won't happen though.

Edited by av185 on Thursday 19th September 09:58

[E65Ross]

av185 said:

br d said:

Different strokes.
I have owned both Ferrari and Lambo N/A cars and while they were great fun they didn't match the McLarens.

And the whole manual gearbox malarkey is a mystery to me, philistine that I am. Manual boxes are for driving around London in my vans, when I'm thrashing a supercar about I want both hands firmly on the wheel. I honestly want the experience to be in my guts, not in my head.

Each to their own but surely you have got this the wrong way round.

Auto boxes are best in traffic/congestion and 'manuel' boxes for driving the open road and ultimate interaction.

Thing is with paddle changes every gear is the same there's no skill required anyone can drive fast and the novelty wears off in a few miles. Whereas with 'manuel' there is far greater skill and driver involvement required to extract the best performance. The Henry Catchpole analogy of auto gearboxes as instant coffee and 'manuel' as fresh proper coffee is a perfect one imo.

I have both gearboxes on a selection of cars btw but find I am liking paddleshift less and less. It is boring. And anyone can drive one even those with no driving skills whatsoever.

But if I need to drive into Manchester I would take a paddleshift car. To sit in traffic.

If I am driving across country or for pleasure I would take one with a proper gearbox for greater interaction and driving pleasure.

Maybe this is where McLaren are going wrong.

I sold my 570S for this very reason. It was boring.

A n.a. proper sounding rev hungry engine with a 'manuel' gearbox would hugely broaden their appeal instead of the same old stuff.

Won't happen though.

Genuine question - do you think the additional costs in development, tooling and manufacture to build another line of models which had a manual gearbox would be offset (and more) by offering said cars with a manual gearbox? Baring in mind this would ultimately slow the production of those with the dual clutch boxes (they only have limited space for production), I'm not so sure it would be a viable option for a relatively small company.

[355spiderguy]

It genuinely still amazes me how so many 'pistonheaders' have such a foaming at the mouth dislike for McLaren that they make constant posts about poor design, poor engines, poor sound, poor quality and outstanding depreciation etc etc.

You do realise that the constant similar posts make you look a little bit 'no right' don't you?

I'm not a McLaren fanboy, i just happen to own one that i use daily and contrary to popular belief, it gets me from A to B everytime, and may i add, very briskly.

Have had Ferraris and Porsches, and although both still seem a generation behind, i don't ever feel the need to impose my 'i know better than you views' on others whom own them.

The GT is a bit 'mehhh'; its not my cup of tea but certainly not anything to get your knickers in a twist about...but then its a McLaren and it seems as though its the law on Pistonheads to do so.

[355spiderguy]

av185 said:

A n.a. proper sounding rev hungry engine with a 'manuel' gearbox would hugely broaden their appeal instead of the same old stuff. Perhaps McLaren should take a leaf out of Porsches book and their success by going against the norm.

Won't happen though.

Edited by av185 on Thursday 19th September 09:58

It would be a huge step backwards; why spend any funds on old tech?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but in a very short period of time you shall find Porsche ( and others ) will no longer offer strictly N/A engines nor manuals as it will only be the old duffers that desire it and emission requirements will dictate it.

[E65Ross]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The person I quoted said it would broaden their appeal, and unless they mean "broaden their appeal to those who wouldn't buy one anyway" then they must surely mean "broaden their appeal to increase sales and profits", which I'm not sure if that'd be the case.

[br d]

av185 said:

Each to their own but surely you have got this the wrong way round.

Auto boxes are best in traffic/congestion and 'manuel' boxes for driving the open road and ultimate interaction.

Thing is with paddle changes every gear is the same there's no skill required anyone can drive fast and the novelty wears off in a few miles. Whereas with 'manuel' there is far greater skill and driver involvement required to extract the best performance. The Henry Catchpole analogy of auto gearboxes as instant coffee and 'manuel' as fresh proper coffee is a perfect one imo.

I have both gearboxes on a selection of cars btw but find I am liking paddleshift less and less. It is boring. And anyone can drive one even those with no driving skills whatsoever.

But if I need to drive into Manchester I would take a paddleshift car. To sit in traffic.

If I am driving across country or for pleasure I would take one with a proper gearbox for greater interaction and driving pleasure.

Maybe this is where McLaren are going wrong.

I sold my 570S for this very reason. It was boring.

A n.a. proper sounding rev hungry engine with a 'manuel' gearbox would hugely broaden their appeal instead of the same old stuff. Perhaps McLaren should take a leaf out of Porsches book and their success by going against the norm.

Won't happen though.

Edited by av185 on Thursday 19th September 09:58

We are too far apart here, I can't imagine finding a 570S boring. Certainly there may be aspects of the car you'd like to see done differently but you must have a heart rate in single figures if you can push a 570S toward its limits and be bored.

Although to be fair, I only kept my 911 Turbo for 4 months because once I'd got used to the point and squirt nature of it I found it very anodine, though certainly not boring when pushing on.

To me your gearbox argument is specious, I genuinely don't care about the "greater skill" involved in using one.
I have a finite and rapidly diminishing time to enjoy myself and learning to be skilful with a gearbox isn't something I want to waste any of it on. I want to buy a ridiculously fast car and drive it as ridiculously fast as I can while I can still get away with it.

The paddle shift fits that bill.

I don't track, or stress about lines and apexes, in fact I'm not even a good driver. Give me all the easymode buttons available and I'm happy.

We don't have enough common ground here.

[355spiderguy]

br d said:

We are too far apart here, I can't imagine finding a 570S boring. Certainly there may be aspects of the car you'd like to see done differently but you must have a heart rate in single figures if you can push a 570S toward its limits and be bored.

Although to be fair, I only kept my 911 Turbo for 4 months because once I'd got used to the point and squirt nature of it I found it very anodine, though certainly not boring when pushing on.

To me your gearbox argument is specious, I genuinely don't care about the "greater skill" involved in using one.
I have a finite and rapidly diminishing time to enjoy myself and learning to be skilful with a gearbox isn't something I want to waste any of it on. I want to buy a ridiculously fast car and drive it as ridiculously fast as I can while I can still get away with it.

The paddle shift fits that bill.

I don't track, or stress about lines and apexes, in fact I'm not even a good driver. Give me all the easymode buttons available and I'm happy.

We don't have enough common ground here.

A refreshingly real world post....not a single thing i would disagree with and couldn't of put it better myself.

[f1ten]

Utter nonsense Ferrari could easily turn out a 1200hp turbo changers car but they don’t want to jump 5 -7 years of product management plus a 720hp pista is lively enough for the road.

Brute power from a turbo is top trumps for the sake of top trumps. Fact is I’ve driven a few macs and was disappointed with the engine. It’s mighty but in many ways dull. Like many have said, how many iterations of the same chassis tub and engine can they do.... 2011 mp12 was a long time ago now.

355spiderguy said:

Kermit74 said:

E65Ross said:

Kermit74 said:

Another 'new' McLaren using the same tub and drivetrain that every other McLaren uses?

I guess the P1 engine was different though?

Please correct me if i'm wrong.

You're wrong. HTH.

Just as I thought - the P1 was also using the same tub and engine....

Ferrari etc still can't get to the level of carbon tubs for their cars and an engine that all these years later still outperforms almost everything....i feel your frustration.

Also, maybe McLaren should go and poach some of the top Porsche designers so they can come up with lots of different new McLaren body styles so their range doesn't look so similar for years on end....

[anonymous-user]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

We can safely conclude you're completely out of your depth here.

While you're splashing about trying not to drown it's about time you named some of those nimbler and less powerful cars which you find more fun to drive than the McLarens.

The stage is yours - let's hear your performance.

[E65Ross]

f1ten said:

Like many have said, how many iterations of the same chassis tub and engine can they do.... 2011 mp12 was a long time ago now.

It's called product development, and the carbon tub has changed quite significantly since the original, have a read of monocell 1, 2 and 3. The engine is very different as well and shares very few components from the 12C. Did people moan with Porsche and how many iterations of the Mezger engine they had over the years?

[Guvernator]

The problem is McLaren is still a very small manufacturer being compared to the likes of Porsche who make everything from 2 seater roadsters all the way up to 2 tonne SUV's and everything in between. Even comparing them to Ferrari who make 2 seater V8 sportscars all the way up to 4 seater v12 GT's, the line-up seems a bit lacking.

Yes McLaren aren't big enough to offer that kind of variety but even within their own little niche of 2 seater mid engine sportscars, their various offerings just seem a bit too similar to a lot of people.

Add in the fact that while the engine is obviously very good at putting out the numbers, subjectively it's been criticised by quite a few for lacking aural drama and character and I can understand why some people aren't too enamoured with them.

I certainly respect the engineering expertise and what they have achieved with the somewhat limited time and resources they have but in terms of desirability, I just don't want one of their cars over the equivalent products from Ferrari, Lamborghini or Porsche.

2 seat coupe or Roadster, I'd take the F8 or Hurrican with it's glorious v10, track car I'd take a Porsche GT3, Hybrid hypercar I'd take a 918 or LaFerrari over a P1,. At every price point, one of their competitors has a product that I just desire more.

[stvbez]

This article sums up exactly what I thought when I first read of this car. Utterly pointless ... its not an outright sportscar and its no Conti GT... its not even comparable to a F California...

McC what the hell were you thinking?

[The Vambo]

stvbez said:

This article sums up exactly what I thought when I first read of this car. Utterly pointless ... its not an outright sportscar and its no Conti GT... its not even comparable to a F California...

McC what the hell were you thinking?

stvbez is poor so we won't ask his opinion?

[Hitch]

I saw a few of these around Surrey over the summer. It's a very clunky design to behold compared to the dozens of other McLarens you see around there. Doesn't look particularly cohesive, as if they've tried to make it work but not quite got there.

The 570GT would do me!

[Matty3]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

9 now - just an observation others can draw their own a conclusions

[TypeRTim]

What this thread has so eloquently demonstrated, is that opinions are like aholes, everyone has one but it shouldn't always be on display because to some people it is unpleasant to see.

For me, there is not a single Porsche I desire to own. To me, they are all ugly and boring. I'm sure they are wonderful to drive, but I just don't want one on my drive. Likewise Ferrari, I don't like their interiors (where you send most of your time interacting with the car) or the image that comes with owning a Ferrari, too many footballers own them.

Yes, Mclaren have used the same basic architecture of a single-piece CFRP tub, with a twin turbo V8 bolted directly to it at the back for years now. But that design has evolved as E65Ross pointed out:

E65Ross said:

the carbon tub has changed quite significantly since the original, have a read of monocell 1, 2 and 3.

And maybe they do that because:
a.) CFRP is the strongest material per gram
b.) making it in to a single piece makes it stronger still
c.) putting the engine behind the passenger cell is the best place for it in terms of inertial momentum and weight distribution
d.) turbocharging is the most efficient way to increase power density of an internal combustion engine
e.) keeping the engine relatively small is good for packaging and weight
f.) mid-engined layout is the best aerodynamically as it allows a smaller frontal cross section
g.) making the engine a stressed member increases chassis rigidity and brings packaging benefits
h.) Mclaren don't actually make their own engine in house, it is subcontracted to Ricardo
i.) Mclaren don't have the time, expertise or money to design a completely new engine from scratch or manufacture it in house (the M838T is based on a Nissan Racing Design that can be found in R390 amongst others)
j.) Iterative evolution saves development costs allowing for greater profit margins
k.) Keeping the same basic components allows for smaller and more efficient assembly lines
l.) Mclaren have only been making serial production road cars since 2011
m.) they hated the compromises that had to be made with the SLR

I could go on, but yeah, throw all of those out the window and build a metal chassis, front engined, naturally aspirated v12 car with a manual gearbox that looks nothing like anything the brand has ever produced because a few people think their cars are too similar. Oh, and make it cheaper than the established rivals because they would never buy the first attempt by a British manufacturer who have never produced anything like this before.

[Beefy59]

I like this one, too: somehow it's more distinctive than most of the McLaren range. But a GT?? If you can't immediately see where your luggage and golf clubs go, how can it be a GT? For the same reason, the new mid-engined Corvette is a non-starter as a "sensible" (super) car...

[TypeRTim]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The problem being, subjectives are exactly that...subjective. They are not concrete between person to person.They can't be used to sell one car against another in advertising media. It would immediately be ripped to shreds! Hence they focus on what they can quantify; stats and figures.

My view on what makes a car engaging, characterful and involving could very well be (and probably in all likelihood is) very different.

Look at where the Mclaren brand has come from: Formula 1. Where paddle shifts have been in use for well over 15 years. Mclaren have form here and are trading on, in part, their pedigree and success in this arena. How could you possibly sell a Mclaren against, say, a Ferrari if it was not as fast, not as technologically advanced and not as powerful but made YOU feel slightly better inside.

Mclaren are known to be a data-driven brand. Ferrari and lamborghini trade on passion and Italian flair, it's what they are good at and have done for decades. Mclaren, well, Mclaren say we can do anything you can but objectively better. Maybe that doesn't translate as well.

on your point on compulsory paddle shifts...

When was the last time something left Maranello with 3 pedals? 30 599s...in total... were built with a manual gearbox. The last mid-engined Fezza? the 430, but even then only around 10% were made with the manual. Something with a N/A V10 that you so love? The Gallardo, which stopped production in 2013.

So, yeah, Mclaren are really missing a trick not having a manual option.

Edited by TypeRTim on Friday 20th September 11:30

Edited by TypeRTim on Friday 20th September 11:31

[Julian Thompson]

Is someone clever enough to add a poll to ask how many of us would buy one of these vs not?

[anonymous-user]

TypeRTim said:

So, yeah, Mclaren are really missing a trick not having a manual option.

It's the old problem with cmoose - anything he doesn't own can't be any good.

He keeps telling us McLarens don't live up to his driving god standards yet, strangely, he's been completely unable to say what he would prefer to drive instead.