RE: McLaren GT | Driven
Discussion
cluckcluck said:
Whilst imo it looks lovely, it seems a lazy attempt. Putting your luggage over the engine and wedged between the glass, using some cheap ass straps is not cool.
To be fair to McLaren, their front boot is also pretty big, you’d certainly fit a couple of trolley bags in there (and I’m sure MSO will sell you very expensive ones that take up every inch of the space!). They also claim you can fit a set of golf clubs or skis in the back too, which you can’t in a lot of rivals with the front mid engine layout. I’ve not seen the GT in the flesh, but the 570S ‘frunk’ is about the same size as a 911’s - plenty of room for a few days away, even with my wife’s habit of packing for a fortnight for a weekend
I actually like the looks of this, the toned down looks and the slightly stretched rear actually make this the best looking McLaren in my eyes, better than the incohesive mess of their usual offerings IMO.
However if I had the means to buy a GT car at this level, I think it would be very difficult to look past Aston Martin or Ferrari who just do Super GT's a lot better.
However if I had the means to buy a GT car at this level, I think it would be very difficult to look past Aston Martin or Ferrari who just do Super GT's a lot better.
fernando the frog said:
it makes me laugh that this website only has jobs available to people with degrees (any'll do), yet the writing standard is so abysmal - also why do half of the sentences start off with "and"?!
Blame Blair he was the one allowing every person and their dog to get a degree, even thickos, hence the sub intelligent gene pool 'graduating' from 'Universities' 
who unexpectedly can neither write nor spell correctly. j3gme said:
Please say the doors open normally? Cant tell from pictures, …..that's what puts me of McLarens, the doors!
Cross it off your list
I actually like their doors gives a sense of theatre that a lot of other makers don't have.
Quite like the exterior design apart from the side vents, seems compromised though not really a pure GT not really a pure sports car.
Finally... McLaren have ditched their hideous 90s Hyundai swoopy styling nonsense. Ridiculous doors aside.
Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
I don't know why so many are upset at this thing. Sure, it's a warmed over version of their existing offerings but so what? It looks quite lovely in an understated way and I'm sure it'll move a few more chassis numbers and keep the coffers from running dry. What's so wrong with that?
Sandpit Steve said:
Would be interested in a group test against rivals from Aston and Bentley, whereas the reviewer compared it more to a 600LT - which is undoubtedly a fantastic car, but a very different beast and definitely not something I’m going to want to use to take the wife for a long weekend in Nice or Monaco.
This really. The real comparison is a group test against some of the rival GTs, not a comparison with mid-engined super cars.Gandahar said:
I have to confess on finding that first paragraph very hard to read and wondered if Nic Prosser had written it.
Perhaps it was a clever way of showing an analogy to the GT by simply smearing words across the page in a parody? Bring back 720S Dan.
Yes that first para was really hard going!Perhaps it was a clever way of showing an analogy to the GT by simply smearing words across the page in a parody? Bring back 720S Dan.
chelme said:
McLarens unsuccessful attempt at fitting an old square peg in a round hole...
They need new designers (body, aesthetics) and engineers (New engine/drivetrains)
Do they? If they are still selling cars, why invest tens of millions in new stuff?They need new designers (body, aesthetics) and engineers (New engine/drivetrains)
AER said:
I don't know why so many are upset at this thing. Sure, it's a warmed over version of their existing offerings but so what? It looks quite lovely in an understated way and I'm sure it'll move a few more chassis numbers and keep the coffers from running dry. What's so wrong with that?
Because, according to this forum, car makers are actually charity organisations and should make cars that suit the bizarre needs of PH users, rather than actually making profit 
Kubevoid said:
Finally... McLaren have ditched their hideous 90s Hyundai swoopy styling nonsense. Ridiculous doors aside.
Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
Yes, I'm sure the steering is so incredibly sloppy Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
I think it looks fantastic in blue, but still not sure why the nice folks at McLaren can't manage to get any character into their engines, with the exception of the 600LT (never driven the other LT products). Personally, compromises have never paid off for me when it comes to cars, even though my 12C was wonderful on longer journeys.
And putting luggage on the deck is rather dangerous, imho.
And putting luggage on the deck is rather dangerous, imho.
E65Ross said:
Kubevoid said:
Finally... McLaren have ditched their hideous 90s Hyundai swoopy styling nonsense. Ridiculous doors aside.
Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
Yes, I'm sure the steering is so incredibly sloppy Sounds ideal if you want sloppy steering on a long trip, while not actually being able to pack for a long trip.
Shame this seems so confused. Maybe the name stands for Grand Tranny.
"The McLaren GT turns and rides as a mid-engined supercar does. This, not the prodigious speed, is what makes it different from any of the above.
It’s agile, turns flat through corners, doesn’t incline to understeer, gets its power down zealously. True, the softer front springs mean there’s a fraction more delay in the turn-in than say a 570S. A fraction.
But once in a bend you notice the gorgeous steering – surely as good as any powered system anywhere today. Your turning angle builds progressively and the wheel rim’s ever-animated, transparent about every bump and dip and change in grip. The whole car holds itself in perfect balance, letting all four tyres share the work, pivoting around your hips."
Autocar also praised the way it drives:
"And the GT still drives like a McLaren. Yes, the power arrives earlier, the torque curve is flatter and there isn't the insane top end of the 720S, but this is still a sharpened stiletto of a motor, standing in stark contrast to the broadswords wielded elsewhere.
Nor do you need the traditional ‘slow in, fast out’ approach to corners you’d usually employ in a conventional grand tourer of far greater heft and with its engine ahead of the driver. You can still carry enormous speed in the GT, and in the highly unlikely event you find yourself needing to replot a course mid-corner, you can rotate the car minutely with your right foot alone, or with the exquisite and still-hydraulic steering, in a way that would simply not be possible in an weightier, less agile Aston or Bentley.
Indeed, if you go looking for those commodities you’d seek in a supercar and that are the first to be sacrificed by conventional grand tourers (grip, poise, feel, traction and so on), you’ll find the full complement alive and well inside the elegantly extended shape of the GT. Were it to come across any one of its ostensible rivals on a wide and empty road, the McLaren would drive out of sight with embarrassing rapidity. "
Obviously subjectivity comes into play but these seem wildly different opinions from Dan's understeery blancmange.
Bizarre
Edited by Maldini35 on Tuesday 17th September 12:44
Maldini35 said:
A very different driving experience from Top Gear:
"The McLaren GT turns and rides as a mid-engined supercar does. This, not the prodigious speed, is what makes it different from any of the above.
It’s agile, turns flat through corners, doesn’t incline to understeer, gets its power down zealously. True, the softer front springs mean there’s a fraction more delay in the turn-in than say a 570S. A fraction.
But once in a bend you notice the gorgeous steering – surely as good as any powered system anywhere today. Your turning angle builds progressively and the wheel rim’s ever-animated, transparent about every bump and dip and change in grip. The whole car holds itself in perfect balance, letting all four tyres share the work, pivoting around your hips."
Obviously subjectivity comes into play but these seem wildly different opinions.
Bizarre
I understand many reasons why people don't like McLarens, the engines lack character (except for the LT), the built quality is Italian at best, and the depreciation is awful, even for supercar standards. But the steering is fantastic, second only to Lotus, and I'm not even sure about that."The McLaren GT turns and rides as a mid-engined supercar does. This, not the prodigious speed, is what makes it different from any of the above.
It’s agile, turns flat through corners, doesn’t incline to understeer, gets its power down zealously. True, the softer front springs mean there’s a fraction more delay in the turn-in than say a 570S. A fraction.
But once in a bend you notice the gorgeous steering – surely as good as any powered system anywhere today. Your turning angle builds progressively and the wheel rim’s ever-animated, transparent about every bump and dip and change in grip. The whole car holds itself in perfect balance, letting all four tyres share the work, pivoting around your hips."
Obviously subjectivity comes into play but these seem wildly different opinions.
Bizarre
I think this would be my lottery win fantasy daily driver.
OK so I will never be able to afford it, but what a lovely looking thing, especially in those colours. I'd love to own any McLaren, but this is probably the first one I wouldn't feel a bit of a muppet in popping to Waitrose. Or just generally driving from A - B, running an errand or something mundane.
This probably answers more of the questions and makes more of the statements someone wealthy wants to make than any other car. 2 + 2's are largely pointless to a play person (being gender safe and all that) and so long as my highly attractive partner who isn't interested in it feels special getting out of it thats all you need for your jaunt to the South of France.
OK so I will never be able to afford it, but what a lovely looking thing, especially in those colours. I'd love to own any McLaren, but this is probably the first one I wouldn't feel a bit of a muppet in popping to Waitrose. Or just generally driving from A - B, running an errand or something mundane.
This probably answers more of the questions and makes more of the statements someone wealthy wants to make than any other car. 2 + 2's are largely pointless to a play person (being gender safe and all that) and so long as my highly attractive partner who isn't interested in it feels special getting out of it thats all you need for your jaunt to the South of France.
I think that the only thing that really makes the front styling a little odd is the fact that they have clearly made an effort to raise the height of the splitter, which is understandable on a car whose main design brief is to be more usable everyday. Unfortunately it just makes it look like it has been set in it's raised suspension mode permenently which is a shame.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff