RE: Gordon Murray: 'Last flag-waver of a great V12'
Discussion
would like to see him do something like this:
the 200hp three-cylinder 845kg model would have made money at about thirty grand. Out Lotus, Lotus.
the article mentions iStream.
An idea that is more innovative than anything on the T50 and perhaps too far ahead of its time. The TVR will might show what the benefits of it are, if it ever gets build.
In the meantime, the T50 is remarkable, if for no other reason that it is Cosworth and not Murray that have brought three ludicrous V12's to the world in such a short time, two for GMA and one for Aston.
the 200hp three-cylinder 845kg model would have made money at about thirty grand. Out Lotus, Lotus.
the article mentions iStream.
An idea that is more innovative than anything on the T50 and perhaps too far ahead of its time. The TVR will might show what the benefits of it are, if it ever gets build.
In the meantime, the T50 is remarkable, if for no other reason that it is Cosworth and not Murray that have brought three ludicrous V12's to the world in such a short time, two for GMA and one for Aston.
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
FA57REN said:
"Supercar innovation is harder than ever."
Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
Have you designed and built a cheapo family car yourself?Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
I have also been around the process for a junior 'supercar' and it was easier. The difference in mind set for things like durability and servicing etc was huge - lots of bought in parts (from premium branded suppliers) and a much lower level of need for the thing to have a 12,000 mile service interval and a cam belt change only every 50k with all accessible at the front of the engine. etc. Added to that a much higher price point giving you flex in parts costs - and then limited production so you don't have to fit a dashboard in 90 seconds.
The funny one here is Porsche - it's why I always hold them in much higher esteem than Ferrari - their cars require nothing special from the owner, you drive it and maintain it etc. in a normal way yet have a similar experience to a supercar. Yes they have had issues with cylinders etc but these are issues not the core ideology. Ferrari expect their cars to be treated like a princess, Porsche more like a family truckster. Impressive.
I guess it's why we get so many supercar coming stories - it's still very hard - but not nearly as hard.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The Brabham fan car was never banned, it was withdrawn by Ecclestone in order to keep the constructors association together.
You'd expect better from a staff writer, wouldn't you? I think the team were able to prove scientifically that the "primary" function of the fan was cooling, so legal.robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
FA57REN said:
"Supercar innovation is harder than ever."
Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
Have you designed and built a cheapo family car yourself?Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
BurtonLazars said:
hornbaek said:
Sad that all his talent is spent on something that is past its sell by date the day it roles out of the factory door. The F1 was ahead of its time and still today is pushing the envelope of what is possible with a naturally aspirated engine combining all the aero, lightness and drive ability into one design that is defying the passage of time.
Can you confirm you’re saying (?) that “the T50 is past its sell by date”, but the F1 is “still today pushing the envelope of what’s possible”? And that you think the F1 has better “aero, lightness and drive ability” than the T50.hornbaek said:
Sadly with this new one he is at the dinosaur end of the V12 engine. Imagine if he had built something with the vision of the F1 that he had at the time.
Are you suggesting the T50 should have been an EV?SidewaysSi said:
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
FA57REN said:
"Supercar innovation is harder than ever."
Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
Have you designed and built a cheapo family car yourself?Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
That's not to take away from the fact that this is the most exciting project probably since the F1, I sincerely hope GM is around to see the first customer cars delivered.
Gonzo63 said:
Without doubt a very talented designer/engineer, but can not help but liken him to some Victorian industrialist or land owner who is now using other peoples money to build his personal folly.
I am not knocking it, I wish V12's were compulsory, but .........
Psstt, mate, your bitter attitude to wealth is hanging out.I am not knocking it, I wish V12's were compulsory, but .........
Yeah I think Gian pallo Dallara might question the point that only Gordon and Mauro Forghieri know how to build a lightweight sports car from the ground up?
Good on him for realising there is a market for a McLaren F1 mk2 and I am glad they are building the v12T50.
No one questions his talent with building a no holds barred sports car with a bottomless budget. However he does struggle with the stuff that he uses himself, the A110, Smart coupe, Elan and Mk1 escort. The basic simple car, this will be what makes him obtainable, otherwise it is a bit like Horatio Pagani who makes artwork.
Good on him for realising there is a market for a McLaren F1 mk2 and I am glad they are building the v12T50.
No one questions his talent with building a no holds barred sports car with a bottomless budget. However he does struggle with the stuff that he uses himself, the A110, Smart coupe, Elan and Mk1 escort. The basic simple car, this will be what makes him obtainable, otherwise it is a bit like Horatio Pagani who makes artwork.
sisu said:
Yeah I think Gian pallo Dallara might question the point that only Gordon and Mauro Forghieri know how to build a lightweight sports car from the ground up?
Good on him for realising there is a market for a McLaren F1 mk2 and I am glad they are building the v12T50.
No one questions his talent with building a no holds barred sports car with a bottomless budget. However he does struggle with the stuff that he uses himself, the A110, Smart coupe, Elan and Mk1 escort. The basic simple car, this will be what makes him obtainable, otherwise it is a bit like Horatio Pagani who makes artwork.
To make something like a A110 you need a factory, lots of suppliers and huge budget for investing. It´s not reasonable to think that just because someone makes the "best-of-the-best" sports car in a limited run, he could instead have created a sportscar for the people. Its impossible without a huge OEM behind you. Good on him for realising there is a market for a McLaren F1 mk2 and I am glad they are building the v12T50.
No one questions his talent with building a no holds barred sports car with a bottomless budget. However he does struggle with the stuff that he uses himself, the A110, Smart coupe, Elan and Mk1 escort. The basic simple car, this will be what makes him obtainable, otherwise it is a bit like Horatio Pagani who makes artwork.
In the case of T50 its either it or nothing. What makes me hyped about it just like most is that he has based its creation on totally different ideals than any other brand. And that is performance takes the back seat. For this, I call it a sportscar, not a hypercar. Correct me if I am wrong but the Dallara is more of a trackday car than a roadcar, with a low rpm Ford Ecoboost engine. It cannot even be mentioned in the same sentance as the T50.
Edited by Moskvich on Saturday 27th February 11:42
Edited by Moskvich on Saturday 27th February 11:48
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
FA57REN said:
"Supercar innovation is harder than ever."
Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
Have you designed and built a cheapo family car yourself?Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
That's not to take away from the fact that this is the most exciting project probably since the F1, I sincerely hope GM is around to see the first customer cars delivered.
robsco said:
GM is a master of self promotion; full of his own importance (and rightfully so!), a few poetically judged statements and namedropping the F1 and he has keyboard warriors globally squeezing their tinkles. This car is an astonishing achievement, but it is a trinket. The majority will be kept stored, never to see the light of day. Removing the emotion, it is nowhere near as great an achievement as a manufacturer that can build a high quality family car that can sustain years and years of abuse, over hundreds of thousands of miles in radically changing conditions, whilst doing so profitably and on a huge scale.
That's not to take away from the fact that this is the most exciting project probably since the F1, I sincerely hope GM is around to see the first customer cars delivered.
Good post, agree with all that. I've struggled to read anything GM comes out with for a little while now to be honest. Since an Article in (I think Evo) back in the mid 2000s where he said (I'm paraphrasing) "Horacio Pagani is incredible, he reminds me of me" it's all been much of the same. That's not to take away from the fact that this is the most exciting project probably since the F1, I sincerely hope GM is around to see the first customer cars delivered.
Very interesting that he plans on using the same V12 and the same gearbox in the next model. What is the next model gonna be? Another mid engined supercar, but now 200kg heavier, with a slightly detuned engine and for "only" 1M? I don't really know how I feel about that. For one, I liked the idea that the engine and the gearbox were exclusive to the T.50. Using them in other, lesser models makes them, and the T.50, a bit less special. For two, while it was very apparent that with the production run limited to the same 100 cars the next model would also be extremely expensive and nothing like the T.43 they wanted to make earlier, I was at least hoping it's gonna be a different flavor to the T.50 altogether.
While getting another T.50, just a bit heavier, less powerful and a bit cheaper, powered by the same amazing V12, is still very appealing, in the end it's the same car, but worse. A lot of what makes the T.50 exciting is that it's the ultimate expression of what Murray thinks is the best driver's car. If they were to make another, quite different car, you could be excited for that because it's something new, an expression of something new. Like the best possible GT car or something. If they make another mid engined supercar, then it's not the ultimate expression of anything, it's just a T.50 on a budget - but still a car that only multi-millionaires can buy, that you will never drive, never sit in, never see even. Which is fine if it's a wild thing like the T.50, but less fine if it's budget/price forced model.
Well, no point getting too negative before we know more. Maybe the next model is front engined with a big boot at the back, who knows! And you can't really be too down about getting yet another NA V12, manual gearbox car, lightweight car, no matter what it is, can you?
While getting another T.50, just a bit heavier, less powerful and a bit cheaper, powered by the same amazing V12, is still very appealing, in the end it's the same car, but worse. A lot of what makes the T.50 exciting is that it's the ultimate expression of what Murray thinks is the best driver's car. If they were to make another, quite different car, you could be excited for that because it's something new, an expression of something new. Like the best possible GT car or something. If they make another mid engined supercar, then it's not the ultimate expression of anything, it's just a T.50 on a budget - but still a car that only multi-millionaires can buy, that you will never drive, never sit in, never see even. Which is fine if it's a wild thing like the T.50, but less fine if it's budget/price forced model.
Well, no point getting too negative before we know more. Maybe the next model is front engined with a big boot at the back, who knows! And you can't really be too down about getting yet another NA V12, manual gearbox car, lightweight car, no matter what it is, can you?
Isebac said:
Very interesting that he plans on using the same V12 and the same gearbox in the next model. What is the next model gonna be? Another mid engined supercar, but now 200kg heavier, with a slightly detuned engine and for "only" 1M? I don't really know how I feel about that. For one, I liked the idea that the engine and the gearbox were exclusive to the T.50. Using them in other, lesser models makes them, and the T.50, a bit less special. For two, while it was very apparent that with the production run limited to the same 100 cars the next model would also be extremely expensive and nothing like the T.43 they wanted to make earlier, I was at least hoping it's gonna be a different flavor to the T.50 altogether.
While getting another T.50, just a bit heavier, less powerful and a bit cheaper, powered by the same amazing V12, is still very appealing, in the end it's the same car, but worse. A lot of what makes the T.50 exciting is that it's the ultimate expression of what Murray thinks is the best driver's car. If they were to make another, quite different car, you could be excited for that because it's something new, an expression of something new. Like the best possible GT car or something. If they make another mid engined supercar, then it's not the ultimate expression of anything, it's just a T.50 on a budget - but still a car that only multi-millionaires can buy, that you will never drive, never sit in, never see even. Which is fine if it's a wild thing like the T.50, but less fine if it's budget/price forced model.
Well, no point getting too negative before we know more. Maybe the next model is front engined with a big boot at the back, who knows! And you can't really be too down about getting yet another NA V12, manual gearbox car, lightweight car, no matter what it is, can you?
TBF that engine sounds (on paper) so utterly devine it'd be a crying shame for it not to be exploited and enjoyed more. Especially as said a good number of these will end up in humidity controlled garages as investements... Although I wonder (and hope) more of these go to people who will use them as intended than investors where there the high sticker price might seem more risky than a few Italian etc lumps?While getting another T.50, just a bit heavier, less powerful and a bit cheaper, powered by the same amazing V12, is still very appealing, in the end it's the same car, but worse. A lot of what makes the T.50 exciting is that it's the ultimate expression of what Murray thinks is the best driver's car. If they were to make another, quite different car, you could be excited for that because it's something new, an expression of something new. Like the best possible GT car or something. If they make another mid engined supercar, then it's not the ultimate expression of anything, it's just a T.50 on a budget - but still a car that only multi-millionaires can buy, that you will never drive, never sit in, never see even. Which is fine if it's a wild thing like the T.50, but less fine if it's budget/price forced model.
Well, no point getting too negative before we know more. Maybe the next model is front engined with a big boot at the back, who knows! And you can't really be too down about getting yet another NA V12, manual gearbox car, lightweight car, no matter what it is, can you?
hucumber said:
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
robsco said:
SidewaysSi said:
FA57REN said:
"Supercar innovation is harder than ever."
Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
Have you designed and built a cheapo family car yourself?Cobblers.
Designing a family car that will tolerate minimal low-end servicing, multiple start-stops per hour, cheap fuels and a barrage of physical and environmental regulations, yet keep going for 200,000 miles, is hard.
Hand-building a pet project that has no expectations of reliability and will cost over £1 million through is lifecycle? Easy in comparison.
That's not to take away from the fact that this is the most exciting project probably since the F1, I sincerely hope GM is around to see the first customer cars delivered.
There seems to be a lot of bitter/jealous people on here - yes, most people can't afford it and won't so much as ever touch one but does that matter? Life ain't fair but same as it ever was.
Plenty of great cars at all price points which is the joy of cars.
SidewaysSi said:
Exactly, which was my point that Robsco didn't get.
There seems to be a lot of bitter/jealous people on here - yes, most people can't afford it and won't so much as ever touch one but does that matter? Life ain't fair but same as it ever was.
Plenty of great cars at all price points which is the joy of cars.
There are a few who are a bit bitter/jealous, most aren't though. There seems to be a lot of bitter/jealous people on here - yes, most people can't afford it and won't so much as ever touch one but does that matter? Life ain't fair but same as it ever was.
Plenty of great cars at all price points which is the joy of cars.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff