RE: Ferrari 458 Vs McLaren 12C - The Verdict

[CampDavid]

I hope not. Beating that record using a press car seems a bit wrong.

CraigyMc said:

Slicks and Bellof are an unfair advantage.

I wonder what year someone will finally crack 6:11...

Only a matter of time.

[CraigyMc]

Rich_W said:

CraigyMc said:

Yup what? The GT2 RS is clearly an excellent car in isolation - but as this is a comparison between that and the new McLaren, we will need to wait to see what the MP4/12C is like.

Has anyone even pedalled an MP4/12C round the ring to set a comparable time yet?

C

You can't have it both ways! "12C is great, but any car that might be better cannot be considered as 12C hasn't actually proven itself yet"

Eh... What?

This is what I was saying:

You: 911 GT2 is good at cornering
Me: Yes, it is. But it might be bettered by the MP4/12. Can't know that until someone tests it.

C

[CraigyMc]

CampDavid said:

I hope not. Beating that record using a press car seems a bit wrong.

CraigyMc said:

Slicks and Bellof are an unfair advantage.

I wonder what year someone will finally crack 6:11...

Only a matter of time.

When it eventually happens, I'd be amazed if it's not a pure racecar that does it.

Imagine what a slick-shod caparo could do on the ring, or an ex-f1 car, if they were allowed to run one.

C

[EDLT]

CraigyMc said:

When it eventually happens, I'd be amazed if it's not a pure racecar that does it.

Imagine what a slick-shod caparo could do on the ring, or an ex-f1 car, if they were allowed to run one.

C

I'm surprised that the Zonda R didn't get closer, it had roughly the same amount of power and should have had far more advanced aerodynamics and tyres.

[CraigyMc]

EDLT said:

CraigyMc said:

When it eventually happens, I'd be amazed if it's not a pure racecar that does it.

Imagine what a slick-shod caparo could do on the ring, or an ex-f1 car, if they were allowed to run one.

C

I'm surprised that the Zonda R didn't get closer, it had roughly the same amount of power and should have had far more advanced aerodynamics and tyres.

The Zonda R is really lardy compared to the porsche that holds the record - the Porsche 956 was 800Kg. The Zonda F is 1070Kg.

That was actually one of the main reasons for me suggesting a caparo might be quite fast..

C

[Mr Whippy]

boxerTen said:

My understanding is that McLaren is using a cut-down version of the Creuat suspension which in its full form allows one to choose an independent spring/damper rate for each of the four modes heave, roll, pitch, and diagonal twist. In the full system (and in McLaren's cut-down 2-mode version) one can simultaneously have high rates for roll but low (soft) rates for heave. The high roll rate bestows flat cornering while the soft heave rate gives good contact on irregular surfaces - without the compromise necessary in normal suspensions - like the 458's.

Edited by boxerTen on Tuesday 15th February 21:34

I'm not sure how that works.

When you say rate, is that damping rate, or wheel rate?


The 12C has no arb, and controls roll with damping and hydraulics, and of course the existing springs at each corner. Is that correct? How is extra roll stiffness generated when needed, just by dampers? How does that not impact the heave/pitching, and only the roll rate?

The F458 has some arb, maybe 25% as much as the F430 from memory, and controls roll using the springs in each corner too. I think it probably stiffens dampers too, to control pitch/yaw/roll moments (as the Enzo does)


I'd like to know more. I'm genuinely left wondering what McLaren are talking about. It sounds like smoke and mirrors marketing speak to me, but if there is a genuine real benefit to their system vs the F458's configuration, I'd like to read something technical about the differences, rather than rely on the fact McLaren did it, and said fancy words, so it's obviously better


Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 16th February 00:09

[Chris Chilton]

Scuffers said:

they are not that weedy (the front springs)



and the rear ARB

That's not an anti roll bar it's a z bar thing, though i thought exactly that at first. Only controls heave, not roll. If you could see the other side of the car and how it connects you'd see it's not an arb

[Ftumpch]

Funny, I just joined this forum at a time when I think the performance of road cars is just getting out of hand. 592 bhp?? Where in the world could you use such a car to anywhere near its potential limits, aside from a racetrack?

Still, I'm totally prepared to eat my words should anyone happen to offer me a drive...

[Scuffers]

CraigyMc said:

EDLT said:

CraigyMc said:

When it eventually happens, I'd be amazed if it's not a pure racecar that does it.

Imagine what a slick-shod caparo could do on the ring, or an ex-f1 car, if they were allowed to run one.

C

I'm surprised that the Zonda R didn't get closer, it had roughly the same amount of power and should have had far more advanced aerodynamics and tyres.

The Zonda R is really lardy compared to the porsche that holds the record - the Porsche 956 was 800Kg. The Zonda F is 1070Kg.

That was actually one of the main reasons for me suggesting a caparo might be quite fast..

C

Honesty don't think something like a Caparo could get close.

I think you would need an un-restricted LMP1 car or F1 car.

[Mr Whippy]

Chris Chilton said:

Scuffers said:

they are not that weedy (the front springs)



and the rear ARB

That's not an anti roll bar it's a z bar thing, though i thought exactly that at first. Only controls heave, not roll. If you could see the other side of the car and how it connects you'd see it's not an arb

How can you control heave only, unless there is some system to detect what the fronts are doing too?

Ie, asymetric heave is essentially the same mechanic as pitch or dive, or the front end hitting a bump or the back end hitting up hump, etc etc...

Heave when pitched also must be hard to detect?

Any proper tech spec would be nice to see

Dave

[otolith]

Ferrari will have to step up their spectacular cheating a notch further if it's going to win group tests against this.

[tomirk]

Looks like job well done by Mclaren. But reading the first road tests I think that in pursuit of excellence they may have lost something along the way. These cars have such performance that the differances on the road are irrelevant. Involvement and a steering feel are much more important for me anyway. If I was in the market for such a car I think I would on my way to Manthey Motors to put their whole catalog of goodies on my new GT3RS (including the 4.1 engine upgrade) or looking at a M600.

[TonyHetherington]

Ftumpch said:

Funny, I just joined this forum at a time when I think the performance of road cars is just getting out of hand. 592 bhp?? Where in the world could you use such a car to anywhere near its potential limits, aside from a racetrack?

Still, I'm totally prepared to eat my words should anyone happen to offer me a drive...

A quick drive through the EuroTunnel gets you access to some utterly brilliant roads in the Alps - where all 592 of those horses can be completely unleashed. Yes, you will not be able to get near the top speed, but you can drive home via Germany to do that

[boxerTen]

Mr Whippy said:

I'm not sure how that works.

When you say rate, is that damping rate, or wheel rate?

The 12C has no arb, and controls roll with damping and hydraulics, and of course the existing springs at each corner. Is that correct? How is extra roll stiffness generated when needed, just by dampers? How does that not impact the heave/pitching, and only the roll rate?

The F458 has some arb, maybe 25% as much as the F430 from memory, and controls roll using the springs in each corner too. I think it probably stiffens dampers too, to control pitch/yaw/roll moments (as the Enzo does)

I'd like to know more. I'm genuinely left wondering what McLaren are talking about. It sounds like smoke and mirrors marketing speak to me, but if there is a genuine real benefit to their system vs the F458's configuration, I'd like to read something technical about the differences, rather than rely on the fact McLaren did it, and said fancy words, so it's obviously better

Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 16th February 00:09

I think what happens is the following:

Take a hydraulic line from each wheel, whose movements are A and B, split each line in two.
1. Connect one of the split lines from each wheel to the same side of a hydraulic piston, giving A + B, damp this lightly - this is the two-wheel equivalent of heave.
2. Connect the remaining two lines, one from each wheel, to opposite sides of another hydraulic piston, giving A - B, damp this heavily - this is the two-wheel equivalent of roll.

Looking at the pictures you can see what may be precisely this arrangement.

[andyps]

CraigyMc said:

andyps said:

TheRoadWarrior said:

otolith said:

Not uncommon now for tachometers to instrument lower rev limits on a cold engine. The RX-8 R3 does it, I think various BMWs do it, seems the kind of thing the McLaren would have.

Yup, Clio200 does this too.

And the 1978 Alfasud my Mum had had a light on the rev counter that was lit when the engine was cold, went out when it was Ok to give it full revs so hardly something new!

Is is at all possible you posted this in the wrong thread?

On the basis that I read a comment about rev counters indicating a lower rev limit on cold engines as being something fairly new, I thought it relevant to say that they have been around for over 30 years. Maybe I misunderstood the posts I quoted.

[Mr Whippy]

boxerTen said:

I think what happens is the following:

Take a hydraulic line from each wheel, whose movements are A and B, split each line in two.
1. Connect one of the split lines from each wheel to the same side of a hydraulic piston, giving A + B, damp this lightly - this is the two-wheel equivalent of heave.
2. Connect the remaining two lines, one from each wheel, to opposite sides of another hydraulic piston, giving A - B, damp this heavily - this is the two-wheel equivalent of roll.

Looking at the pictures you can see what may be precisely this arrangement.

Hmmm, sounds pretty interesting.

I guess there will never be true independence, but that is what they are aiming to get more of with this setup. I guess the issue is that you have some compromise with this system which is that you can't store energy like a spring does... which might cost you somewhere!? Damping the hydraulic flow (restricting it) to control roll sounds like you are essentially heavily over-damping the spring/suspension movement to reduce suspension movement (makes me think it'd be really hard in ride then)

Hmmm. Will be good to read some more info on this as it becomes available. I'm guessing it's all very cleverly valved and controlled but I'm still struggling with the principle that it's much use away from dynamic situations (ie, more controlled transients, but steady state roll stiffness can't be impacted away from what the springs give)

Hmmm

Dave

[Ipelm]

Hmmm this all seems very depressing, its like that 80's Ferrari/Lambo top speed thing, each company introduces a new model/variation a little better than the others last car. All highly irrelevant to what an owner gets out of ownership. Yes its all very well all that turn in stuff, hydraulic this and that. If you are racing and a tenth here and there is important then heyho, but jeez whats in for the owner. Oh so you can lap 5 secs better than so and so, oh big deal what are you going to do with your 5 seconds......mount it on the wall? Its all vapid and pointless ego, not to say depreciation, when all those updated variations turn up.

Its all going no where fast.....quite pitiful really, corporate egos making charlies out of the gullible rich, an expensive way to learn the value of money for some kid with a rich dad....or a dad trying to relive his idealised fantasy of his or someone elses youth.

When I worked for a Ferrari dealership some years ago the factory used to despise owners as old men just trying to pick up girls and not worth taking seriously, nothing seems to have changed. Maybe something has actually, perhaps its just another theatre for the likes of Ron Dennis and his equivalent at Ferrari to play out their ridiculous feud carried over from F1. Ego has become super-ego which has morphed into mega-ego, truly a banner for the craziness of our meaningless 'life style' times.

[otolith]

An unusual point of view - what kind of cars do you think they should be making? Or should they just give up and close the factory gates?

[ESOG]

Ill have the Ferrari please. The 458 and the California are the nicest Ferraris yet in my opinion. The McLaren is stunning, and it is nice to one not near a million dollars. I thought the design was ace until I saw the rear of it in this write up. Its hideously designed at the rear. Agree?

[Scuffers]

Mr Whippy said:

I guess the issue is that you have some compromise with this system which is that you can't store energy like a spring does...

the 'spring' in the system is the gas sphere's (look at the picture)