RE: Ferrari 458 Vs McLaren 12C - The Verdict
Discussion
BBC F1 pit-lane reporter Ted Kravitz: "Fernando Alonso's Ferrari is being fixed in the garage under the watchful eye of Pat Fry, Ferrari's new head of race engineering and deputy technical director. Alonso is sitting in the motorhome with his manager, the car will be back in service soon. Meanwhile, a McLaren MP4-12C - the company's new sports car - has arrived in the paddock. Could it be Jenson Button's ride home after he finishes testing this afternoon? The car is proudly sporting its British tax disc - and the road tax for one of these cars is £205 a year."
andy_s said:
BBC F1 pit-lane reporter Ted Kravitz: "Fernando Alonso's Ferrari is being fixed in the garage under the watchful eye of Pat Fry, Ferrari's new head of race engineering and deputy technical director. Alonso is sitting in the motorhome with his manager, the car will be back in service soon. Meanwhile, a McLaren MP4-12C - the company's new sports car - has arrived in the paddock. Could it be Jenson Button's ride home after he finishes testing this afternoon? The car is proudly sporting its British tax disc - and the road tax for one of these cars is £205 a year."
love the usual BBC accuracy....according to VCA, there is no combination that gives a £205 TAX disc?
with the quoted CO2 emissions at 279g/km, then they are firmly in Band M (Over 255g/km) thus £435.00 for 12 months or £239.25 for 6.
otolith said:
OK - so you don't have a problem with their capabilities, other than that the entry requirement is wealth rather than talent.
What is it that you think they are missing from the ownership experience?
Jeez just look at them! Dogs dinner styling, chasing a pointless goal of unusable real world performance, gadgets designed to flatter the ego's of the drivers.......Just the sort of thing the nouveau riche to go for......hardly suitable for the gentleman/woman who understands the thrill of owning something utterly exquisite. ie. a car that engages the emotions on so many different levels. What is it that you think they are missing from the ownership experience?
Wealth and talent you mention above are irrelevant. I cant afford a great work of art, I can however certainly revel in the emotions that such an object awake within me. Cars should be designed for no less than this.
Rich_W said:
flemke said:
?
Wrt Dennis's stepping back from the racing team, your chronology is wrong. He had started McLaren Automotive before 2007, when the Stepney stuff happened, and 3 years before he stepped away from racing. He did not leave the racing team in order to start Automotive.
I never said he did. Wrt Dennis's stepping back from the racing team, your chronology is wrong. He had started McLaren Automotive before 2007, when the Stepney stuff happened, and 3 years before he stepped away from racing. He did not leave the racing team in order to start Automotive.
Rich_W said:
McLaren didn't NEED to make a road car. It does smell a little like Ron's ego at work. he can't work in F1 anymore, so wants another avenue to try and crush Ferrari at EVERY oppourtunity (pissing in the wind springs to mind) and build himself a legacy for his retirement. I think it's no surprise that Ferrari and McLarens F1 operations are getting on much much better these days with Mr Domenicalli and Whitmarsh at the helms.
I don't know what you might have been trying to say, but what you did say, in plain English, was that the reason that he wanted another avenue was that he couldn't work in F1 anymore. This would be wrong, as he had embarked on the road car programme well before he "couldn't" work in F1 anymore.Rich_W said:
But Automotive was going along quite nicely since 03ish (when they rebranded from Cars which of course was started way back in 88) He didn't NEED to oversee the project, but his free time and anti-Ferrari stance made him WANT to be there. And now he's there. The whole of Automotive has to engage in his "crush Ferrari" nonsense. The company is now fixated on ONE of it's rivals. To the point that they didn't even benchtest a Turbo S, let alone a GT2 or Balboni or whatever.
"Automotive was going along quite nicely"? With what - the SLR? "He didn't NEED to oversee the project"? He owned 30% of the company, the other owners were not part of management and weren't going to be part of management, the road car programme was (and remains) a huge undertaking, strategic change and enormous risk. Who, if not Ron, would you have expected to oversee the project?
They didn't benchtest a Turbo S - this would be the car that you yourself said above was not comparable?
The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
GT2 is targeted at a different market.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
As much as I am a fan [boy] of Ferrari, I think it is fantastic McLaren has made this car.
And, according to all of the tests so far, it is a very special car indeed and reflects McLaren's ethos very well.
Hell, the excitement in the press and amongst enthusiasts just now takes me back to the feeling in the 90s when the F1 road car was launched.
Obviously it's different from the Ferrari. It's made by a completely different manufacturer with a completely different approach.
I love it that we have the chance to argue about meaningless minutiae of the 458 and McLaren, when Europe, the UK government, environmentalists and just about everyone else in the world wants us to drive something like a Prius.
Forza McLaren
And, according to all of the tests so far, it is a very special car indeed and reflects McLaren's ethos very well.
Hell, the excitement in the press and amongst enthusiasts just now takes me back to the feeling in the 90s when the F1 road car was launched.
Obviously it's different from the Ferrari. It's made by a completely different manufacturer with a completely different approach.
I love it that we have the chance to argue about meaningless minutiae of the 458 and McLaren, when Europe, the UK government, environmentalists and just about everyone else in the world wants us to drive something like a Prius.
Forza McLaren
flemke said:
Rich_W said:
But Automotive was going along quite nicely since 03ish (when they rebranded from Cars which of course was started way back in 88) He didn't NEED to oversee the project, but his free time and anti-Ferrari stance made him WANT to be there. And now he's there. The whole of Automotive has to engage in his "crush Ferrari" nonsense. The company is now fixated on ONE of it's rivals. To the point that they didn't even benchtest a Turbo S, let alone a GT2 or Balboni or whatever.
"Automotive was going along quite nicely"? With what - the SLR? "He didn't NEED to oversee the project"? He owned 30% of the company, the other owners were not part of management and weren't going to be part of management, the road car programme was (and remains) a huge undertaking, strategic change and enormous risk. Who, if not Ron, would you have expected to oversee the project?
They didn't benchtest a Turbo S - this would be the car that you yourself said above was not comparable?
The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
GT2 is targeted at a different market.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
1. The handling benchmark they used was the Cayman S and it was the only Porsche the engineers loved (they bought several from RSJ).
2. They weren't interested in the 911 at all though they bought a PDK Turbo because they wanted to see how the gearbox works together with the turbos.
3. They did also have a new Ferrari (I didn't ask which one).
flemke said:
"Automotive was going along quite nicely"? With what - the SLR?
Dennis was in on that decision I would assume?flemke said:
"He didn't NEED to oversee the project"? He owned 30% of the company, the other owners were not part of management and weren't going to be part of management, the road car programme was (and remains) a huge undertaking, strategic change and enormous risk. Who, if not Ron, would you have expected to oversee the project?
Anthony Sheriff. 
You are of course right about the 30% angle (albeit 15% these days) but if he doesn't trust the people below him to do the job well enough why employ them?flemke said:
They didn't benchtest a Turbo S - this would be the car that you yourself said above was not comparable?
The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
I guess my point was that just it seems a little one sided to only look at 2 of your competitors products. Was the NSX really a competitor to the F40 or 959 way back in the late 80s? Certainly not in terms of price or heritage. (Senna link aside) But it's often quoted that Murray thought that was the best. Imagine if Murray had never considered using the doors from a little know Toyota hatchback. Sometimes the best ideas come from unusual sources. The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
flemke said:
GT2 is targeted at a different market.
I meant the RS version. Twin Turbo. Both 200+mph cars. Both cars you could conceiveably use every day. Very similar price tags. But even the GT2 version would surely have been a better choice than a 911 Turbo?SonnyM said:
I also want to add that the 12C is great for competition - now Ferrari and Lambo have a good reason to produce even more exciting cars... It can only be better for us!
Good point. Next Ferrari (est 4-5 years away) will be better than 12C. And then 3 years later that will be beaten by 13C (or whatever) Haven't read the whole thread but surprised at where it seems to have ended up - chastising automotive competition. So what if RD despises everything red if it leads to the sustainable creation of a new car company? What's wrong with that?
The Ferrari has the looks but is not a complete aesthetic package. The rear angles and side silhouette are great but the details of the front are a bit awkward. Perhaps it'll grow on me but I find the Lamborghini's much easier to look at from the front then the 458.
I'm a bit disappointed about the reviews on the mp4-12c so far. They seem a bit thin on detail. Was there a press word # max? I'm eager to hear about the post purchase owner support from the factory and dealer. I suspect this will be an area where Mclaren trounces Ferrari. Does the Maccy use cam belts or chains? Will the 12c be more durable? How does the cellular data link to the factory function?
I'm leaning towards the Maccy in the mean time.
The Ferrari has the looks but is not a complete aesthetic package. The rear angles and side silhouette are great but the details of the front are a bit awkward. Perhaps it'll grow on me but I find the Lamborghini's much easier to look at from the front then the 458.
I'm a bit disappointed about the reviews on the mp4-12c so far. They seem a bit thin on detail. Was there a press word # max? I'm eager to hear about the post purchase owner support from the factory and dealer. I suspect this will be an area where Mclaren trounces Ferrari. Does the Maccy use cam belts or chains? Will the 12c be more durable? How does the cellular data link to the factory function?
I'm leaning towards the Maccy in the mean time.
Rich_W said:
flemke said:
"Automotive was going along quite nicely"? With what - the SLR?
Dennis was in on that decision I would assume?flemke said:
"He didn't NEED to oversee the project"? He owned 30% of the company, the other owners were not part of management and weren't going to be part of management, the road car programme was (and remains) a huge undertaking, strategic change and enormous risk. Who, if not Ron, would you have expected to oversee the project?
Anthony Sheriff. You are of course right about the 30% angle (albeit 15% these days) but if he doesn't trust the people below him to do the job well enough why employ them?flemke said:
They didn't benchtest a Turbo S - this would be the car that you yourself said above was not comparable?
The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
I guess my point was that just it seems a little one sided to only look at 2 of your competitors products. Was the NSX really a competitor to the F40 or 959 way back in the late 80s? Certainly not in terms of price or heritage. (Senna link aside) But it's often quoted that Murray thought that was the best. Imagine if Murray had never considered using the doors from a little know Toyota hatchback. Sometimes the best ideas come from unusual sources. The Gallardo is the previous generation of sports car, so a comparison would be meaningless.
The cover headline a few months ago on Autocar was, "New Ferrari 458 blitzes rivals". If the 458 was the best in class, why would a competitor such as McLaren not focus on it as the benchmark?
flemke said:
GT2 is targeted at a different market.
I meant the RS version. Twin Turbo. Both 200+mph cars. Both cars you could conceiveably use every day. Very similar price tags. But even the GT2 version would surely have been a better choice than a 911 Turbo?Dennis was in on what decision - to embark on the SLR with M-B? To cease the SLR when they couldn't sell any more? Of course he was. What's your point about '03? What they did in '03 had nothing to do with McLaren's more recent road car initiative.
Anthony Sheriff works for McLaren. Ron, MO and the Bahrainis own McLaren. There is a difference. What would you have had Ron do about such a massive endeavour - hand the keys to Sheriff and retire, so that Anthony would have enough freedom to create his own business? It would have made no sense whatever for Ron not to take direct charge of the programme.
"If he doesn't trust the people below him to do the job well enough"? You are joking, right? Any manager or leader should trust the people below him enough to do the jobs that they are already doing. That hardly means that every single person below him should be trusted to do every other job in the organisation.
Btw, Ron currently owns 25%.
Re what cars McLaren did or did not look at when they were conceiving and developing the 12C, who said that the 458 was the only car they ever thought about? I know for a fact that it wasn't the only one.
You meant the GT2RS? Apart from the fact that the RS didn't even exist until after McLaren had made a dozen 12C development cars and had put many 10s of thousands of miles on them - that is, until it was too late for significant changes to be made to the 12C - the Porsche RS market is a different market. It's not a market for visionary technology or stylistics or country club showmanship. It's a hard-core, utilitarian market for those who appreciate a 40 year-old device that is being continually honed into a sharper, more powerful tool, rather than an altogether new tool.
flemke said:
I'm struggling to see why you are so exercised over this, except perhaps because you cannot find anything substantial to criticise about what is plainly a superb car, but still you'd like to criticise something.
Yet you, as someone that could perceiveably afford to get one, aren't. Of course then we can have the 60 page thread of kiss arses suggesting what Blue to paint it. Which of course you will never take the suggestion of someone here will you.For reference I LOVE the F1. I just wish they had tried to bring some of that NA, manual, light weight, purity to the new car (although the regulations have changed somewhat) And I defintely don't like the looks. I am no more wrong for NOT liking it, than you are for liking it.
But more than all of that. Like the Veyron before it. (which I also don't like) People are w
king themselves silly as if every other supercar manufacturer (in particular the Maranello concern) is still building cars made out of iron girders. The "McLaren-can-do-no-wrong" brigade. Or the often rolled out line that somehow they are hard done by. As if their whiter than white. 
Rich_W said:
flemke said:
I'm struggling to see why you are so exercised over this, except perhaps because you cannot find anything substantial to criticise about what is plainly a superb car, but still you'd like to criticise something.
Yet you, as someone that could perceiveably afford to get one, aren't. Of course then we can have the 60 page thread of kiss arses suggesting what Blue to paint it. Which of course you will never take the suggestion of someone here will you.For reference I LOVE the F1. I just wish they had tried to bring some of that NA, manual, light weight, purity to the new car (although the regulations have changed somewhat) And I defintely don't like the looks. I am no more wrong for NOT liking it, than you are for liking it.
But more than all of that. Like the Veyron before it. (which I also don't like) People are w
king themselves silly as if every other supercar manufacturer (in particular the Maranello concern) is still building cars made out of iron girders. The "McLaren-can-do-no-wrong" brigade. Or the often rolled out line that somehow they are hard done by. As if their whiter than white. Whether I get one will not be determined by whether the 12C is good at what it was meant to do. I have always expected that it would be exceptionally good at what it was meant to do, and I believe that in fact it is that good. The question for me personally is whether I need that kind of thing.
Indeed, liking/not liking is not a matter of right and wrong. Liking/not liking is not to be confused with better/worse, which is a different question that sometimes overlaps the former.
My preference would be for the kind of car that you describe: manual 'box, light weight, etc. Regrettably, we are not going to see anything like that at the upper end of the market, from McLaren or anybody else. That leaves us with judging a different kind of car based on the criteria relevant to it.
You might like steak and dislike fish, but that would not mean that you should judge fish according to how closely it resembles a good steak.
Even Ron Dennis would admit that his team has never been whiter-than-white. That would not mean, however, that they had been as black as some others have been. Also, recall that McLaren's primary grievance was not with any other team. As intense as their rivalry sometimes has been, McLaren greatly respects Ferrari, and vice versa. McLaren's primary grievance was with a regulator who made a mockery of his regulatory powers and obligations across numerous issues, and who was manifestly, sometimes incredibly, tendentious and unjust in his treatment of different competitors. If you get screwed, you're entitled to blame the guy who screwed you.
Getting back to the car itself, if you don't like it, great - that's your business. Feel free to express your dislike of the car in whatever words you prefer. You had gone beyond that, however, and made petty criticisms of what you imagined motivated Ron Dennis and how he spent his time. Beyond being petty, some of your criticisms were factually wrong. Next time, please consider focusing on the car, rather than on irrelevant, trivial notions about the Chairman.
An Aussie perspective on the 12C.
http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/first-dr...
First drive: McLaren 12C
Getting into the sleek McLaren 12C is arguably the most difficult part of driving it. There's no doorhandle, not even a sensor pad or any indication as to where or what you might have to press or push to open them.
Instead there's a part of the paintwork under the dominant crease that reacts to a hand sliding across it, in turn electronically releasing the latch. No doubt owners will quickly remember exactly where that spot is, because visions of standing in a busy city of stroking a car for no apparent reason could raise a few eyebrows.
Faith should be restored once you raise the dihedral doors that open out and up reveals the thick outer rails of the carbon fibre tub. While there may be more foot room to swing inside, the height of the doors mean there's some ducking and weaving to get in.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Once there, you instantly feel at one with the car, sitting close to the road and relatively close to the passenger (the 12C is strictly a two-seater). The tactile steering wheel - its chunky grip was modeled from McLaren Formula One cars - is bare of buttons and switches, with shift paddles mounted behind it.
A crisp, clear tachometer dominates the compact instrument cluster that's flanked by twin colour screens on either side.
In the centre of the McLaren 12C's cabin there's a digital screen that will look after everything from the satellite-navigation (complete with track mapping functions) to the audio system and other major functions.
Between it and the electronic handbrake is a selection of buttons and dials to control the major driving functions of the car, including the stability control and engine response.
Start the car and the switchable electronics are in their most docile mode, with the most aggressive stability control program and softest suspension, not matter how you left the car when you last turned it off. Press the "Active" button, though, and it takes note of where the two knobs are pointing - Normal, Sport or Track (more on those later).
For now, though, the McLaren 12C is nearing the end of its four-year development program and I'm the only Aussie to have been flung the keys to one of three prototypes representative of the soon-to-be finished project.
All that's left before the McLaren is signed off for deliveries are some minor electronic tweaks, including to the wet weather performance of the stability control system that's designed to contain a slide.
Predictably, it's raining - and I've got 441kW of power at my disposal in a car that will cost upwards of $500,000. Fortunately, though, my first acquaintance comes on the roads surrounding the challenging Portimao circuit in Portugal.
McLaren is keen to demonstrate that the 12C is not a one-trick pony that's been engineered entirely on a race track. It's not often your first taste of one of the fastest cars on the planet comes through tight streets, stop signs and potholed roads.
But the McLaren is surprisingly compliant over very second rate surfaces despite the ultra low profile Pirelli tyres (19-inch in diameter at the front and 20-inch at the rear).
It's also good at keeping its nose clear of dips and undulations that can often scar the underside of a high performance machine.
Unleashing the 3.8-litre V8 on some country roads, though, quickly reveals just how brisk it is.
I'm glad we're heading back to the track to test a car that clearly has impressive pace.
My first on-track stint comes alongside long time McLaren F1 test driver Chris Goodwin, the man who's also helped develop the McLaren 12C to be a genuine competitor to the Ferrari 458 Italia - it's most natural on-paper rival.
Sitting alongside Goodwin doesn't do much to quell the nerves as rain gently falls. He's calm about the idea of a stranger thrashing one of four development cars that have been unleashed on the media.
Despite the remaining development work, clearly he has confidence in the operation of the stability control. He doesn't flinch when the trademark orange 12C breaks sideways for me at 100km/h exiting a right-hander, lurching right violently before quickly stepping back into line and resuming its potent form. I've never been so happy to have so many electronics working with me.
On paper the McLaren mounts a ferocious sports car case. Its 441kW outguns the Ferrari 458's by 16kW. It's 51kg lighter. Twin turbochargers endow it with more torque, or mid-range pulling power, and the full 600Nm is available as low as 3000rpm.
Right now that's part of the problem; on the greasy Portimao track - an undulating collection of challenging twists and blind corners - the 12C is all too eager to spin its wheels in second or third gear. As I get more adventurous I even manage to fire the traction control into action in fourth gear at 160km/h. Despite my best efforts, though, the 12C is sticking faithfully to the script - and the track. Phew.
I'm not brave enough to switch all the electronic aids off, instead relying on the yet-to-be-finalised electronic programs, which on a wet road could be more progressive in their operation. Four-wheel-drive would be even more handy, but that'd add weight, something McLaren has gone out of its way to shed in the 12C.
Instead of steel or aluminium the body is made of a super rigid carbon fibre "monocell" (like a giant two-seater tub), to which the engine, suspension and body panels are bolted on. It's more than a touch of F1 in a road car and is currently the only one of its ilk available here.
The 12C is claimed to reach 100km/h in as little as 3.1 seconds (3.3 seconds when shod with the regular roadgoing Pirelli tyres fitted as standard) on its way to a top speed of 330km/h, but the rain has ruled out any trial run.
Still, it doesn't take a stopwatch to confirm that the 12C is potently rapid. Even in third gear punching out of tight hairpins the launch from 50km/h to beyond 100km/h takes a couple of seconds or less and you've got to feed the power on through fear of activating the stability control; my hands are gripping the beautifully tactile steering wheel like a monkey on a tree.
And the 12C never looks like slowing, pulling ferociously all the way to its 8500rpm cutout. It really is an impressive display of how much power, torque and light weight can lead to serious performance. Few cars on the road will get near the 12C in a straight line.
It's that combination of pull right across the rev range that makes the 12C so brutal. Driving sedately requires on a mild squeeze of the accelerator to bring the turbos to life, with only the vaguest hint of lag before they're pumping air ferociously into the relatively compact yet easily excitable 3.8-litre V8.
Yet let revs build and there's an addictive wale as the engine fires towards its electronic limit. The twin-clutch gearbox, too, rips between gears in a way - and speed - no manual could get close to. There's a mechanical jolt between full throttle shifts, and the occasional clunkiness from a standstill, but it's otherwise a slick seven-speed set-up. With a full auto mode, it's the paddle shifts that give the more complete experience; the metal paddles are like a see-saw connected left-to right and pivoting in the centre, just like in the F1 car.
The engine has a muted V8 thrum when left in Normal mode. But flick the switch to Sport or Track mode (the latter deactivates the stability control altogether) and it unleashes a raucous, ferocious bark that's an ear tingling mix of induction and high tech explosions.
With the engine sitting inches behind me there's a feeling you're part of the whole go-fast equation.
That said, it's not as sexy to look at as the styled red camshaft covers on a Ferrari; McLaren says the emphasis was on getting the bespoke engine low in the compartment to lower the centre of gravity - all with the aim of improving handling.
Using just half the main straight I manage to see 235km/h on the digital speedo tucked into the elegantly functional tacho that dominates the simple, classy instrument cluster before deciding to let the rain have its way and easing off.
As I ease on to the brakes and squeeze gently the mirror fills with the rear spoiler that pops up to act as an air brake, washing off speed and aiding stability.
Jumping on those massive optional carbon ceramic brake discs and the deceleration is almost as impressive; McLaren claims the 12C will stop from 100km/h in 30.5 metres - about 20 per cent less than your average road car.
The brakes need some encouragement when driven around town, with a firm yet confidence-inspiring feel, but they come to life when squeezed harder.
Backed up with 1.6 million kilometers of real world testing, the 12C also lives up the Formula One ethos of working as well in a corner as it does in a straight line. Indeed, the 12C is arguably more advanced than an F1 car such are the electronics on board.
Adaptive suspension adjusts to the conditions and the road surface. Brake steer that was developed for the 1997 McLaren F1 car makes an appearance in the 12C, applying brakes to one or more wheels to have the car more accurately point in the direction of the steering wheel. Unlike ABS or stability control, it's difficult to feel it working, but the results are obvious. The ability of the car to point the way it's being directed without pushing wide at the front - or understeering - is phenomenal.
A tight and greasy right-left-right combination off the end of the main straight is the perfect challenge. Even in the wet when it's thrown at a tighter corner it manages to tuck itself in and scythe through the bend with the sort of precision that can add a touch of Schumacher - or Lewis Hamilton - to the whole equation.
The electronic suspension with three settings - Normal, Sport and Track - demonstrates how much effort McLaren has put into ensuring the 12C can live happily on pockmarked B roads as well as a flowing, smooth race track.
Along with the air brake, it's the sort of thing McLaren would love to include in its Formula One cars, were it not banned. Indeed the 12C has numerous technologies that F1 simply doesn't allow.
"Many of the systems on this car which are performance systems that are not allowed in formula one," said technical director Dick Glover, who admits frankly that he's "never been involved in a car with doors before, so it's all a bit of a mystery to me".
"One of the things we love about [working on] road cars is you can do what you want [and not worry about cost restrictions], as long as there's a business case behind it."
But while the 12C isn't lacking in character, there's a clinical feel to its operation. There's equal parts science and seat-of-the-pants engagement, although McLaren boss Ron Dennis points to the numbers that he says make it a class leader.
"There isn't a car in that ($500,000 sports car) segment that you can take and drive it faster around a circuit, accelerate faster, have a higher top speed, corner as fast, brake as fast and have the ride and handling characteristics (of the 12C)."
"We've got them all, we've measured them all and we are significantly better than all the other cars."
Part of it stems from the development process, much of which took place on computers and on an advanced simulator that every other minute is helping the McLaren F1 team shaves thousandths of a second from its lap times.
While McLaren developed dozens of prototypes, test drivers spent many of their days stopped and staring at a computer screen in the same simulator that shaves thousands of a second off F1 lap times by validating new components in a virtual world.
"It saves time and money," says Geoff Grose, head of testing and development. "If an adjustment [on the simulator] improves the performance we can add it to the car and test it on the track almost immediately."
One thing McLaren doesn't have is anything like the heritage or recognition of Ferrari, a brand most schoolkids would be more than happy to aspire to owning.
Sure, McLaren has enjoyed more success on the track, but its road cars are limited to the almost mythical F1 produced between 1993 and 1998 - of which just 64 roadgoing versions were sold - and the more prevalent (and recent) Mercedes-Benz McLaren SLR.
Neither of them were sold in Australia, increasing the challenge of cementing the brand among the established elite.
http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/first-dr...
First drive: McLaren 12C
Getting into the sleek McLaren 12C is arguably the most difficult part of driving it. There's no doorhandle, not even a sensor pad or any indication as to where or what you might have to press or push to open them.
Instead there's a part of the paintwork under the dominant crease that reacts to a hand sliding across it, in turn electronically releasing the latch. No doubt owners will quickly remember exactly where that spot is, because visions of standing in a busy city of stroking a car for no apparent reason could raise a few eyebrows.
Faith should be restored once you raise the dihedral doors that open out and up reveals the thick outer rails of the carbon fibre tub. While there may be more foot room to swing inside, the height of the doors mean there's some ducking and weaving to get in.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Once there, you instantly feel at one with the car, sitting close to the road and relatively close to the passenger (the 12C is strictly a two-seater). The tactile steering wheel - its chunky grip was modeled from McLaren Formula One cars - is bare of buttons and switches, with shift paddles mounted behind it.
A crisp, clear tachometer dominates the compact instrument cluster that's flanked by twin colour screens on either side.
In the centre of the McLaren 12C's cabin there's a digital screen that will look after everything from the satellite-navigation (complete with track mapping functions) to the audio system and other major functions.
Between it and the electronic handbrake is a selection of buttons and dials to control the major driving functions of the car, including the stability control and engine response.
Start the car and the switchable electronics are in their most docile mode, with the most aggressive stability control program and softest suspension, not matter how you left the car when you last turned it off. Press the "Active" button, though, and it takes note of where the two knobs are pointing - Normal, Sport or Track (more on those later).
For now, though, the McLaren 12C is nearing the end of its four-year development program and I'm the only Aussie to have been flung the keys to one of three prototypes representative of the soon-to-be finished project.
All that's left before the McLaren is signed off for deliveries are some minor electronic tweaks, including to the wet weather performance of the stability control system that's designed to contain a slide.
Predictably, it's raining - and I've got 441kW of power at my disposal in a car that will cost upwards of $500,000. Fortunately, though, my first acquaintance comes on the roads surrounding the challenging Portimao circuit in Portugal.
McLaren is keen to demonstrate that the 12C is not a one-trick pony that's been engineered entirely on a race track. It's not often your first taste of one of the fastest cars on the planet comes through tight streets, stop signs and potholed roads.
But the McLaren is surprisingly compliant over very second rate surfaces despite the ultra low profile Pirelli tyres (19-inch in diameter at the front and 20-inch at the rear).
It's also good at keeping its nose clear of dips and undulations that can often scar the underside of a high performance machine.
Unleashing the 3.8-litre V8 on some country roads, though, quickly reveals just how brisk it is.
I'm glad we're heading back to the track to test a car that clearly has impressive pace.
My first on-track stint comes alongside long time McLaren F1 test driver Chris Goodwin, the man who's also helped develop the McLaren 12C to be a genuine competitor to the Ferrari 458 Italia - it's most natural on-paper rival.
Sitting alongside Goodwin doesn't do much to quell the nerves as rain gently falls. He's calm about the idea of a stranger thrashing one of four development cars that have been unleashed on the media.
Despite the remaining development work, clearly he has confidence in the operation of the stability control. He doesn't flinch when the trademark orange 12C breaks sideways for me at 100km/h exiting a right-hander, lurching right violently before quickly stepping back into line and resuming its potent form. I've never been so happy to have so many electronics working with me.
On paper the McLaren mounts a ferocious sports car case. Its 441kW outguns the Ferrari 458's by 16kW. It's 51kg lighter. Twin turbochargers endow it with more torque, or mid-range pulling power, and the full 600Nm is available as low as 3000rpm.
Right now that's part of the problem; on the greasy Portimao track - an undulating collection of challenging twists and blind corners - the 12C is all too eager to spin its wheels in second or third gear. As I get more adventurous I even manage to fire the traction control into action in fourth gear at 160km/h. Despite my best efforts, though, the 12C is sticking faithfully to the script - and the track. Phew.
I'm not brave enough to switch all the electronic aids off, instead relying on the yet-to-be-finalised electronic programs, which on a wet road could be more progressive in their operation. Four-wheel-drive would be even more handy, but that'd add weight, something McLaren has gone out of its way to shed in the 12C.
Instead of steel or aluminium the body is made of a super rigid carbon fibre "monocell" (like a giant two-seater tub), to which the engine, suspension and body panels are bolted on. It's more than a touch of F1 in a road car and is currently the only one of its ilk available here.
The 12C is claimed to reach 100km/h in as little as 3.1 seconds (3.3 seconds when shod with the regular roadgoing Pirelli tyres fitted as standard) on its way to a top speed of 330km/h, but the rain has ruled out any trial run.
Still, it doesn't take a stopwatch to confirm that the 12C is potently rapid. Even in third gear punching out of tight hairpins the launch from 50km/h to beyond 100km/h takes a couple of seconds or less and you've got to feed the power on through fear of activating the stability control; my hands are gripping the beautifully tactile steering wheel like a monkey on a tree.
And the 12C never looks like slowing, pulling ferociously all the way to its 8500rpm cutout. It really is an impressive display of how much power, torque and light weight can lead to serious performance. Few cars on the road will get near the 12C in a straight line.
It's that combination of pull right across the rev range that makes the 12C so brutal. Driving sedately requires on a mild squeeze of the accelerator to bring the turbos to life, with only the vaguest hint of lag before they're pumping air ferociously into the relatively compact yet easily excitable 3.8-litre V8.
Yet let revs build and there's an addictive wale as the engine fires towards its electronic limit. The twin-clutch gearbox, too, rips between gears in a way - and speed - no manual could get close to. There's a mechanical jolt between full throttle shifts, and the occasional clunkiness from a standstill, but it's otherwise a slick seven-speed set-up. With a full auto mode, it's the paddle shifts that give the more complete experience; the metal paddles are like a see-saw connected left-to right and pivoting in the centre, just like in the F1 car.
The engine has a muted V8 thrum when left in Normal mode. But flick the switch to Sport or Track mode (the latter deactivates the stability control altogether) and it unleashes a raucous, ferocious bark that's an ear tingling mix of induction and high tech explosions.
With the engine sitting inches behind me there's a feeling you're part of the whole go-fast equation.
That said, it's not as sexy to look at as the styled red camshaft covers on a Ferrari; McLaren says the emphasis was on getting the bespoke engine low in the compartment to lower the centre of gravity - all with the aim of improving handling.
Using just half the main straight I manage to see 235km/h on the digital speedo tucked into the elegantly functional tacho that dominates the simple, classy instrument cluster before deciding to let the rain have its way and easing off.
As I ease on to the brakes and squeeze gently the mirror fills with the rear spoiler that pops up to act as an air brake, washing off speed and aiding stability.
Jumping on those massive optional carbon ceramic brake discs and the deceleration is almost as impressive; McLaren claims the 12C will stop from 100km/h in 30.5 metres - about 20 per cent less than your average road car.
The brakes need some encouragement when driven around town, with a firm yet confidence-inspiring feel, but they come to life when squeezed harder.
Backed up with 1.6 million kilometers of real world testing, the 12C also lives up the Formula One ethos of working as well in a corner as it does in a straight line. Indeed, the 12C is arguably more advanced than an F1 car such are the electronics on board.
Adaptive suspension adjusts to the conditions and the road surface. Brake steer that was developed for the 1997 McLaren F1 car makes an appearance in the 12C, applying brakes to one or more wheels to have the car more accurately point in the direction of the steering wheel. Unlike ABS or stability control, it's difficult to feel it working, but the results are obvious. The ability of the car to point the way it's being directed without pushing wide at the front - or understeering - is phenomenal.
A tight and greasy right-left-right combination off the end of the main straight is the perfect challenge. Even in the wet when it's thrown at a tighter corner it manages to tuck itself in and scythe through the bend with the sort of precision that can add a touch of Schumacher - or Lewis Hamilton - to the whole equation.
The electronic suspension with three settings - Normal, Sport and Track - demonstrates how much effort McLaren has put into ensuring the 12C can live happily on pockmarked B roads as well as a flowing, smooth race track.
Along with the air brake, it's the sort of thing McLaren would love to include in its Formula One cars, were it not banned. Indeed the 12C has numerous technologies that F1 simply doesn't allow.
"Many of the systems on this car which are performance systems that are not allowed in formula one," said technical director Dick Glover, who admits frankly that he's "never been involved in a car with doors before, so it's all a bit of a mystery to me".
"One of the things we love about [working on] road cars is you can do what you want [and not worry about cost restrictions], as long as there's a business case behind it."
But while the 12C isn't lacking in character, there's a clinical feel to its operation. There's equal parts science and seat-of-the-pants engagement, although McLaren boss Ron Dennis points to the numbers that he says make it a class leader.
"There isn't a car in that ($500,000 sports car) segment that you can take and drive it faster around a circuit, accelerate faster, have a higher top speed, corner as fast, brake as fast and have the ride and handling characteristics (of the 12C)."
"We've got them all, we've measured them all and we are significantly better than all the other cars."
Part of it stems from the development process, much of which took place on computers and on an advanced simulator that every other minute is helping the McLaren F1 team shaves thousandths of a second from its lap times.
While McLaren developed dozens of prototypes, test drivers spent many of their days stopped and staring at a computer screen in the same simulator that shaves thousands of a second off F1 lap times by validating new components in a virtual world.
"It saves time and money," says Geoff Grose, head of testing and development. "If an adjustment [on the simulator] improves the performance we can add it to the car and test it on the track almost immediately."
One thing McLaren doesn't have is anything like the heritage or recognition of Ferrari, a brand most schoolkids would be more than happy to aspire to owning.
Sure, McLaren has enjoyed more success on the track, but its road cars are limited to the almost mythical F1 produced between 1993 and 1998 - of which just 64 roadgoing versions were sold - and the more prevalent (and recent) Mercedes-Benz McLaren SLR.
Neither of them were sold in Australia, increasing the challenge of cementing the brand among the established elite.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff