Lots of 675LTs for sale..

[Davey S2]

WCZ said:

boxerTen said:

When I specced my car (not a McLaren, redder and more Italian) I deleted the stereo, nav, parking camera/sensors, electrochromatic mirrors, and wiggly headlights. The airbags and electric windows would have gone too if it had been possible. I've no doubt knocked a hole in its resale value, but do I care? Would be interesting to know what proportion of supercar buyers do this.

good man.

lots of people don't have this mentality unfortunately, I was interested in finding an m3 csl once but wanted one in the lightest spec (-aircon -stereo etc) but couldn't find a single example which to me was surprising as it's against the spirit of the car to spec these things.

I don't find it surprising at all.

It's a road car which will be used for some track work. Driving to Spa or the 'Ring is a lot more comfortable with air con and a stereo. Unless your going after lap times for some reason the weight penalty is unlikely to be noticed.

[flemke]

MarkNC said:

flemke said:

Yes, quarter panels are the same; 675LT's rear wing is an extension of them, whereas in 688 they are not extended.

That is incorrect. The MSO HS's quarter panels are different than those on the 675LT. The 675LT quarter panels have an indentation where the wing meets the bodywork. In the MSO HS that indentation is not needed because the wing is permanently suspended above the bodywork. The cover over the exhaust section is also different on the MSO HS because of the changes to location of the wing struts.

I believe you are right, Mark. They had told me that they're different as between 650 and 688, but when I looked at renderings I did not see any difference. If you know specifically what the difference is, you must be correct.

The issue was whether the 688 is another version of the 675LT. I was saying that it is not, in that it does not have the long tail that is the signature feature of the "LT".

[NRS]

flemke said:

I have two cars with removable roofs (that was the only choice).
In each I have on one occasion lowered or removed the roof to see what it was like, driven a distance, then put the roof back because the experience without it seemed like nothing special.
Maybe the problem is that my hair isn't long enough to get blown around.

It might also depend where you are. My car is a very different level to yours (partially being young, partially Norwegian tax on cars), but here convertibles are great because the roads are quiet so no need to worry about people staring if you care about that, but you get proper fresh air and also get to look up and see the mountains right above you etc., which is not really possible in a car with a roof.

[flemke]

Yellow491 said:

Flemke you really are like a stuck old record,move on ,lifes to short.

If you guys are such driving gods to notice 40 kg,i will be totaly impressed and amazed with 675bhp to push it along.
a spyder would be in your mirrors,or in front .The coupe is no more a racer or boulevard cruiser than the spyder,just simply marketing models.

What the spyder does do ,is provide very enjoyable fun driving with the flexability of the roof.Try lowering the rear window in the coupe,for all that noise,surely the coupe rear window lowers,does it not;).
Its nearly as much fun as all the porsches with roof out capability,and i hope better in time if possible.!

I have two cars with removable roofs (that was the only choice).
In each I have on one occasion lowered or removed the roof to see what it was like, driven a distance, then put the roof back because the experience without it seemed like nothing special. In both cases that was more than 10 years ago, and the roofs have not been off since then.
Maybe the problem is that I don't have enough hair to get blown around.

[flemke]

NRS said:

flemke said:

I have two cars with removable roofs (that was the only choice).
In each I have on one occasion lowered or removed the roof to see what it was like, driven a distance, then put the roof back because the experience without it seemed like nothing special.
Maybe the problem is that my hair isn't long enough to get blown around.

It might also depend where you are. My car is a very different level to yours (partially being young, partially Norwegian tax on cars), but here convertibles are great because the roads are quiet so no need to worry about people staring if you care about that, but you get proper fresh air and also get to look up and see the mountains right above you etc., which is not really possible in a car with a roof.

Best drive of my life, ever: Molde to Trondheim, along the fjords setting off at about 10:00 p.m. in early July.
Because of the time of year, it still was not dark. Along the coast road, you can see several bends ahead, the road was in perfect condition.
In 90 miles of driving, at no point did I encounter even one other car on the road.
If I'd only been in a 675LT. I might have enjoyed it even in the spider version!

[MarkNC]

flemke said:

The issue was whether the 688 is another version of the 675LT. I was saying that it is not, in that it does not have the long tail that is the signature feature of the "LT".

I think you're right. It's mostly the same car but a little bit different.

[boxerTen]

thecook101 said:

MDL111 said:

Let me know if you ever sell it :-)

^^ There's a man who can spot an opportunity!

Given the way car design is going at the moment I reckon it'll be a decade or two before I sell it.

[Boshly]

flemke said:

Boshly said:

The Surveyor said:

So the 675LT is a 'quest for perfection', race-car ethos, uncompromising... the lightest... to the point where they put less paint on the carbon to make it lighter, blah blah blah. Yes the spider is as stiff as the coupe, but can somebody explain how adding 40kg worth of folding roof just to appease the St Tropez posers fits in with the 675LT ethos? If they chopped the roof off and gave you a 10oz Kevlar fibre rain cape and wash-down neoprene seats then I'd get it, but adding the weight of a mechanical folding roof means it's no longer 'uncompromising', its no longer 'the lightest' and it's certainly no longer a 'quest for perfection'.

Ah but that's my (somewhat tongue in cheek) point. Look at the current F1 drivers feelings on potentially enclosing their cockpits. The coupe compromises the open cockpit, and thus sound/feel/smell, of a 'proper' race car in the pursuit of adverse weather protection. The Mac spider compromises 40kg (approx 2.5/3%?) of weight for the same protection.

I would say it's just as much of a quest for perfection, just a different path.

So please, less of the St TROPEZ posers BS. Us spider drivers are just as much purists as you coupe guys maybe more

Flemke you're right about doors and more weight saving etc but I'm only looking at like for like here, after all as our Italian stallion driving friend suggests we could ditch lots of other comforts including the GPS also, but then we'd never find the tracks in the first place

I agree with The Surveyor.

The argument that the coupe and the spider are both compromised relative to a "pure" car presumes that they are equally compromised, but in fact they are not. The spider is more compromised as a driver's car. More compromised is not as good as less.

Could you, or anyone, possibly articulate for us what the point is of the spider version? What exactly does the user get out of it - in terms of driving?

Cheers.

I'm sure many can articulate far more eloquently than I can and in return i'll simply answer a question with a question. Why do the current crop of F1 drivers so vehemently oppose the closing of their cockpits? What they would gain in safety is obvious but they naturally feel what they would lose is far more significant.

I prefer the feel of an open environment for many reasons, none of which are the gain of an extra fraction of a second per sector. Most are covered above.

I simply feel that for some to state that the effect of an additional 2.5% of weight in what is effectively a road car means that those who have made this choice are somehow inferior and unknowing, is somewhat disingenuous.

I also believe your comment that the spider is "more compromised", in the case of the 675, is possibly without proper basis. You may of course refer to laptimes but I think we all already know that the joy of driving fast and well and spiritedly AND enjoyably is not necessarily measured by a timing device alone, and in many cases a slower communicative car is far more enjoyable.

Hope that helps you understand my pov

[flemke]

Boshly said:

I'm sure many can articulate far more eloquently than I can and in return i'll simply answer a question with a question. Why do the current crop of F1 drivers so vehemently oppose the closing of their cockpits? What they would gain in safety is obvious but they naturally feel what they would lose is far more significant.

I prefer the feel of an open environment for many reasons, none of which are the gain of an extra fraction of a second per sector. Most are covered above.

I simply feel that for some to state that the effect of an additional 2.5% of weight in what is effectively a road car means that those who have made this choice are somehow inferior and unknowing, is somewhat disingenuous.

I also believe your comment that the spider is "more compromised", in the case of the 675, is possibly without proper basis. You may of course refer to laptimes but I think we all already know that the joy of driving fast and well and spiritedly AND enjoyably is not necessarily measured by a timing device alone, and in many cases a slower communicative car is far more enjoyable.

Hope that helps you understand my pov

I don't think that what is best in racing cars is necessarily best in road cars. Racing must be a show for an audience, whereas in a road car what onlookers might think is irrelevant.

When I said that the spider is more compromised, I had in mind specifically that it is 40kg heavier and has a higher CoG.

One might debate how large or small that extent of compromise is, but no one can dispute that more weight and a higher CoG are undesirable.

Certainly I would accept that, for all or almost all of its usage, the road car's spiderliness is going to make no meaningful difference. My objection to it is not practical but rather conceptual.

[Yellow491]

hunter 66 said:

Yellow how is she .........

Its bloody fast hunter
300 miles now,loosened her up a bit last night,poor old traction control was very confused!
It feels faster than the cgt,probably down to gear change,build quality is fairly good,but not cgt standard.
The roof is very good,roof up and rear window down is a great option for engine noise.
Enjoy silverstone,first time missing the classic,sadly competition champs dates clashing.I will miss the zebra steaks😄

[hunter 66]

Yes Yellow the steak will miss being you ............. great colour ... my favourite by a long way . Yes the spider is the way to go ... so your hair flows in the wind !!

[Boshly]

flemke said:

.....My objection to it is not practical but rather conceptual.

Enough said in that case