Senna at Geneva

[Thom]

Interesting how some are distorting my comment to whatever suits them best.
It remains that modern McLarens suffer from a lack of substance, like most over-engineered cars that keep repeating the same old major design formula while just pushing incrementally sub functions to some hypothetical perfection that by essence will never be met. Like everyone I understand the need to self-indulge in a flattering toy for a few hours during the week, but spending that much on such depreciating cars that only a very few will be able to enjoy to their full is an exercise I find more difficult to grasp the older I get, especially when a car looks as bad as the Senna - which I actually thought I liked in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way when the first pictures were published a few months ago. The example with the Bristol was a bit far-fetched, but I doubt anyone could seriously argue a Bristol will remain quite a bit exclusive than the usual McLaren.

[flemke]

Quickmoose said:

I do..... and good for you
A well regarded marque making a limited run showy-off thing to maintain it's perceived best in class stature.....something 'the market' has been gorging on for a decent period now..... mmmm risky

With respect, are you saying anything other than that a company is making a product that you don't like? Most of us could say that about most companies.
Regarding the products themselves (as opposed to acting with integrity - a difference subject), I cannot see what is wrong with a company making things that I don't like, so long as they or somebody else will also make things that I do like.

[Quickmoose]

flemke said:

Quickmoose said:

I do..... and good for you
A well regarded marque making a limited run showy-off thing to maintain it's perceived best in class stature.....something 'the market' has been gorging on for a decent period now..... mmmm risky

With respect, are you saying anything other than that a company is making a product that you don't like? Most of us could say that about most companies.
Regarding the products themselves (as opposed to acting with integrity - a difference subject), I cannot see what is wrong with a company making things that I don't like, so long as they or somebody else will also make things that I do like.

other companies that are market lead you mean?
My liking it or not has nowt to do with it, obviously.

[flemke]

Thom said:

It remains that modern McLarens suffer from a lack of substance, like most over-engineered cars that keep repeating the same old major design formula while just pushing incrementally sub functions to some hypothetical perfection that by essence will never be met.

Which modern sports cars have more "substance"? Isn't a certain lack of it common to all, perhaps in slightly different ways for each manufacturer?

"Same old major design formula" - such as rear-engined Porsches, Ferrari's reliance on "emozione", and Aston's 20+ year-old aesthetic template?

[flemke]

Quickmoose said:

flemke said:

Quickmoose said:

I do..... and good for you
A well regarded marque making a limited run showy-off thing to maintain it's perceived best in class stature.....something 'the market' has been gorging on for a decent period now..... mmmm risky

With respect, are you saying anything other than that a company is making a product that you don't like? Most of us could say that about most companies.
Regarding the products themselves (as opposed to acting with integrity - a difference subject), I cannot see what is wrong with a company making things that I don't like, so long as they or somebody else will also make things that I do like.

other companies that are market lead you mean?
My liking it or not has nowt to do with it, obviously.

I wasn't thinking about any particular company, no.
More generally, perhaps I misconstrued your original point. I consider the LaFerrari and Valkyrie to be laughable. If you would say the same about the P15, then fair enough.

[Quickmoose]

Its ok flemke, I believe it is a comment on quite of lot of marques, all selling out to make an SUV and slowly but surely screwing their history for a quick buck.
It's not just McLaren.
They appear to be more astute and make their cream by selling this kind of useless trinket....which is to be fair better than diluting their brand by making vehicles that have no place wearing those badges...

I do wish though that to a degree, Aston and Porsche's approach to design were 'copied'.... considered evolution does create more beauty than, ham fisted shock tactics combined and brutal engineering excuses, be that from McLaren or another marque that struggle to form or develop a cohesive aesthetic.

[The Surveyor]

Thom said:

Interesting how some are distorting my comment to whatever suits them best.
It remains that modern McLarens suffer from a lack of substance, like most over-engineered cars that keep repeating the same old major design formula while just pushing incrementally sub functions to some hypothetical perfection that by essence will never be met. Like everyone I understand the need to self-indulge in a flattering toy for a few hours during the week, but spending that much on such depreciating cars that only a very few will be able to enjoy to their full is an exercise I find more difficult to grasp the older I get, especially when a car looks as bad as the Senna - which I actually thought I liked in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way when the first pictures were published a few months ago. The example with the Bristol was a bit far-fetched, but I doubt anyone could seriously argue a Bristol will remain quite a bit exclusive than the usual McLaren.

I think you meant to say...

"It remains my opinion that modern McLarens suffer from...... "

I do get your point, I just don't agree with it

[The Surveyor]

Quickmoose said:

.....

I do wish though that to a degree, Aston and Porsche's approach to design were 'copied'.... considered evolution does create more beauty than, ham fisted shock tactics combined and brutal engineering excuses, be that from McLaren or another marque that struggle to form or develop a cohesive aesthetic.

To be fair, I'm no sure there is anything for McLaren to copy from either Aston Martin or Porsche. Aston Martin stuck with the same design through financial necessity rather than any planned design strategy. And after trying to kill off the 911 with the 928, Porsche have facilitated the retention of the 911 via their SUV range rather than their 'shock tactic' 959, Carrera GT, or 918, albeit I would agree that they do share a common design language.

Each manufacture has their own different approach whether that be through design or necessity, the fact we have both conventional and slightly left-field options available should be a cause for calibration rather than nit-picking IMHO.

[Thom]

flemke said:

Which modern sports cars have more "substance"? Isn't a certain lack of it common to all, perhaps in slightly different ways for each manufacturer?
"Same old major design formula" - such as rear-engined Porsches, Ferrari's reliance on "emozione", and Aston's 20+ year-old aesthetic template?

Well, pretty much. Perhaps let's give credit to Porsche for sticking to a manual gearbox on the latest GT3?
Considering the success of the Sports Series I'm sure McLaren would meet even greater success with a manual 540C and a better-sounding powertrain tuned and synchronised so that downshifting would feel like second to none... though I know that in such a niche market you don't make your bread and butter on higher volume, priced down products.

[Ferruccio]

Thom said:

Did Bruce McLaren care about what the market wanted when he set out to design and build his own race cars?
Did Ettore Bugatti care about what the market wanted when he continually accumulated massive debts to build his cars and lay the foundations for his legend?
Did Ferrucio Lamborgini care about what the market wanted when he poured much of his hard earned cash from building tractors into building financially unsuccessful supercars?
]

If you talked to the guys who first put Lamborghini together, the same word would come up over and over - spirit.
It’s different for different people, but you just know when it’s there and when it isn’t.

[The Surveyor]

Ferruccio said:

If you talked to the guys who first put Lamborghini together, the same word would come up over and over - spirit.
It’s different for different people, but you just know when it’s there and when it isn’t.

Do you think that same pioneering spirit is still there in Lamborghini?

[flemke]

Thom said:

flemke said:

Which modern sports cars have more "substance"? Isn't a certain lack of it common to all, perhaps in slightly different ways for each manufacturer?
"Same old major design formula" - such as rear-engined Porsches, Ferrari's reliance on "emozione", and Aston's 20+ year-old aesthetic template?

Well, pretty much. Perhaps let's give credit to Porsche for sticking to a manual gearbox on the latest GT3?

Rather than "sticking to a manual gearbox", did Porsche not abandon it and then bring it back, whereas if they had been paying attention to their customers they would never have abandoned it in the first place?

[flemke]

Quickmoose said:

Its ok flemke, I believe it is a comment on quite of lot of marques, all selling out to make an SUV and slowly but surely screwing their history for a quick buck.
It's not just McLaren.
They appear to be more astute and make their cream by selling this kind of useless trinket....which is to be fair better than diluting their brand by making vehicles that have no place wearing those badges...

I do wish though that to a degree, Aston and Porsche's approach to design were 'copied'.... considered evolution does create more beauty than, ham fisted shock tactics combined and brutal engineering excuses, be that from McLaren or another marque that struggle to form or develop a cohesive aesthetic.

Although I would not wish to see Porsche or McLaren sacrifice all principle for the sake of profit, if it's a matter of survival, I see no issue with their developing products in which I have zero interest in order to maintain their ability to develop products in which I might have some interest.

I have little doubt that, if they had no alternative to doing less inspiring but profitable things in order to keep their businesses going, Ferdinand Porsche and Bruce McLaren would have done so. You make recall that Porsche used to make tractors. Not long after Bruce's premature death, his team was funded by big lumps of cigarette money. It's business.

[hunter 66]

Being old school Porsche man .. although Daily Driver is a Ferrari , I have absolute admiration for McLaren ...... they have spiced the whole market up and stimulated debate and interest in making amazing , challenging cars

[Thom]

flemke said:

Rather than "sticking to a manual gearbox", did Porsche not abandon it and then bring it back, whereas if they had been paying attention to their customers they would never have abandoned it in the first place?

Indeed they did. However, managing the technical diversity involved with two gearbox set ups for a single model has a cost, and while it is certainly offset somewhere else, they could have simply maintained the dual clutch gearbox and have sat on a possibly insignificant share of the market's demands to push their profits even further. However it seems they decided to go the other way around and even if the car is obviously faster with the dual clutch, who wants to have a faster car if it's a less involving drive?
That they came back to the manual gearbox is actually more respectable than if they had just stayed with it without even trying the sequential 'box. They tried something and learned a lesson - of course considering that learning that lesson saw all parties involved satisfied.

With McLaren we have an impressive turn around of new models with an after sale service that apparently is not quite up to par with the cars' performance. That does not send quite the right signals on the brand's possible ambitions as establishing itself as a credible long term industrial statement similar to Porsche who are probably the closest in terms of "image efficiency". I know all to well how it's like to "run after the train" with buoyant project managers playing with too much resource, wild ideas and who are all too happy not having to build a proper industrial process which are essential bases to avoid the potentialy massive short term losses wealthy investors with little to no industrial awareness do not (want to) hear much about. I'm afraid McLaren are in a similar boat at the moment and I certainly do wish them to build the said bases to build a proper long term image as a serious brand with a reasonably high industrial output within the market it is playing in. If you are confident in your product you invest in it instead of pretending to restart from a blanksheet at every new iteration... which is what Porsche did with the 911. Too many novelties too quickly kill the novelty, and if I were to swallow the depreciation of a new McLaren that will be superceded by another even faster one 6 months later then I'd probably feel quite a bit more frustrated than with a Bristol regardless of the driving experience
Also I'm not exactly sure I understand how it can be accepted that such an "exclusive" brand may give that little value to the hard earned cash of its customers.

Edited by Thom on Friday 16th March 08:31

[Ferruccio]

The Surveyor said:

Ferruccio said:

If you talked to the guys who first put Lamborghini together, the same word would come up over and over - spirit.
It’s different for different people, but you just know when it’s there and when it isn’t.

Do you think that same pioneering spirit is still there in Lamborghini?

55 years on the world is a very different place but, in parts, yes, that spirit is still there in the factory in my view.

[RamboLambo]

hunter 66 said:

Being old school Porsche man .. although Daily Driver is a Ferrari , I have absolute admiration for McLaren ...... they have spiced the whole market up and stimulated debate and interest in making amazing , challenging cars

Agree what McLaren has done in a short space of time is amazing. Their products are leading edge technology so fair play to them.

Its got to be good for the whole supercar scene and keeps the likes of Lamborghini and Ferrari on their toes whereas in the past they could of rested on their laurels.
Huracan Performante is a perfect example of Lamborghini seriously upping their game to compete

[Quickmoose]

RamboLambo said:

hunter 66 said:

Being old school Porsche man .. although Daily Driver is a Ferrari , I have absolute admiration for McLaren ...... they have spiced the whole market up and stimulated debate and interest in making amazing , challenging cars

Agree what McLaren has done in a short space of time is amazing. Their products are leading edge technology so fair play to them.

Its got to be good for the whole supercar scene and keeps the likes of Lamborghini and Ferrari on their toes whereas in the past they could of rested on their laurels.
Huracan Performante is a perfect example of Lamborghini seriously upping their game to compete

100% with that, in no time, they've entered the market and damn near dominated the conversation ever since, the tech, the stats, the engineering, all totally overwhelming, that and the majority of their product being desirable too, if lacking in drama and character (which may be part of their desired USP..?)....an utterly astonishing rise.
Hoping the BP23 can restore some of the latter, although I'm not holding out much hope
Of course with the qualities they have in abundance, the business case and the buyers with similarly niche tastes are there to be exploited.
It has elements of Bangle and BMW IMO.
Take a marque that everyone has pretty decent existing opinion of...get a design language that shocks and offends as much as it delights and pleases, shake the sector up and watch the competition scrabble about to keep up.
Aston a case in point, where once style and subtlety was part of the DNA, now it's aggression and dramatic differences of opinion...getting them talked about and watch the profits return/rise...

[Ferruccio]

Quickmoose said:

Of course with the qualities they have in abundance, the business case and the buyers with similarly niche tastes are there to be exploited.

No business that seeks to exploit its customer ever really succeeds long term.

[R8Steve]

Thom said:

Yes, the market is always the good excuse.
Two weeks down the line they will spit out some meaningless 3 seater orange SUV and some folks (not you) will come up with "well it's just what the market wants".
Did Bruce McLaren care about what the market wanted when he set out to design and build his own race cars?
Did Ettore Bugatti care about what the market wanted when he continually accumulated massive debts to build his cars and lay the foundations for his legend?
Did Ferrucio Lamborgini care about what the market wanted when he poured much of his hard earned cash from building tractors into building financially unsuccessful supercars?

The "market" leads to nothing but the bdising of respectable names into meaningless brands producing objects of social status that gradually lose relationship with what the founders set out when they took massive risks to actually create something that back then broke actual boundaries. The market never takes risks - people do.
In the case of the McLaren Senna, we have a blatant case of adding insult to injury. Give me a Bristol Fighter anyday over this ridiculous plasticky/carbon-ish patchwork only a tasteless billionaire teenager would dream of.

I take it you've never ran a business?