Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
AlmostUseful said:
You don’t like the P1? It’s an incredible thing to look at!
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar. No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
Nockenpaul said:
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar.
No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
You sure?No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
AMVSVNick said:
Nockenpaul said:
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar.
No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
You sure?No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
Funny, many regard the P1 as an absolutely fantastic looking thing.
AMVSVNick said:
Nockenpaul said:
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar.
No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
You sure?No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
Nockenpaul said:
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar.
No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
You know what.
I actually agree with you. Sure it's probably the best driver of all the modern McLarens.
But it doesn't "look light" and he's right it doesn't look "fast" In that it doesn't have a rake to it front to rear. The lines aren't strong enough either. And I've never been super enamoured with the back end. Spoiler down looks dull. The rear 3/4 drooping away rather than up to a purposeful point. Think of a sprinter in the blocks. Think of Aston Vanquish with it's muscular bum.
The GTR/LM goes some what to rectifying that with it's enormous fixed spoiler.
And I agree on using P1 headlights on the lesser cars! When 12c became 650s the headlights let it down. They are P1 lights so to try and graft them on to the simple clean lines of the 12C was a curious chouice
For a giggle I put the 12c front on a 675LT
That actually works!
Which of course means the best looking modern McLaren is the 12c HS imo. Clean, simple, and crucially "looks like a McLaren" You can clearly see a design similarity to the F1
Shame its not the car it could have been aside from that. Hopefully now they are getting cheaper, the tuning companies will start ironing out the bugs and "restomod" with 650s/675lt parts to bring them up to 2020 standard.
Edited by S1KRR on Friday 31st July 22:11
Nockenpaul said:
AlmostUseful said:
You don’t like the P1? It’s an incredible thing to look at!
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar. No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
AlmostUseful said:
Nockenpaul said:
AlmostUseful said:
You don’t like the P1? It’s an incredible thing to look at!
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar. No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
It looks as though they only gone and blown the bloody doors orf, to paraphrase that nosey neighbour, Michael Caine.
I think that the logo shaped lights are forced and hum drum, causing the front end of subsequent McLarens to wear a benign grin. The macho and aggressive styling of the last gen Ferrari headlights didn't sit well with me either. Lambos always look good.
S1KRR said:
You know what.
I actually agree with you. Sure it's probably the best driver of all the modern McLarens.
But it doesn't "look light" and he's right it doesn't look "fast" In that it doesn't have a rake to it front to rear. The lines aren't strong enough either. And I've never been super enamoured with the back end. Spoiler down looks dull. The rear 3/4 drooping away rather than up to a purposeful point. Think of a sprinter in the blocks. Think of Aston Vanquish with it's muscular bum.
The GTR/LM goes some what to rectifying that with it's enormous fixed spoiler.
And I agree on using P1 headlights on the lesser cars! When 12c became 650s the headlights let it down. They are P1 lights so to try and graft them on to the simple clean lines of the 12C was a curious chouice
For a giggle I put the 12c front on a 675LT
That actually works!
Which of course means the best looking modern McLaren is the 12c HS imo. Clean, simple, and crucially "looks like a McLaren" You can clearly see a design similarity to the F1
Shame its not the car it could have been aside from that. Hopefully now they are getting cheaper, the tuning companies will start ironing out the bugs and "restomod" with 650s/675lt parts to bring them up to 2020 standard.
Edited by S1KRR on Friday 31st July 22:11
bolidemichael said:
I almost completely agree with the exception of the back end, which I think is fabulous in its lack of articulation and absence of bodywork.
It looks as though they only gone and blown the bloody doors orf, to paraphrase that nosey neighbour, Michael Caine.
I think that the logo shaped lights are forced and hum drum, causing the front end of subsequent McLarens to wear a benign grin. The macho and aggressive styling of the last gen Ferrari headlights didn't sit well with me either. Lambos always look good.
It looks as though they only gone and blown the bloody doors orf, to paraphrase that nosey neighbour, Michael Caine.
I think that the logo shaped lights are forced and hum drum, causing the front end of subsequent McLarens to wear a benign grin. The macho and aggressive styling of the last gen Ferrari headlights didn't sit well with me either. Lambos always look good.
Nockenpaul said:
AlmostUseful said:
You don’t like the P1? It’s an incredible thing to look at!
Well, the 'biomimicry' theme is not only ill-advised conceptually, it is heavy-handed in execution as well. They wanted a cheetah, they got a hungry horse - look at the sculpted portion around the door. And ironically, the car does not communicate lightness as they intended, on the contrary, it looks heavy with an abundance of droopy lines and boring, fatty volumes all round. among generic supercar proportions, lack of tension in the lines and crass details like logo-shaped headlights the worst offender has to be the aforementioned sculpted-away portion on the sides. There is this weak, uncommited line below the door mirror close to where the upper and lower segments meet that just drives one mad. It is utterly tasteless, a masterclass in how to f**k up something as f**ck-up proof as a million dollar hypercar. No, I don't like it. And 8 years later, Mclaren are yet to redeem themselves...
As is often the case, the car in the flesh is a far nicer package than 2D images convey. If most customers chose to degrade the design by leaving the sculptured portion around the door in black raw carbon, thereby ruining the continuity of the entire side, the designers cannot be blamed for that. Some buyers painted that section in the same colour as the rest of the body and it made a big difference.
I have one question: why is biomimicry 'ill-advised conceptually'? Slavish mimicry of anything is usually ill-advised, but to draw lessons from nature (in this case, millions of years of evolution) need not be intrinsically unwise. Do you prefer the jagged, awkward, higgledy-piggledy, striving-vainly-to-seem-futuristic shapes of modern Ferraris?
Flemke - I was wondering today about some cars that don’t seem to have come to fruition (yet) despite some major players behind them - the Mercedes Project One, the Aston Martin Valkyrie and a few others. Do you think that with all the new regulations trying to push a new ‘hyper car’ is being more and more impeded in a way the F1 wasn’t?
I now realise that my Lambo comment should've included the word, 'mostly'.
Nevertheless, it took me ages to catch up with the present day from my last read in May; very interesting ebbs and flows, particularly in relation to the insight into Ron and Max. I've been awaiting Joe Saward's insight for too long. Max is a charming cad though; the tragedy of his son speaks volumes.
Nevertheless, it took me ages to catch up with the present day from my last read in May; very interesting ebbs and flows, particularly in relation to the insight into Ron and Max. I've been awaiting Joe Saward's insight for too long. Max is a charming cad though; the tragedy of his son speaks volumes.
Petrus1983 said:
Flemke - I was wondering today about some cars that don’t seem to have come to fruition (yet) despite some major players behind them - the Mercedes Project One, the Aston Martin Valkyrie and a few others. Do you think that with all the new regulations trying to push a new ‘hyper car’ is being more and more impeded in a way the F1 wasn’t?
The problem with both cars, as I understand it, is overheating. That could easily be solved if the two companies were not trying to create things as completely unnecessary to the point of being useless as these track-based cars that need to operate on the public roads. I don't see that as an issue with regulation, but rather as an issue of two companies' self-imposed constraints in pursuit of vanity projects.flemke said:
Petrus1983 said:
Flemke - I was wondering today about some cars that don’t seem to have come to fruition (yet) despite some major players behind them - the Mercedes Project One, the Aston Martin Valkyrie and a few others. Do you think that with all the new regulations trying to push a new ‘hyper car’ is being more and more impeded in a way the F1 wasn’t?
The problem with both cars, as I understand it, is overheating. That could easily be solved if the two companies were not trying to create things as completely unnecessary to the point of being useless as these track-based cars that need to operate on the public roads. I don't see that as an issue with regulation, but rather as an issue of two companies' self-imposed constraints in pursuit of vanity projects.bolidemichael said:
What is wrong with a halo type, moon shoot technology?
Nothing. But that's not what they're doing...
They're making ultra aero track cars with mega power - and for some fairly odd reason trying to make it not only road legal but road usable.
Problem with that is packaging and airflow. All the mechanicals are shrink wrapped (and producing a huge amount of heat), yet at lower speeds there's bugger all airflow (and you don't want large draggy frontal area radiator inlets).
So it's entirely feasible that what they've currently got are absolutely incredible track cars - but as soon as you try driving one at road legal speeds for half an hour turning into self combusting heaps...
flemke said:
The problem with both cars, as I understand it, is overheating. That could easily be solved if the two companies were not trying to create things as completely unnecessary to the point of being useless as these track-based cars that need to operate on the public roads. I don't see that as an issue with regulation, but rather as an issue of two companies' self-imposed constraints in pursuit of vanity projects.
Interesting. Thanks as ever. Though that is a legitimate and admirable element of the engineering challenge. Hell, with an extrapolated version of that response to hi-tech endeavours, the F1 may have never happened (and we all know from this thread in particular that that it wasn't an immediate sales success).
Lexus built an entirely new factory dedicated to the LFA and developed an in house knowledge of working with carbon fibre in order to do so. Subsequent to that, they produced another technologically progressive sales flop, mic dropped and used the knowledge gained in their subsequent model runs.
These are hugely exciting projects and deserve to be applauded.
EDIT: AM have even drafted in Chris Goodwin as the test driver...
Lexus built an entirely new factory dedicated to the LFA and developed an in house knowledge of working with carbon fibre in order to do so. Subsequent to that, they produced another technologically progressive sales flop, mic dropped and used the knowledge gained in their subsequent model runs.
These are hugely exciting projects and deserve to be applauded.
EDIT: AM have even drafted in Chris Goodwin as the test driver...
Edited by bolidemichael on Sunday 2nd August 22:21
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff