| Author | Message | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 65 Registered: 5-2003 |
Sunny, Glad to be of service.  Greg A | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 863 Registered: 2-2003 |
Thanks for the corrections, I blame my quick Google searches! Sunny | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 64 Registered: 5-2003 |
Sunny, Your timeline for the McLaren F1 is incorrect. The car was launched in 1992. 5 LM's were made after the '95 Le Mans victory to commemorate the acheivement. The GT, of which 3 were made, was the final version of the road car. The car ended production in May of 1998. This information can be found here: http://www.mclarencars.com/ Greg A | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1331 Registered: 9-2002 |
Agreed 100%! --Dan | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 861 Registered: 2-2003 |
Dan, I agree! The McLaren was out in 1991, the LM around 1993 (the most superior performer out of all three), and the GT in 1995 (tend to be least favorite in reviews). I recall it being on the drawing boards shortly after the XJ220 which was still in pre-production stages itself. Classic difference between revolution and evolution, eh? Even though there are faster cars than the F40, the Enzo and other super cars can't take away anything from what and WHEN the F40 and McLaren started life... Mercedes uninvolvement is best in McLaren, for me personally. A name that does NOT need to be cheapened (if such a thing), and saved for special ultra low production cars to continue the tradition, not a more mass marketed supercar. Sunny | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1326 Registered: 9-2002 |
Sunny, If that's the case, then that only adds more to the point. While I dig the Enzo, I know which one I would choose for daily wild purposes. --Dan | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 859 Registered: 2-2003 |
Dan, 1995? You sure? I thought it came out much earlier than that... like designed in 88/89 and came out shortly after... Sunny | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1321 Registered: 9-2002 |
John, In defense of the F1: a) it is a MUCH better road car, and b) it came out in 1995. --Dan | ||
| John (Ferrarifreak)
New member Username: Ferrarifreak Post Number: 42 Registered: 4-2003 |
Yeah I have that september issue of CAR. About the McLaren replacement...they said it will have a V10 engine topping 10.000 rpm (they said the car will be an uncompromising speed missile)And it will have more power than the Enzo. BTW I hate McLaren if you didn't know..but a Enzo vs new McLaren would be great to see.. Cuz in my opinion the McLaren F1 vs the Enzo theres no competition, the Enzo is faster on race tracks (okay theres a little a bit of competition..not much IMO).. But Im sure that the McLaren replacement will not come next year or the year after..So I could expect a Ferrari F60 (if they made it in 2007) vs the new McLaren. Lets just see what will happen. | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 679 Registered: 11-2001 |
What I can say is that if you compare BMW's flagship and Mercedes flagship there is no comparison, the Benz will always be the benchmark and alltime best choice of highline luxury. A few years ago BMW was good with their 3 series M3 and after that era it's fading away and the only BMW that I still like is the M3, every other model just don't cut it and don't even mention the M5, the looks are dated,the styling dept. needs lots of help. Oh and very few people are buying a Ferrari for it's performance or reliability. Ferrari to compete with Mclaren, Nah! who gives? | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 301 Registered: 4-2001 |
Your right, what I should have said were 'real Maserati's'. The Biturbo by most all accounts was a terrible car and the reason Maserati went out of business | ||
| Marvin Balagot (Mdb69)
Junior Member Username: Mdb69 Post Number: 125 Registered: 4-2002 |
"I read where 50+% of the population wasn't even born when Maserati shipped their last car to the US." I don't think this is correct. Weren't the last Masers imported in the late 80's? Perhaps it was best that this was forgotten however. Though I always wanted a Biturbo myself. | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 300 Registered: 4-2001 |
Alex; I agree with most of what you say except by the time profits fall and market share is lost, it probably is too late for an easy recovery if at all. Well run business don't react after the fact. Our motto at GE was "be insecure", anticipate and act. Also don't forget, Fiat and Ferrari made a huge bet on Maserati which to date have results that are not as strong as they would have liked. They really had to reinvent the brand in the US. I read where 50+% of the population wasn't even born when Maserati shipped their last car to the US. Ferrari is strong today but only 10 years ago they were in the dumps at what was it 2500 cars per year? They should feel good about today but also be insecure about the future. | ||
| Alex Papas (Alexpapas)
Junior Member Username: Alexpapas Post Number: 61 Registered: 2-2003 |
Mclaren and Jaguar are two different animals entirely. Jaguar is a well known consumer brand with dealer networks throughout the world and Ford's purchase of Jaguar was a very long term strategy to increase their corporate presence through acquisition. McLaren is a race shop that has produced some consumer vehicles (if the F1 can be considered that). Their forte is in engineering know-how and less in their brand. Somewhat akin to Lotus but not nearly as evolved into marketing cars to end users. I personally foresee Mercedes swallowing McLaren and basically having them run the race operations. McLaren could also be used as a marketing tool in the same way that AMG is today. AMG was once an independent tuner, but today AMG is merely another sub brand in the Mercedes brand of Daimler Chrysler (pronounced the German way in Europe, where the Chrysler is silent). Regarding BMW, they are simply too small with very limited capital to be able to play in the big leagues. The only way they will be assured of additional capital is by taking on a majority partner who controls them or to sell out the brand to one of the major manufacturers. How does this affect Ferrari. They went through the same cycle a couple of decades ago. They sold to an industrial giant with the werewithall to provide growth capital and eventually found a leader within that group who has managed the brand exceptionally well for its corporate masters, the Fiat Industrial group (not Fiat Auto, which is a separate group.). I don't think that competition provided by stronger brands will have an influence per se. The only thing that drives improvement in corporations is when bottom line results suffer because market share is lost. That's not happening right now and Ferrari is still selling everything they produce on their own terms. | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 299 Registered: 4-2001 |
Do you really think the McLaren name is recognized outside of a smallish group of car guys? The Jaguar name is in a different league isn't it? | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1296 Registered: 9-2002 |
John, Don't be so sure. I don't recall the exact number, but MB owns a percentage of McLaren, and they certainly didn't pay anywhere in the ballpark of Ford for Jag. --Dan | ||
| John Do'h (Combover)
Junior Member Username: Combover Post Number: 53 Registered: 8-2003 |
I'm probably a bit off on the number, but I believe Ford paid 7 billion for Jaguar; however, it was later learned that the actual assets of the company were in an amount of 1-2 Billion. In other words, Ford paid 5 Billion for the name "Jaguar." Point is, Mercedes would need to pony up some serious cash to buy Mclaren as the name alone is worth $$$$$. Ditto for Ferrari. | ||
| Steve B (Sjb509)
New member Username: Sjb509 Post Number: 21 Registered: 6-2003 |
This is pure speculation, but could it be in preparation for rule change in F1? Ferrari and Toyota build both their car and engine, you could also say Ford is doing the same thing with Jaguar. Isn't Honda supposed to be designing their own chassis as well? Reading this thread got me to thinking about the possibility of a rule change that could occur where a team had to have their name on the entire car including the engine. While it would seem counter-productive to a healthy grid size, it wouldn't be the first time that a rule, which on the surface seemed illogical, turned out to have a greater significance. | ||
| KCCK (Kenneth)
Member Username: Kenneth Post Number: 644 Registered: 10-2002 |
Alex, "There simply are not enough BMW resources to go around. BMW is destined to become someone's subsidiary." I am very interested in your observation. Can you elaborate? | ||
| N'din (Abangdin)
New member Username: Abangdin Post Number: 38 Registered: 7-2003 |
Any competition is good. We the customers will benefit from it. Mercedes is smart enough to realise that McLaren should have different management for it to keep it's identity. Customers will buy McLaren because it's Mclaren. They don't want to pay extra for a Mercedes that's rebranded a McLaren. | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1293 Registered: 9-2002 |
Alex, The loss of Wolfgang Reitzle is a MAJOR loss to the automotive world. Same with Jac Nasser. Regarding McLaren - they must be financially strong from their ties with Mercedes, but esp. the ownership percentage, but does that mean they need to be swallowed in whole? I hope not. --Dan | ||
| Alex Papas (Alexpapas)
Junior Member Username: Alexpapas Post Number: 59 Registered: 2-2003 |
Ford paid over $5 billion (with a "B") for Jaguar intially. They have since sunk huge amounts each year into the strategy of trying to create a Premier group of products. The guy who could have done it was let go and he now heads up a forklift company (with a lot of common shareholders with the Daimler group BTW). Ford have a very long way to go before they start to recover their shareholders' capital out of that deal. As for McLaren, their need for a sugardaddy goes directly to the changing nature of F1 where the major players are now global car companies and not privateer teams. The Tyrell and Lotuses and Brabhams are long gone and the remaining private teams all have engine deals with global players. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 844 Registered: 2-2003 |
I don't think MB purchasing McLaren will be a good thing, unless they keep McLaren headed in the same direction -- away from AMG's stop light drag race/land yacht handling treatments. BMW Motorsport has had and still has the edge on AMG. Its tuned (pun intended) into a "friendly" German rivalry now, LOL! Ford infused 200 million pounds into Jaguar and introduced the manufacturing methods in order to usher in the new sedan that engineers were already designing (code named X300). A quieter, smoother, more comfortable, faster yet more economical, safer, more secure and more reliable XJ series, what I currently drive now. The S-Type and X-Type are JUST AS problematic as Jaguars before 1993, are cheaper than the XJ, aimed at making sales quotas and profit margins in exchange for less soul and build quality. Slip into an XK or XJ than in S-Type or X-Type. The differences are astounding. Ford is taking as much out of Jaguar as they are putting into it, trust me on this one. I see MB taking McLaren and putting one in everyone's driveway, or at least anyone who can afford their premier cars who want to spend $200k or more on an alternative. Their alternative. No thanks!! Sunny P.S. Jaguar was being bought out. They couldn't struggle any longer and they would not have survived long enough to bring out the new X300. | ||
| Alex Papas (Alexpapas)
Junior Member Username: Alexpapas Post Number: 58 Registered: 2-2003 |
BMW is not playing because they can't pee in the tall grass with the big dogs. They have all they can handle with the F1 engine program. There simply are not enough BMW resources to go around. BMW is destined to become someone's subsidiary. In the world of building consumer vehicles volume is the only thing - it keeps you in the game with the massive need to invest new capital every time a model is changed. It's a pity that small volume manufacturers will never stand alone, as all of the most beautiful vehicles in the last 100 years have come from small carmakers. Once they are swallowed up they become nothing more than nameplates on generic chassis and engine combos with a small nod to individuality in bodywork. It's the reason why old Ferraris will eventually rise in value as they age. They are special and rare. | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 298 Registered: 4-2001 |
Far be it from me to be defending or praising Jaguar designs ( not my cup of tea) but people are buying them at last and the marque will probably be in business 10 years from now and maybe introduce new models with passion. people tell me the XK are great cars for WHAT THEY ARE, smooth ,good looking boulevard cruises that sell like crazy especially in Florida. This provides profits for new car investment. Check ou the DTM Europeon Touring Car race series. MB AMG's are cleaning up with Audi a close second and BMW for some reason not playing. | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1284 Registered: 9-2002 |
William: given that they are based on the Mondeo chassis... I agree, the new jags work. Have an XK8 - it's flawless. Few issues, especially compared to '88 XJS V12. But guess which one has soul. And I won't even get into the two XKEs. --Dan | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 2961 Registered: 2-2001 |
Ture Ford vastly improved Jags reliability & sorted out their electrical gremlins & improved quality but then they give us the S & X type. They look like little more than rebodied Mondeos  | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 297 Registered: 4-2001 |
No one is saying the M5 isn't a fantastic car but didn't the 6/03 R&T comparison road test place it 3rd, after the E55 AMG and RS 6? The new 500shp M5 should be something if you can shut your eyes to the styling What Ford did for Jaguar was quality control and made it into a reliable modern technology car that people are starting to buy again. Without Ford I don't think they could have stayed in Business. BMW will be good for the long term future of RR (if they fire the stylist) and VW for Bentley. Do you think the old "bentley boys" could ever have come up with likes of the new GT? How many great old english names have passed away because of a lack of fresh blood and capital. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 2955 Registered: 2-2001 |
I think Ford has done a lot better with AM than with Jaguar, The XKR is ok & the new XJR is very nice but I have yet to see a new E type or XJ220 appearing | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1274 Registered: 9-2002 |
Lou, I'm with Greg and Taek on this one. 5 years after the latest M5 came out (let's not talk about previous editions here), AMG / MB is still strugling to put together a better car. Yeah, it's faster, but only to a degree (look at 0-100 times - pretty close). Chassis control on the m5, esp. given it's weight, is to die for. You don't even mention those words with respect to an E55 / SL55. I am very dubious of any efforts MB makes on the brand. Hopefully Ron Dennis and co. will be very very controlling. --Dan PS: Why would they need the McLaren brand for sports cars? Leave it alone, or make a successor to the F1 (I am still unsure about this idea as well, as it becomes a competition / me too kind of setup). Personally I feel the brand is best left alone, with one sparkling road car in its history. | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 62 Registered: 5-2003 |
AMG has yet to make a car that outhandles an M. Greg A | ||
| Taek-Ho Kwon (Stickanddice)
Intermediate Member Username: Stickanddice Post Number: 2048 Registered: 11-2002 |
Lou, >>Look at how AMG has turned them into BMW beater << This is highly debatable. I don't think AMG has BMW's Motorsport branch beat. Cheers | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 296 Registered: 4-2001 |
"Benz will ruin McLaren" Possible but I don't think so. Benz has their act together. Look at how AMG has turned them into BMW beater and put AMG on the map big time. Besides, whats there to ruin? Can you buy a Mclaren production car? Tell me how. Did Fiat ruin Ferrari. Did Ford ruin Jaguar? etc etc. | ||
| Fayyaz Vellani (Fvellani)
Junior Member Username: Fvellani Post Number: 122 Registered: 8-2002 |
I think Dan's worst fears will come true...Benz will ruin McLaren | ||
| L. (Testaroja)
Junior Member Username: Testaroja Post Number: 136 Registered: 5-2003 |
Mark then the solution is to buy a porsche | ||
| Rob Lay (Rob328gts)
Board Administrator Username: Rob328gts Post Number: 6113 Registered: 12-2000 |
Wow, that would put even more pressure on Ferrari to compete than even what Lamborghini has done the past couple years. Competition is great. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 756 Registered: 10-2001 |
As soon as we have 10 other exotic cars that have 360 stats or better, and none of them have a 15 or 30k service.... that will be the day! How does 60k or 90k first major service sound? | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 293 Registered: 4-2001 |
Competition is good and Ferrari in my opinon needs it. They still have a lot going for them, performance, pedigree, styling(well...in most cases) etc but the competition is fearsome and getting fearser in everthing except pedigree and history and that will fade as the competition gets better and the generation that remembers and cares about the history fades. | ||
| Augustine J. Staino (Azzuro328)
Junior Member Username: Azzuro328 Post Number: 218 Registered: 4-2003 |
I read that article also and I agree that some healthy competition can only help Ferrari in the long run. And this, in turn, will benefit us. | ||
| KCCK (Kenneth)
Member Username: Kenneth Post Number: 642 Registered: 10-2002 |
I agree, Tom. I think Ferrari can do with a serious wakening up call. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 2953 Registered: 2-2001 |
Doesnt the AMG55SL already compete with the 360 & 575 ? MB bought AMG to make sportier cars. MB has a great racing heritage, as good as Ferrari or McLaren, I dont think they have to buy McLaren to build exotics. Maybe they just want to buy McLaren | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1272 Registered: 9-2002 |
I hope Mercedes doesn't bastardize the fundamental principles behind McLaren and turn all of their cars into electrickery-savvy, weight-happy, sloshy pigs with break-neck go fast acceleration. It's good that all of these manufacturers are keeping each other on their toes - now let's see Luca respond. --Dan | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 554 Registered: 9-2002 |
In the September issue of CAR magazine there is an artical on Mercedes intending to buy Mclaren and turn the company into an exotic car manufacturer. The sole purpose it seems is to compete with Ferrari buy producing a 2+2, an entry level exotic ala 360 and a super exotic to compete with the Enzo. I think this is great!! if anything will wake up Ferrari then then will be it!! What do you guys think? |