458 vs McLaren MP4-12C--- Your thoughts?

You make some very valid points

 

i've been casually following the progress of the MP4, and from what i gather, sure, it looks the way it does in part because of aero goals, but that doesn't mean that that was the only solution, as per the less than 100% happy position of the 'new' designer when the person took over. the form/function argument works as an "excuse" to a certain point. me, i've NEVER liked the way it looks, and just as important for me, it's 'blaaaahhhh blahhhh' engine noise is just as disappointing. but, i've never denied the fact that it is an impressive kit underneath, engineering wise. and of course, i'm on neither 'list' for an MP4 or a 458, so i don't really 'matter' in the end

 

You can blame a designer but really, it's whoever is in charge of marketing who really sets the tone.

Clearly they wanted to mimick the F1. Personally, I think it was a mistake. I saw a picture of the MP4 next to the F1 and its amazing how much better the F1 looks all these years later.

From a marketing perspective, it was less risky for sure to take this path but it also makes the car look "familiar" instead of unique. The F1 is a classic. Trying to mock it is not the best solution for a totally new car in my opinon.

My one real aesthetic issue is the -- what is now very common -- use of black fins everywhere. I thought the Audi R8 had gone as far as you can in that regard but the MP4 seems to take what is now a design cliche even further. Mazda's and Kia's have them for heaven's sake. That, and the dangling front tooth make it a miss for me visually. If I never see another black fin it will be too soon.

Mechanically, I think it's marvelous. Visually, its just not pretty enough.

 

Well I'm no engineer, but to my mind if you feed computational fluid dynamics software a given package (i.e. the chassis dimensions and form) and performance targets for several metrics (downforce, drag, cooling, etc.) and then further cross-validate the results in a wind tunnel, then it is probably going to spit out one optimal body shape that is the best compromise of all objectives. How else does every F1 team on the grid end up with nearly identically shaped cars in this aero age?

The following, directly from McLaren:

"Dedicated wind tunnel and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) teams worked together to use every millimetre of the 12C’s body to optimise downforce, for improved traction and cornering ability, and to reduce drag for increased speeds and fuel efficiency."

So no, I don't feel that I am reading too much into the design philosophy. They have been consistent in this message. My honest impression of the designer Frank Stephenson and his comments is that he is in the rather challenging position of being a right-brained aesthetics person in a corporate culture that is known for its uncompromising focus on efficiency. Tough gig.

As an aviation enthusiast, I've noted similarities. I know not all car guys are airplane guys, but there is a purity in aircraft design that is similarly apparent in the 12C. Sure you could make any given plane look much crazier, but it wouldn't improve it's performance and that would be a poor exercise in design discipline. Even still, most airplanes designed decades ago look great to this day. They have remained visually relevant because they were and always have been the most efficient shape for their intended purpose. McLaren has alluded to this philosophy (pre and post 12C). Sure, it's not for everyone, but some of us do "get it".

So you may see a design that is bland and was a folly or a "miss". I may see a shape that was the result of tireless optimization and that is exciting in it's purity of focus. Some guys fantasize that a modern-day Michaelangelo penned their car somewhere in Modena in between swills of Campari. Which is fine. Other guys get more of a kick dreaming that every millimeter of their supercar was treated like a Formula One project and that more than one artsy designer probably left in a huff before it was all over!

 

FYI, my last post was being written when you posted, so mine wasn't a direct reply. Your points, however, well taken. Good night!

 

Thank you. I realize that some of my posts may be long-winded, but I'm really not trying to spout meaningless B.S.

I'm a fan of this car and being an entrepreneur (like most of us here, I'm sure) I really admire what McLaren has set out to achieve as a company. Whether I end up owning a 12C or not, I do feel compelled to try to explain what I believe is the rationale for their decisions. Along the way that will certainly come off as defensive and biased at times, given that this is a Ferrari-centric community. Not that the boys in Woking need my help!

 

I honestly think a lot of Ferrari enthusiasts like that McLaren is getting in the game. Ferrari needs competition. I don't think Lambo has been that for a few years. The California is going right after the Aston Martin. I think that will make them better too -- if they want to stay in the game.

 

The Cali was a smart move for Ferrari.I wish they would use the chassis for a 2+2 coupe with hybrid power train.

 

Aerodynamics often spoilt aesthetics for sure, but still some manage to do pretty cars. For example, the Ferrari 458 is probably far more efficient than the F430 and it looks way better, IMO. Besides that, details like the shape of the windows, front and rear lights, etc... have not much effect on aerodynamics.

Said that, I don´t think the McLaren is ugly enough to make me forget those 200 kg less. Although I have to admit that if I had the means to buy one, I´d find difficult to give my money to that Ron Dennis sumbag. LOL.

 

Lets also talk practicalities now. How will the McClaren hold up after an accident? With a new CF frame no doubt bonded to aluminium / steel components, how does a repairer go about sorting this thing out. If a metal component bonded into the CF frame breaks its going to be an interesting task fixing it and getting the structural rigidity back (or do you just replace the whole thing?)

McClaren will have there hands full educating not only dealers but also designated repair shops on how to put this car back together again and maintain the characteristics of the car.

Just my two cents worth.

 

Yes, a very valid concern and one that I agree does need more education from McLaren. As far as the carbon monocell holding up *during* the accident, their crash test results were very impressive. Apparently there was no damage whatsoever to the tub itself, such that they were able to reuse the the same monocell for multiple tests. The significance of this is that I believe if you are in an accident that can actually damage the monocell, then it was a real doozy and probably will write off the entire car anyway. McLaren will certainly claim that an aluminum chassis car in the same accident would come out even worse.

The front and rear subframes are aluminum crash structures and my understanding is that they are bolted to the tub, not bonded into the carbon cell itself. Obviously, they are designed to crumple and/or tear away from the tub, thereby absorbing energy and leaving the survival cell intact. In any case, I can't see any shop except a McLaren dealer or the factory being able to put one of these things back together properly. But, given that, my assumption is that provided the monocell is undamaged, they can theoretically re-attach everything else and true it all up as on a brand new vehicle (for a fairly nauseating price, I am sure).

Again, this is my very basic understanding, given what I have read and heard so far. It could be completely wrong.

 

Agree as same theory behind an F1 car (however afer an accident I doubt it they would use the same CF mono).

However to your point that the components may be bolted to the CF frame. Its the bolt point that concerns me as in an accident if that bolt point becomes loose (ie the "flange" bonded in the CF) then how does one repair a loose bolt point. I assume there a numerous bolt points and you would expect that in an accident many of these may become loose making the CF mono useless. I pity the insurers!!

 

I thought about the CF issue and accident repair and I think it's going to be a non-issue. I don't think it will be a plus or a minus for the MC.

Any accident that's a pretty good colision in the 430 is pretty much a write off. I imagine any accident that is the same for the MP4 will be the same. The tub may be OK but the body panels and crash zones will be screwed. If the tub is damaged, then for sure this car took a major hit.

My only concern is that you might loose a corner in a Mp4 that could cause something to rip out of the chassis, thereby damaging it. But, without really seeing the construction, you can't say it will be anything significant.

Let's face it -- if you crash the car enough to damage the frame or the tub of either car, it's going to be toast from an insurer's point of view.

 

I think the McLaren will perform very well in a crash scenario. When you study this car, you realize that McLaren has designed it in the same way they design their race cars. The story is the monocell in test chassis was undamaged in the first two crash tests (the front and rear impacts) and the third one (the side impact) finally did it in. The fact that they could just unbolt the crumpled aluminum structure and bolt on new parts like a race car is impressive.

If you are involved in a crash of any significance it generally means a write off of the car whereas there is a good chance this one might be salvagable. That is the least of your concerns though because the car becomes unmarketable in any case, but atleast you have something you can drive.

 

Excellent article about the Monocell (carbon tub) here:

http://www.compositesworld.com/articles/f1-inspired-monocell-racing-safety-for-the-road(3)

 

Sigh.

Buy the one you like.

 

Great article, thanks.

 

We attended the unveiling event in San Jose tonight. It was a very classy party, and we had a great time.

All the thoughts on styling, already mentioned ad nauseam in this thread, need no further mention. How about just the pics?

Awaiting the de-cloaking event
Image Unavailable, Please Login

There were at least three McLaren F1's in attendance, two inside and one outside.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

One of which was designated the XP4 Experimental Prototype. Still my favorite supercar of the 90's.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

Finally, there you have it ... in the flesh.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

Admittedly, I wasn't "wow'ed" by the first impression. The 458 (since this is the comparo thread) has a prettier disposition and proportions. I'll reserve judgment of the car, as a whole, until I get a chance to drive the MP4-12C. There's a whole personality to be discovered which accounts for some percentage of a car's appeal ... well, to me at least.

 

A few more pics from tonight:

Introducing the car to the guests
Image Unavailable, Please Login

I got to sit in the car and get comfortable. It's slightly wider than a Lotus Evora inside, but less roomy than the 458. Here's a pic of the center console.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

Back-end view. The hall was quite full.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Great pics- thanks for the recap. That blue F1 is striking.
I'll admit, McLaren would do well to start parading the 12C around in a few different colours. I've seen that silver one so many times it feels like it is sitting in my garage already.

I'm sure they will have no problems making their quota in San Jose, however.

 

Saw that earlier this week. That side by side clip of Hamilton an Button driving up the hill at Goodwood is worth a thousand rewinds. Great sound too. Wonder if that is the optional Sport exhaust.

 

Car Magazine September 2010 issue is reported to have an in depth comparison of the 458 and the 12C. Has anyone read the article which supposedly includes a heads up comparison od the two cars driving.

 

It was only a speculative comparison. No driving.


People will buy based on looks, sound, latest greatest, and eventually reliability/servicing. The tech on the 12C is interesting to ponder. That will add something to the experience, in the same way the Honda Insight was made more interesting by being the only car in its segment to have an all aluminum chassis, or the Corvette Z06 is more interesting because it has a balsa wood cored carbon fiber floor. All of these cars are too fast for the road for speed to really matter.

Also, I believe that the 12C is expected to be 80 kg lighter than the 458, not 200 kg. But much of that difference goes away if you dump the stock exhaust and wheels, and install an li battery on the 458. Although, the 12C probably has more scope for future weight reductions.