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

Since when was Ferrari considered the "pinnacle of performance"? Porsche Gt-3's outran the F430. Lambo has more power.

And, it's not just today. It goes back a long time. The 308 was not the fastest car of it's day. Nor was the 328, 344, etc.

The McLaren F1 out runs the Ferrari Enzo. No one seemed to care.

History is against you.

 

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/263737/new_mclaren_mp412c_review.html

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/mclaren-mp4-12c/255434/

 

The popular impression is exactly that: pinnacle performance. That's why Ferrari constantly talks of the connection to F1 and places so much emphasis on winning there. The other cars were one-offs by makes with broad identities. Nobody could seriously say Porsches are better than Ferraris as such. However, if the top end of Ferrari performance cannot stay with entry level from McLaren, they are going to have a fight on their hands down the road.

 

I can see why you are dead center the target of McLaren.

You're bored with Ferrari. Honestly, you are. You may still like it but you want something more --- like a kid who can't stop eating every candy in the store.

And, you are the person they want. That's exactly who they are targeting.

But, you're not typical. Most buyers do not have 2 sitting in their garage now.

These new buyers have finally "made it" and they want to buy an exotic car for all that hard work. They are finally able to afford their own dream car.

And their dream car is..... well, it's not a McLaren no matter how fast it is.

This is exactly my point. This car will be great for people who are bored with Ferrari, upset with Ferrari, want something different than Ferrari, speculators, or total gear heads who just want the latest and greatest (at least in the US market).

So, they designed a car you will love --and that's fantastic. Because as you are stuck in traffic with it, you'll know that it goes 5 MPH faster at top speed than the Ferrari. And that it's tub is made from carbon fibre instead of aluminum. And that it has 50 more HP. That will matter to you, but it doesn't matter to most.

Sorry, but no figures on paper are gonna change that person looking for his exotic dream.

I find it hard to believe that every person who bought an Enzo didn't know the McLaren F1 was faster. They all did and none of them cared.

 

I think you are right: good diagnosis. I am a bit bored with Ferrari and looking forward to something new.

However, let's get back to dreams and little boys. What attracted you to Ferraris first? Their luscious looks? Perfect proportions in design? As a 10-, 15-, 20-year old? I am pretty sure that at that stage we were all the same: Ferraris as the pinnacle of performance? Long before any of us knew what horse-power was, we just vaguely knew Ferrari was on top. So, the battle now is not about us, but it is about the little boys (and girls obviously).

I am not saying Ferrari has anything to fear now. In 10-20 years, though, it's a different story. The perception will matter.

 

The really smart ones had both.

>8^)
ER
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

No question-- we are excited and captivated by LOOKS.

Here's absolute proof:

Ferrari Gt4 308 vs Ferrari 308 GT or GTS

Exact same mechanicals, almost identical performance, completely different looks.

Which one was lusted over then and now? The plain one or the sexy one? Which one is worth more now? Which one is cared for more now and in better working order? Which one is RARER yet still far less desirable to own?

Was the Ferrari 308 gt the fastest car around then? No way. Did it matter? Hell no. Does it matter today? Even more hell no.

Frankly, 20 or 30 years from now all exotics will be illegal so I wouldn't worry about what happens then.

 

Well, now you're cookin'!

 

Ah, the standard get out clause just in case the reviews are positive: The British press would say a house brick was better than the Ferrari if it was made in Britain. It's all bias and the McLaren simply can't be 'better' than the 458. Right...

 

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/mclaren-mp4-12c/255434/

Intense...

 

here's another wrinkle, or angle if you prefer.....to compare the mclaren mp4-12c vs. ferrari 458 in another way.....compare the two in the profit margain

no doubt someone will jump on to say "it's not about the margain"......but my point is this, it is an indicator of what effort was required to make each....after all, you 'should' always be able to do more with more!

like the mclaren f1 vs. enzo prior compared, the technical and performance numbers edge is won out by the mclarens...of course they have had a
huge amount of r&d and more exotic materials/technology in the construction, in order for mclaren to get those higher performance numbers, so not a big surprise there
but the F1 did not "make" money for the company, ron dennis' own admission.....i'm unsure of the enzo, but certainly profit was made on each car

and so i wonder the same with the mp4-12c, that in attaining the higher performance numbers/capability, how much it cost (or will yet cost) from the margain, to get that......compare the 458, even at msrp, was designed to do all that it does, and generate a profit for it's shareholders

i'm not saying that i prefer one over the other, to me if owners of the 458 finding it 'not as exciting when new' after a while of owning, how will the "reigned in" mclaren feel after a while to it's owners? ........IMO the 458 the more "sexy" of the pair

 

Button finds it "Hilarious"

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha6sC0Aqz5w[/ame]

>8^)
ER

 

Pedigree? Who the **** care about that? Pedigree doesn't mean ****. Pedigree is a marketing tax they charge you and which you gladly pay.

Placing a Ferrari key down and looking for recognition is almost as bad as wearing Ferrari shoes and shirts to C&C -- everyone else laughs.

And if you really want to test the cars in such a 'common folk' way, open your doors and see who is more interesting. Doors that open up vs regular doors. Win McLaren. As for looks, neither the 458 or McLaren as great looking.

BTW, your pedigreed Ferrari just got it's ass handed to it based on the reviews pouring out.

 

A supercar without the super looks, McLaren just never gets it right. They should just give up the goat.

 

Ahahahha, soooo true, but you know this is normal since the Brits are the Greatest nation in the world

 

Looks may be in the eyes of the beholder, but beauty is not. Beauty is a factor decided by proportion, transition between shapes and forms. Proportions, details, and expresion.

You may like something, somebody may not. But beauty its a matter of trained eye.

MC's proportions are ruined by the front end, by the a-pillars that are to inclined and spoil the front wings courving. THe front expresion is awful.

The only thing ok about Mc proportion is the rear. everyting else is rubbish aesthetic.

The courving over the 458's doors doesent compare to the scoops from mc.

..and so and so......

That's why just trained people can design something to be liked by many. If everybody would design theyr own cars......

 

They didn't just get the McLaren F1 right, they hit out of the ballpark. Mind blowing performance even by today's standards, sleek, sexy looks, record holder of the road car speed record for nearly 13 years, winner of numerous automotive competitions and flat out victor of the 1995 24 hrs of Le Mans, so on and so forth...

And judging by the reviews, the MP4 is following in its footsteps. Which makes me a very happy camper : )

 

There's something I don't understand.

McLaren says the CCB's are not really what you need (they want to "wheen" people off them in their own language) and everyone here says they are too heavy, too expensive, not worth the money, etc.

But, every press test that McLaren has had with the car has CCB's on it.

Why? If they are not really the best thing, why put them on your test cars? Why would you give away test cars that only have the more expensive brakes if they "aren't worth it"?

I will say that one thing impresses me more than any other. And, you're going to think its weird: It's the fuel mileage. I'm impressed. For a car with that much HP and performace to deliver over 20 MPG is very impressive.

 

These tests were carried out at the Portimao race circuit in Portugal.

What McLaren have said about their CCBs is that most customers will not need them if they are not tracking the car's frequently. Also their steel brakes (the overall system) are actually lighter than the optional CCBs.

Clearly this event, held at a race track over several days with cars being driven at the limit by lead footed journalists, warranted the fitment of CCBs.

>8^)
ER

 

Don't forget the downside of using CCB's for excessive track use: EXPENSIVE!

You'd spend insane amounts of money replacing them.

 

I wasn't talking about the F1 being a dud because it certainly wasn't. I was talking about the timing of its release and it was released at the wrong time, and as such McLaren dropped the ball.

 

MotorTrend's turn at the wheel here. They start with the overview they published last September, then jump into the Portugal Press drive on page 4:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/exotic/1104_2012_mclaren_mp4_12c_drive/index.html

Lovely image here in the Ice Silver paint. Looks like Porsche's "Polar Silver" to me and might be the colour to have on the 12C?

>8^)
ER
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Good point mate, also some Macca afficionados should tell us why the F1 s speed record was done with an XP

 

You don`t replace the discs (ceramic rotors are in the area of 200000 km usage - average) you replace the pads, (a few quid that is) but I doubt you wear them on 20-30 laps, let`s be rezonable

 

If the McLaren takes off and becomes wildly popular, do you think people will buy Ferrari 360s to make the layman think that they have a 12c?