458 Italia vs McLaren MP4 Blighty - The UK press decides

+1

Kryz himself said that Porsche and Lambo take tests "on the chin" and that they DO NOT "cheat."

The hallowed F1 had a crap chassis around a glorious BMW engine (Tiff Needel said it, maybe he is a liar too), it seems now the MP4 has an okay chassis around a sweet Ricardo engine

 

It was such a crappy chassis that it beat the Enzo, a car more modern and loaded with technology, around the Evo test circuit. It was so crappy that it won Le Mans, something no Ferrari has done in...a very long time.

 

Sorry if this was already thrown in, but I'm getting eye strain trying to read all this...

Car Magazine UK's lap times set by Ben Collins (aka, former Stig) have been released, as well as a new video.

Here are the results:

Ferrari 458 Italia........01:28,30
Porsche 911 GT2RS.. 01:28,78
LP570 Performante... 01:29,92
McLaren MP4-12C..... 01:30,10
Audi R8 V10.............. 01:31,06
Mercedes SLS AMG.... 01:33,10

...and a link to the video:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8EAYPssUzg&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

You're about 3 pages too late!

Nice try though...

 

At least we know another MP4 exists which is faster than another Italia.




The MP4-26 vs the F150 Italia, of course

 

Crap. Oh well.

I've been trying to follow it, but I guess I missed everything after EVO's laptimes and whatnot.

Honestly, as far as Car Mag's laptimes go, I'm not only very impressed 458's but the Gallardo's as well. They're different enough to have both in my driveway, right?

 

The F150 pretty much stinks. But, if you go to the F1 section of Fchat, you don't hear excuses. What you hear is a whole lot of fans telling them they better do better or fire some people.


BTW: The McLaren F1 road car is one of the finest cars ever built. It is an engineering masterpiece that all high performance cars are measured by.

 

As I said earlier, the big winner was Audi. The Lambo came out a lot faster than people though and the low priced R10 beat the pants off the Mercedes.

I think if most were to guess, this is what you would think to find.

1) Mp4-12C (latest and greatest)
2) 458 (good but not great)
3) Porsche GT2 (good but too old to compete)
4) Merc gullwing (fast and new)
5) Lambo spider (over the hill -- a spider)
6) Audi R10 (there's a reason why you're so cheap)


I think a lot of minds were blown today!

 

I'll say this, though, disregarding laptimes, the R8 looked like one of the most fun to drive from the video.
Enough composure and tail-out antics to satisfy anyone.

 

There is a note at the end of the CAR video which goes...

"McLaren says their 12C was suffering from hydraulic suspension problems on the day of the test and has since returned to Rockingham.

Piloting the same car on the optional Pirelli Corsa tyres, McLaren's chief test driver recorded a time of 1:28:00..."

krzys, you got those all important tenths and can reinstate your order.

Odd, though, that Collins didn't notice that something was amiss. A problem significant enough to cost two seconds a lap should be obvious...

 

If Ferrari said and done this, the entire world would yell: CHEAT!

Seriously --- what does this prove? The only real way to test the cars is with the same drivers under the same conditions with an impartial judge. Now, let's let Ferrari put in their best driver and which to sticky tires.

I'm with Krzys that Ferrari exaggerates their claims. I have no doubt that Mac will do the same.

Honestly... it's a bit pathetic to come back and "prove" their car can be faster.

I'm sure that if McLaren's own driver didn't beat the time, then for sure they would have announced it too to the world...... yah, right.

The Mp4-12c is fast. But, when the chips were down, the others shined while they didn't. It didn't on the track and it didn't in the hearts of the story contributors.

To me, the second part is more damning. You can excuse a leak in the hydraulics for a poor showing but it's not that easy when dealing with it's lack of likeability.

 

Yeah, I wonder what Ferrari would get out of the 458 if they went there on their own and figured the car.

Like yourself, though, I couldn't care less that the 458 was faster. Obviously, as the video is all and only about lap times and this thread has brought out a rather juvenile element in the McLaren fan club, it's the topic here. But when I read magazine articles about stuff like this I tend to glaze over when it comes to the chart showing the lap times. I usually only read that part of the article once I've read everything else three times and there's absolutely nothing else left to read. Is it fast enough to kill me? Yes. That's all I need to know. Anything beyond that is just for bragging about.

 

Here's the problem for McLaren. The car's entire point is to "blow everyone away" with it's performance over those menial brands Ferrari and Lamborghini. Why else would you buy one? Serious.... if you hate Ferrari, you can buy Porsche or Audi or Lambo or Aston Martin or others if you live in Europe.

So, they marketed the car as some kind of record breaker.

Well.... the problem is when you start down this path, you need to deliver.

If I were a 12c buyer buying only because it's the fast car on the block, I'm having second thoughts today.

 

both overly eager (hopeful?) buyer and McL are holding hands in that one. that's what happens when you talk trash, make claims, before even ONE FRICKIN PRODUCTION CAR turned a wheel. for those so DESPERATE to have something vastly superior performance and tech wise, just to have something to poke in the eye of Ferrari...especially at the price point...don't go around pouting, making excuses, cuz that don't fly. that car ain't here (yet?), deal with it.

 

I think there are plenty of people coming to this conclusion. Read the article and the comments too that I've pasted below, if there is anyone who knows tracking a car it's AXIS (they still proclaim the Scud as the best car ever).

http://axisofoversteer.blogspot.com/2011/06/mclaren-mp4-12c-vs-ferrari-458-ouch.html

Don't know whether what's said about the logistics of McLaren are true but if so they seem to be in bigger trouble than just magazine reviews!

 

I guess the note I related from the end of the CAR video is somewhat negated by the fact that the EVO car was fitted with Pirelli Corsas and, presumably, wasn't also suffering from an hydraulic problem (unless, of course, the McLaren is consistently unreliable).

The article you quote highlights the biggest problem for McLaren, though. Big deal about lap times, who cares, but it might just turn out that the McLaren is actually as dull to drive as it is to look at.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2JVR0mAzjQ[/ame]

I really can't believe this is the same car that's getting these reviews now.

 

Maybe it isn't. We were told on and on that these were pre-production cars. It's possible that McLaren gave these a bit extra poke. It is plausible

 

Good points, if in fact the suspension fault is real is the Mclaren so devoid of feel and feedback to the driver that he cannot tell?

Funny that someone mentioned at AXIS that Honda in F1 tried to go the hydraulic suspension route and binned it quickly. Ferrari has hade their system (though very very different from the extreme McLaren version) for years and hasn't quite had problems like this (except maybe the Enzo at the Ring, but of course the car was 5/6 years old by then)

 

Could be. Just like how the 458's used in this test might have been ringers, it is plausible.

 

hats off to the Lambo - the only spider there, old tech and all that yet, still a good show! That must have bothered Ron . ..

 

It would be a shame if the hydraulic suspension were an achilles' heel. I rather like the fact that they've taken a different route and McLaren are to be applauded for bringing variety to the supercar table. I like kit for its own sake, so the more fascinating the better.

 

This is a good video from Car Magazine

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8EAYPssUzg&feature=player_embedded#at=290

 

See post #545

 

sorry linked to the wrong video, I'll post the right one when I get back to the office