Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

More like 145 HP down.

 

918 is very fast. Compare it to the CGT...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CXkJ42sb01k#t=16

 

Never seen any of those stickers in the shops. I bet he's bought a Ferrari one and changed it over.

 

Laferrari is trying to beat the DeLorean of Back to the future.

1 lap in - 41 years

 

The 918 sounds a million times better than the P1. I like it more every day.

 

Those mirrors look rather dumb on th car in those pics. Almost like it's supposed to pull a caravan.

 

P1 is turbo, NA sounds better

 

The 918 may end up the "slowest" of the trio (in terms of outright straight line pace) but I have a feeling that:

a) it will actually produce the power output that the manufacturer quotes, perhaps more (the CGT produced more than quoted) perhaps unlike the Ferrari (typically exaggerated - the road cars never match the press cars) and possibly even the P1 (unknown). The same applies to "downforce" and lateral acceleration...The Porsche will do exactly what they SAY it will do.

b) it will be the best engineered and tested - leading to greater reliability - did someone say NINE YEAR WARRANTY?? (that's what I've been told that Porsche are offering).

c) it will DEFINITELY beat the other two for build quality and finish. I remember a pal telling me that his brand new Enzo from new, had an engine cover that fitted so badly he couldn't close it...it took 4 attempts to get one to close properly, and let's not talk about the infant manufacturer McLarens problems with the Mp4-12C.

d) it's 4wd and 4ws will make it point-to-point the fastest car on the Road, although the P1/theTheFerrari may be ultimately faster around a track.

e) 918 will be a worthy successor to the CGT IMO, as will the theFerrari (f**king stupid name) to the Enzo - history will compare the two generations favourably. BUT the P1 has got an impossible mountain to climb to be held up with any regard to the F1 which is considered the greatest car of all time.

f) 918 is the only truly bespoke car of the three with it's V8 out of the RS Spyder. The LaF**kingStupidName has it's engine out of a rather more mundane F12 and and we all KNOW the P1 is an extreme 12C.


That's not to say that the 918 is the car that I would necessarily choose but based on what I've seen it's the most likely to be the "objectively superior automotive product."

I still can't get over the TheFerrari's stupid name TBH irrespective of the cars availability at ANY price.

 

It is an impressive car, but the 12C was running Pzeros...

 

They actually made a completely new V8 for the 918... used the experience they gained from racing RS Spyder, yes, but not it's engine.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV2pEXK_zIM[/ame]

 

That last video is cool, but seriously....a video that shows a car surviving.....'heat testing'?? 'Mission accomplished'?? Isn't that basically expected for every car manufactured?
I was hoping for a video showing more of the performance capabilities....
Kevin

 

Numerous Ferrari customer cars have exceeded the quoted factory numbers. For example, the Enzo that broke all of R&T's records at the time (annihilating the McLaren F1 on the way) was a well used customer car.

 

You want to bet your kidneys' that Ferrari's 0-300 and >7 @ The Ring will turn out to be true?

 

Just stating that Ferrari does not exaggerate its numbers. All the claimed numbers in the past 10-15 years have been either matched or surpassed by independent testers, some using customer cars.

If I had to answer though, I would say the 0-300 time is very believable.

 

I was fortunate enough to catch a ride in the 918 at the Quail a few weeks back.

It is a very interesting car no doubt and my favorite of the new supercars. It took me a while to warm up to the idea, but they are executing very well. It is the way of the near future for sure (hybrids). How else do you meet the 2025 regulations and still have a fun car to drive?

I was told they are not done at 887hp, and that they are in fact going to set a new world record. These comments were presented to me unprovoked. I believe them. Porsche ALWAYS delivers.

 

Make sure you book a Dialysis machine...

 

I believe them too.

 

Weight of the Enzo?

Downforce of the Enzo?

Having weighed one and put one in a wind tunnel I found their claims not to be true.

 

Porsche admits, the car is heavy. (I believe they will support the car overtime with lighter batteries as they come along.) They also have solutions. 4WS and TORQUE. Thats the whole game in their minds!

They will have much more torque with large batteries than these other cars. While on track at all points in the rev range they will have more of it. And as always in true Porsche engineering fashion, it will do it all with much less drama, relatively of course.

The engine sounds nuts and is a masterpiece in itself, the electric brakes are as firm as the giant ceramics, and it HAS NO ROOF. Enough said.

 

I, very politely, beg to differ.
I've run a number of different production Ferraris myself (no special series though) and they've always been woefully short of the quoted power. By as much as 10%. And although it's been mildly irritating it's not been the end of the world.

Ferrari have, in the past, consistently lied about power, downforce, lateral G, laptimes and acceleration. (ask Jim - he'll verify this).
Typically, cars lent to journalists have had difference ECU's, exhausts, suspension geometries and other modifications which later production cars have NOT had. That's why Ferrari HATE Chris Harris testing their cars. He tests productions cars and not press cars and the cars tend not to stack up with claims.
I know for a fact that supposed "independent testers" are not necessarily independent (report something negative and you can be sure your programme/Magazine wont be lent any more Ferraris to test) and when BBC Top Gear have tested Ferraris in the past, Ferrari have sent engineers with laptops to electronically optimise the car for their test track, possibly modify the suspension and a host of other things.

Remember that BBC Top Gear test - 360CS vs 996RS - they recorded an identical laptime? Absolute rubbish. No they didn't. The 996 RS was someway faster. And I think it was Andrea Bertolini (Ferrari's test driver) and his engineers needed 5 attempts to get near the 996RS's first time lap by the Stig. I ran both cars and I tell you the RS would waste the 360CS in performance terms.

My friends that have owned the "big stuff" have also reported that WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE F40, their cars have never achieved the quoted power outputs nor performance figures. (The F40 has/had way more power than the quoted amount!).

Ferrari have been complete bull5hitters in the past. They may not be now so I concede to you that this LAF may be different...(but not based on Ferraris history)


It's no secret that the word from Maranello is Ferrari are now stuggling with
- matching the LAF claimed performance figures
- Laptimes
- brake pedal feel (due to KERS etc).

The car may blow everyone away and do EXACTLY what Ferrari promise. If that's the case, I can't wait. So far only Porsche have done it consistently (which is why the car appears slower....) - can't say about McLaren though...
Good Luck Ferrari - you've talked the talk, will you walk the walk? (or perhaps LaF buyers don't care - highly likely - in which case Ferrari are not incentivised to deliver on their promises, so it's ultimately those self-same buyers that lose out!!!).

 

We agree to disagree.

I too have seen customer cars surpass the quoted figures when measured at various events. The 458, that a fellow fchatter measured at 6+ secs for the 100-200 kph dash is a recent example. The Enzo I mentioned earlier, an older one. Also, all supercar manufacturers send technicians in the tests. Chris Harris you say? What a joker...

 

Well, rose tinted spectacles will let you see what ever you want I suppose. Nothing wrong in being a Ferrari fan - I am one - but the fact is that history clearly shows the facts. For longer than many of us can remember, Ferrari has over stated it's performance figures, and Porsche has understated. It is what it is. The most extreme case I have seen was in my 355. Great car - my favourite F car to date in fact, and emotionally pushed all the right buttons including sounding EPIC. However... top speed - quoted at 185. Reality - I never got more than 173mph on the speedo - and we know how they over read.

At the end of the day, I see this contest playing out like this:-

- LaF - most emotional
- 918 - most thoroughly engineered tech showcase
- P1 - most extreme performance

All very different in their own way, and all appealing in their own way. We are blessed to have them - we should be supportive of their respective strengths and recognise that whilst we love the Ferrari LaF, it won't beat the opposition in every single metric.

Oh - and why do you think Chris Harris is a joker?

 

I have seen 195 in the 430 and it still had more. I am aware of the fact that older Ferraris had this issue (especially in the 60s and 70s). After the 360 though I have not seen a Ferrari that could not match factory claims.

As far as Harris is concerned, he made a fool of himself by making accusations of rigging without offering any proof whatsoever. When one makes an accusation he is obligated to prove the claim, otherwise he is nothing more than a backbiter.

 

Oddly enough on the new Chris Harris video he states SEVERAL TIMES that the F40 is clearly more powerful that its listed figure. So which is it? Are Ferrari the blatant liars some people think (wish) them to be or not?