Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

Ding... ding... ding.

Exactly. McL may have wanted to sell 500,... but upon discussion with initial likely buyers, they realized that they would lose some of their "likely's" if they went above #X.

Sure,... there may be another 125 willing buyers,... but that would have resulted in a portion of the original 375 NOT buying. Net sales more or less unchanged...

At the end of the day,... McL came to the conclusion that the best solution was ~375.

McLaren is not stupid. 375 is what they decided they could sell. (According to Enzo's philosophy,... they likely felt they could sell 376).

 

Is it true that McLaren's upcoming P13 will use the same tub as P1?

Just curious.

 

And the same engine, but detuned))) AFAIK

 

Though they're just now returning to '90-early '91 market-pricing - or maybe 50% of, inflation-adjusted - could be they'd value even higher still at originally proposed production #'s?

 

Am I the only one who thinks that market value is not our concern here? I thought this was about the actual cars...

 

It's McLaren first go at selling this no of cars at this price. Ferrari on the other hand had a lot of customers from way back who have not only had the pleasure of enjoying ownership of a ltd edition Ferrari but also to made a tidy profit off it. Obviously Ferrari with it's long history can sell more than 499 cars. Yet it has set 499 as it objective for the LF. It's primary objective is to ensure the price of the LF goes up and continue the fine tradition of Ltd edition Ferraris. For McLaren to sell 375 pcs is a fantastic result and i am sure they probably could have sold more but they probably want allow the price of the P1 to go up to start a successful run of ltd edition for future models. I would not mind owning the LF, P1 or 918. There is a very fine line on which is a better car.

 

Maybe I am wrong but if I am a P1 owner I would not feel so great about a LESSER model (a Porsche 911 competitor in fact) being made from what is essentially the heart and backbone of my 'ultra rare and exclusive new hypercar'.

Am I alone in this?

 

Exactly.

 

I agree, I would have wanted a bespoke chassis, not an adapted 12C chassis, one must wonder from a costing point of the profit per car on the P1 considering the shared components with the 12C.....

(sounds terribly accountant like I know)

 

Well - Mclaren tried to produce more F1's, but no one would buy them. Ferrari had no trouble selling 349+ F50's through a strange lease sale agreement.

As for engine architecture the F50 used an "f1 derived 4.7". The f1 engine, the BMW s70, shared evolution with the European s50 (m3 motor).

Ferraris brand sells cars regardless of whether they're actually good. That's not to say the Laferrari won't be an amazing car, but to even be considered in the same breadth other brands have to over deliver. The 918 has done so, Mclaren is still coy about mentioning their achievement.

 

So first the P1 was said to use the chassis from the 12C - not true - and now you are suggesting that McLaren's entry level model will use the chassis from the top end model - also likely not true. While similar construction techniques are used across the model range, the chassis are not interchangeable between the three cars.

The S70/2 V12 was an evolution of the M70/S70 V12 from the BMW 8-Series, however the S70/2 produced for the F1 was almost entirely bespoke due to Gordon's strict weight and packaging constraints imposed on the design team at BMW Motorsports. There has been a lot of suggestions that the S50 is half the S70/2 engine, but even that doesn't prove to be correct when comparing the block and components.

>8^)
ER

 

Ok. I'm actually relieved to hear that. Thanks Erik.

 

I understood that the tubs, whilst not exactly interchangeable between the P1 and 12c, it is only in the details and that they are basically the same?

 

I love Ferraris as much as you guys but I have to give credit where it is due.

I think it is important to realize the genius of building cars the McLaren way. The body shell is not necessary for the structural integrity of the car. If you peel the body shell of a 12C away and look at how the chassis is constructed you can clearly see how the same concepts can be used to practically build any car in their lineup for the foreseeable future including the P1. Sure the tub, crash structures, and engine mounting will not be exactly the same for every model but there are significant economies of scale, especially when you can change the body shell without coming up with a whole new chassis design. Imagine how simple coming up with a 12C replacement will be and how much money they will save. They could put a body shell on it that looks just as crazy as the P1 in a relatively short amount of time.

It is clear there are lot of differences between the P1 and 12C via the technology they deploy. To say that a P1 is the same as a 12C because the share a revolutionary chassis design concept is stretching it.

 

They are basically the same in the sense they are all carbon fiber. But they are not the same size, weight, shape, etc.

 

But I believe the bottom half is basically identical save for the method of construction.

 

Frank explained to me they are not interchangeable. There are some differences besides just the top canopy. ie they don't take a 12c and 'add' a canopy to it.

 

Incorrect, but even if that were the case, why would it matter? No one is going to create a P1 from a 12C.

Aston Martin has been using and evolving their VH chassis architecture since 2004 applying it all the way up to their million dollar plus One-77 model. When it comes to the underpinnings of a new model it's not necessary to reinvent the wheel when you are already using a superior solution.

>8^)
ER

 

The engines will be significantly different in all three models. P1's engine is believed by the majority of people that it is the same one found in the 12C, but it is in reality 90% new.

The block is completely different, redesigned cylinder heads, combustion chambers, exhaust valves. Oil and water pumps are new, the oil tank is different and the turbochargers are bespoke.

 

Not exactly, the bottom bit is also different. The MonoCage is a single unit, it incorporates the vehicle's roof and snorkel air intake, with the air tunnels inside it, as well as the IPAS battery and power electronics.

So it's not like they just bolted on the roof structure onto 12C's MonoCell. And the fact that it's a one-piece structure makes it even more special.

 

Not sure if its been mentioned but iirc the p1's canopy can be fitted with an optional integrated roll cage that fastens to the tub.

 

Chose my words wisely - the evolution was shared, I wasn't suggesting theyre simply a merged engine. However, cylinder heads and early vanos systems have a lot in common between the s50 and s70. The M70 shares nothing other than the fact is was a v12 - its a 2v non vanos motor.

 

You can follow the evolution of BMW's V12 engines from M70 to S70 to S70/1 to S70/2. The McLaren F1s engine is truly an evolution of the 1-off V12 BMW Motorsport built for the stillborn M8 concept third in line on the list, but that engine was determined to be too large and too heavy for use in the F1 so BMW Motorsport built an entirely new engine. The fact that there are similarities with other engines in the BMW family should not be shocking given Rosche and his team led the design of all of them in a similar time period.

>8^)
ER

 

This thread is ****ed. Unsubscribing.
Pete

 

You can do that without being a drama queen.

>8^)
ER