Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

would it be a better car if only 64 had been made?

 

No idea at all eric , I am disappoint

Since you consider the F1 as part of the modern era . What about the Gt1 ? Don't even start me on race cars and historics.
A le man winning 917 is well over 10mil and one of the well know colour schemes at least double that .

The 918 spider is never twice the car the Carrera gt is , same as the P1 isn't 350,000 pounds more than an F1 . In fact its not even close . Id argue the 918 has much more new tech than the GT ever did yet the P1 is much less bespoke , unique and world changing than the f1 ever was . Double standards again ?

Don't go there with old Porsches 73 RSR , RS , and the majority of race cars of the old days have doubled , tripled or quadrupled in some cases in the last few years .
There are many Porsches that in percentage terms have increased in value MUCH more than an F1 has .

Borderline ignorance and genuine double standards ( again) , you forget how many F1s they sold?lol
The carrera GT is the most successful limited edition supercar in history along with the F40 . Even with the airbag laws that killed her off the GT was a raving success especially when compared to things like the P1 and F1 Mclarens , neither of which could sell out their initially proposed numbers . Cars in the Carrera GTs price range at similar levels traditionally sell a third or a quarter as much .

Porsche is supercar Royalty along with Ferrari and Lamborghini . Anyway you cut it Mclaren are the new kids on the block when it comes to road cars , however you and your masters at Woking spin it facts are facts . Mclaren have a fine racing history , of that there is no doubt but lets not get carried away .
Ive educated you on these things before mate .

 

Was the F1 a better car for falling short on the number they initially wanted to build?

 

What an idiotic comment. McLaren said they would build 500 P1's and Ron Dennis said that it was the fastest car that was ever going to be built, ever... Why did they downgrade to 375 Eric? Why did they go from 500 to 375? Do they, right now, or have had, interest from 500 with a written commitment and proof of funds to purchase a car? You will probably provide a diplomatic answer, but the truth is no. If they had 500 orders, they would have made 500 cars. There might be a waiting list now, but that was after the build number was downgraded - and it was downgraded for a reason.

Fits pretty well in the bounds of the general criteria for public embarrassment.

 

This conversation goes both ways but never in the right direction.

If you don't like his criteria for failure, take it up with him.

>8^)
ER

 

One can only imagine the prices for F40's had only 64 road going examples left the factory.

Erik's double standards and bizarre illogical opinions are well established by now as are their motivations. His latest two servings of which were quite delicious.

 

When it comes to a business discussion, it's not even close.

McLaren made money on the F1, just. They bloody well had to. They weren't a car company, after all.

They need to make even more money on the P1. Now they are a car company. Even if a very small one.

Porsche can afford to lose money on a halo car. That's because they are much bigger and better as a car company than McLaren. The technology developed in the 918 will trickle down to its next cars, and that alone will pay for the losses on each unit sold. The concept of a loss leader, and all that. It's business, and Porsche are BETTER at it than McLaren. There is no two ways about that. They are a lot better. I forsee Porsche continuing to be profitable for many many years. You don't need any special skill to do that. Just count the number of Porsches you see next time you go out for a drive, SUV's or sports cars, it doesn't matter, $$ doesn't differentiate. Or, put another way, $$ doesn't account for taste. McLaren's future isn't all that clear. How long did they take between the F1 and the MP4-12C? The SLR doesn't count as it has a star on its nose, not a boomerang. It took a long long time. Roughly 2 Ferrari hypercar releases' worth of time. 3, almost. Now count, in the time it took for McLaren to sell the last F1, to the time they sold the first MP4-12C, how many new models Porsche came out with.

Using the price of the car as an argument for cachet is a stupid argument. The fact that Porsche never released a near million dollar car before is nearly irrelevant to the ability for them to sell one now. The Porsche name alone carries enough cachet. "It's got cachet up the ying yang". Plus, out of the three manufacturers, they can wait the longest to sell out, because they have very positive cash flow, and a huge conglomerate behind them. It's a win win for them, and every milestone they exceed (for instance the ring time, or the recent Motor Trend tests) is a bonus. Oh, and they still have money to develop SEVERAL cars while developing (and redeveloping) the 918 - such as the Macan, the rumored 960 Ferrari Fighter, and new variants of the 911/Cayman/Boxter/Cayenne, although I concede the 991 GT3 engine fire issue was a rare misstep. They are also fine enough financially to run a works GT team in the WEC, AND start - from scratch - an LMP1 programme which was competitive from its first race. Last I checked competitive LMP1 programmes' cost is quickly approaching F1 levels. Oh, and I think their customer racing programmes (yes, plural) are bigger than McLaren & Ferrari's together. Like Napolis used to say here, when the flag drops the bull**** stops. And the flag drops - and has dropped - a lot more often and successfully for Porsche than for McLaren.

McLaren need to sell out of P1's quick because being able to say they sold out of P1's is important to keep investors happy, and money in the bank. R&D for them is a lot more expensive, especially because they are funding a F1 team that hasn't done so well in the past 2, 3 years. That's a long time in $$ terms. And their lineup is limited to only 2 models. So the P1 costs what it does because it absolutely has to. If they could make and sell 500, I believe they would. And I say this with the same skepticism Peloton shows when he says the 918 had to be redeveloped for the sake of cachet, although customer cars weren't delivered until Porsche decided they were happy with the final product, like any manufacturer of anything great (and expensive) is prone to do.

This is business, and in the business world Porsche will always - always - have more cachet than McLaren. McLaren as a car company, should be compared to Pagani before being compared to Ferrari or Porsche.

The question is not who has made a car worth 1 million, it's who can get away with it. And if you ask anyone, what brands could get away with it, Porsche would always be on the list.

 

do you guys not see the irony and sarcasm he was trying to convey? you've all long had a dig at us that mclaren initially and officially wanted to sell 500, but could then, only just manage to sell 375 p1s? if you can't see the irony then you're insulting his intelligence. some people on here just have a default mindset.

could we all not agree that not one of the 3 fanboy groups could honestly call any of the 3 cars a failure? as a mclaren fanboy I think the other 2 cars are brilliant and genius. I think all that remains is to see them on the same track on the same day.

 

Keep up Dave, you're slacking... ; )

Seems our boy co23 thinks those English lads over at Mclaren are less holy than our clever guys at Ferrari and just wanted to set him straight on the facts.

 

Just want to add that, Porsche in fact offered the road-going version of the 911 GT1 EVO Le Mans race car called the 911 GT1 Straßenversion, for homologation purposes at nearly a million ($912,000) and sold all 25 of them to meet the requirement.

 

True, although that was not conceived to be a road car from day 1.

 

If I had a P1 on order (I don't :-( ) and the numbers built went from 500 to 375... that's GooD news! That means it'll be more rare.

(And it's sold out with a long waiting list.)

 

Sorry, prior to the 918, Porsche didn't have million-dollar-supercar cachet. You can argue Porsche GT1 homologation car all you want, but if you're going to make that argument then I suppose Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes, et al all have that same cachet, and, in that event, the "cachet" loses its cachet.

The F1 may have been built in the 90s, but it surpassed all of its competition by a landslide, including the F40 and later F50, while still being a livable daily driver, and it wasn't truly surpassed until the introduction of this new generation of supercars.

McLaren arguably has the largest supercar cachet coming into this new era of supercar, as the most recent offerings until now from Ferrari (Enzo) and Porsche (CGT) could only match the F1's performance despite being given a full decade to catch up.

 

They have trouble seeing through their own hatred for me and it feverishly clouds their judgement.

Whatever... life goes on.

>8^)
ER

 

Notice I didn't argue the GT1 car.

The cachet argument is not about who has done it, it's about who would be thought of as capable and probable to do it.

The F1 was such a good car it put McLaren on the list.

But Porsche is higher. Ferrari highest. Even Lamborghini is higher than McLaren.

Ask any non car person "which 3 brands do you think can build a million dollar sports car?", and their responses will prove my point.

McLaren defenders don't NEED to say Porsche doesn't have the cachet to build a car such as the 918, to defend the P1 against it. It's a stupid argument, and the fact they bring it up is the saddest part about it.

 

Actually, porsche was among the first who made a million dollar car - there was dauer 962, then gt1. And if I am not wrong - laferrari f.e. is the first car exceeded 1 mil barrier. Mclaren f1 was also cheaper. In 1993 the price was 731000 dollars, not over 1 mil

 

Capability and probability are not part of the definition of cachet. Non-car people's opinions of this level of supercar are irrelevant. Half of them would probably say "Carvette."

Porsche, while a perfectly respectable brand, simply does not have the same marque in this category prior to the introduction of the 918. McLaren has this (arguably this is their only cachet, until their recent quarter million dollar offerings). Neither approach Ferrari.

This thread is riddled with sad people clinging to tiny details and gotcha moments.

 

Ridiculous. What you call cachet was just the expression of Ron Dennis big ego and his inferiority complex as challenger.
It's not a big deal to build such performant supercars for one million.
Ferrari and Porsche know how to do it. And they do it at least as well as Mclaren.

 

Ron's supposed inferiority complex put a better car in the customer's hands then three of Ferrari's attempts and Porsche's only offering (959 probably too early).

They might do it as well as McLaren today, but they simply didn't yesterday.

 

When McLaren unveiled the F1 in 1992 they projected a price of £540,000. When deliveries began more than a year later the actual price was £634,500 which was the equivalent of $950k-$980k.

If you are going to attempt to look smart, try to be correct first.

>8^)
ER

 

Making a supercar that nobody wants until well after the event isn't exactly cachet nor can you claim to have it when you've only built a single car in the category.

However, selling over 1000 $450,000 supercars is pretty good pedigree along with the rest of the company's history to then offer a $1m supercar and have the requisite cachet to sell them.

Trying to compare a small company like Mclaren and their sales disaster turned market darling with a company the scale of Porsche is utterly embarrassing and only serves to demonstrate just how desperate those with questionable motives truly are.

 

...in your opinion.

Again, I dread to think of the market value of the F40 if only 64 road going examples were made and just how much more its merits would be inflated had it reached eight figures.

 

Whether or not McLaren claims to have it, they have it. I'm not certain how a single car in the category is worse than Porsche's zero cars in the category, but that's not worth debate.

You're probably right, small companies like McLaren, Ferrari, et al will never be as prestigious as Porsche whose scale dwarfs all by selling trucks, hairdressers' cars and ugly sedan hatchback things.

 

Ferrari isn't a small company by any measure nor is Porsche, nor in scale or status.

Mclaren are and will be for quite some time - that's if they don't implode.

 

1. You say the F1 is better. It's not a fact or a technical data. It's just an opinion. The better car for me is the car I would buy at a given price. In 199x F40 plus a 911 Turbo would have been a better choice for me than a single F1. The f1 was much more expensive than Ferrari and Porsche cars. And I personnaly prefer royalty to challenger's arrogance and snobbery.

2. Even a little company as Pagani is able to build good cars for one million. Or a marketing company like today Bugatti.

Conclusion: building one million cars don't give cachet. It's not relevant. It's just arrogance and snobbery using the prices of cars as primary basis .