Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

cats in every dang thread. so not funny.

 

Hey Mr Lone Wolf, welcome back . Mr Wolf makes strong (sometimes controversial) statements but rarely personal attacks. And he often has a point.

It is true, a LaF buyer can also desire a P1. And vice versa . WtDoom would like to add a LaF to his 918 too.

 

Horst von Saurma: PH Meets
Sport Auto's 'ring lap specialist on why lap times matter:
RE: Horst von Saurma: PH Meets - PistonHeads

 

I interpret his comments as saying the P1 and LaF are different beasts and not as if LaF is the lesser of P1 or in any other way a dissapointment. I haven't driven either of those cars and there is a huge chance I never will, but I have no trouble in believing that the P1, because if it's inherent characteristics, will be the faster trackcar of the two. Just a matter of choices made in the designproces. Doesn't make the P1 necessarily the better car. Which one you'd prefer is also pretty much determined by all sorts of subjective factors. There is no telling, but it is absolutely possible to enjoy both cars, while acknowledging that the P1 is probably faster around a track (once in race mode).

 

The point is a lot of people need to understand that the faster car is the best only in a sport context. When you have championships, rules, races on different tracks, with different conditions, you might have a better opinion. And the goal is the same for all: pure perf.
But IRL - I mean out of a sport context - the appreciation of different cars is more difficult, because the final products are the result of different technical and marketing choices.
Even if 918 is the slowest is it serious to consider it as the worst?
The pure track perf point if view is very restrictive and IMHO quite ridiculous even for hypercars out of an official competition context.
If Mclaren needs to proove they are the best to design track cars they can design cars for F1 or Le Mans. Are the results as good as expected? No? Bad news for fan boys.
It's not a good thing if roads - and Forums- become battlefields for frustrated loosers.

 

Agreed. The conclusion that the car which is fastest on track is the best car all around, is only justified when the manufacturers involved all set out to achieve the same goal: designing the fastest trackcar. Since none of these are actually competition cars, that seems, in itself, a rather silly goal. So in this context, tracktimes are not the beginning, nor the end of anything. They are only indicative of the performance status of a certain car, and that is only one aspect of these highly complicated machines.

 

Did you get to watch that video with the ICE engine sound, start up?

And interesting comments by HVS in that Piston Heads article, echoing most recent AMS article (especially for those who don't read German), and reiterating criteria/conditions:

"What was the first car you tested?
"It was an M3 SMG [E36] - I compared it with the 911 Turbo and the most recent in the last issue we have had the Porsche 918 Spyder. [It's scored 100 out of 100 points with a lap time of 7min 13sec - Ed.] This was the 200th super test so every month I have to produce this format between middle of March until the end of October. The M4 I have just tested, I did it just the way I do it in every case. I have just one 100 per cent lap and that's the difference to all the others; I have just one lap to learn the car behind then the timed one. This is the difference.

"The same with the Porsche 918 - I drove in the industry pool but you can't measure the time. They get angry because there are several cars on the track, you can't push there so I can go 80 per cent perhaps but the difference between 80 per cent and 100 per cent is 300 per cent! The rule is it's me the driver, it's this track, the surface must be dry, 2 degrees Celsius and above and you can go." "

Hmmh. Interesting.

 

Clearly the press, including Harris, were thoroughly impressed with the car, but perhaps then they could not fathom what McLaren and Ferrari were capable of delivering.

What is truly staggering is how long Porsche has had to put this car together... it seems like we've been seeing pictures and news about this car for four, five years. Searching around the internet I recently saw an article that said "this hybrid supercar might arrive by 2012." I would love to know the full history behind it, but I would imagine they had been working on it for a many months, or even years, before the concept was revealed.

So perhaps the 918 is simply too late? Now, when cars are finally being delivered from all three manufacturers, is Porsche delivering something based on relatively old tech and design, a car that's already half a decade old?

 

Guilty as charged !
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Is this serious? Old tech in the 918? LOL!!!

 

Five years is an eon when it comes to supercars. That's how long the car has been around. Hybrid technology is hardly new.

 

P1 has been developed over 5 years and I'd be surprised if the laf took any less time .
By your logic there's no such thing as a new car

Also FYI 918 development was 3 3/12 years not 5

 

Reminiscent of Lexus and the LFA. They spent so much time getting the car "perfect" that when it finally came out it wasn't that "special" anymore. $400K+ for a car with 550 HP? This didn't make sense in many people's mind, especially when you can get cars with more power for less money. Same thing seems to be happening again with the 918. Those that are loyal to the brand will truly appreciate it for what it is; everyone else seems to have moved on.

 

Exactly.

LFA would have been incredible if it didn't take a decade to arrive.

If the 918 was delivered in 2012, it would have been earth shattering. Now, not so much.

 

Nonsense , from someone that just doesn't listen or just knows no better

 

Sorry doom I didn't realize I was expected to bow at your every word.

How do you figure? Supposedly the car is still being developed, and the first delivery was, what, last month?

It's been well over four years since the car was unveiled, so your 3.25 number is off by at least a year. I can't imagine Porsche threw together a car just days before Geneva. Real time to create the car is at least five, possibly six or more years.

 

Some are still on the search for the hair in the soup ).
918 might be the one with the shortest time of development.

Concept showed in Geneva march 2010, on the market nov 2013...

But you could be right, the development was very "open" Dr. Walliser always said that they wanted to show the process of development. Maybe a failure.

craigy the Geneva prototype was nowhere near the 918 is today...

 

No one needs to bow to anyone but when someone takes time to write to me it's only polite to at least take a cursory look , no?

As for 918 the development time was 3 to 3.5 years . Car is not being developed , it's being optimised . Perhaps something mclaren should have done to avoid the ongoing battery problems ?
Mac say the p1 took 5 years and again I doubt the la Ferrari took any less than the same sort of time .

 

Developed vs optimized, either way they haven't produced their final product. I am not looking for a semantics argument.

At the end of the day it's been about two years since the cover came off to actual final deliveries of the P1, less time for the Ferrari, and more than four years for the 918. Perhaps Porsche has been keeping us better apprised of their car through its design and development than has their competition? I doubt it.

On one hand two companies showed us a car and delivered, while the other has been showing us a car for literally twice as long and is still telling us to wait while they try to squeeze out a few more ounces of performance.

One car appears to be years behind the others, in a market segment where Porsche themselves are striving to be the latest and the greatest, and where being the latest and the greatest means everything.

 

But you are incorrect about the 5 , the semantics and there being no finished product.
The car took 3 years to develop , you can say otherwise as much as you like , it's not accurate .again you ignore the similar development time of the laf and the LONGER time of the problem laden p1 , why is that ?

Which car is "behind the others" ? Technologically ( and now as is being proven ) reliability wise the 918 is certainly above the p1 . The 918 doesn't cook it's batteries and subsequently lose power .

 

Nice!! SPA with the CGT must be something else. Do you have the new batch of tires on her?

 

I'd do hard time for that experience!

(Good for you!)

 

crazy
http://ag-spots-2014.o.auroraobjects.eu/2014/05/26/mclaren-p1-c394726052014170043_7.jpg

 

I know, not enough space for the white car, right? Vandals!

 

Ok, current F1 cars were being developed during 2 years. Yes, current F1 cars are f*cking crap. Porsche was developing 919 hybrid racer for 2,5 years, yes it old sh*t. FXX is an old sh*t becouse it was made on old enzo parts. Laferrari is old as stonehedge, its engine was developed in 2006. Mclaren is even older, basics of it engine is from 90's. Yes, all cars are old crap made by foxconn workers, for 25 per month salary. Whooa)))

P.S. Sorry, but sometimes reading all that silliness somebody write there is quite difficult. People, do you know what is product development and life cycle?