Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

Thank you for this post. It makes a lot of sense to me.

 

Being petty is just the theme of this thread!

 

I agree with you 100% and did you know Porsche also uses Carbo Tech for their carbon tub as well? In my argument against Peloton, I was simply pointing out the facts to highlight the major flaws in his statement. There is nothing wrong with relying on 3rd party suppliers and their expertise. As a mechanical engineering major and who used to work for Magna and Delphi Automotive many years ago, companies like Ricardo know their stuff.

Having said this, it is still very "romantic" to see small manufacturers (i.e. Ferrari) making their own parts and engines from scratch. Hands down, nothing beats a naturally aspirated engine. Scratch that, nothing beats a naturally aspirated engine that is "boosted" by electricity!

 

P1's engine is one of the best in the industry. The number of cylinders never made an engine better or worse, they're different. P1's MonoCage is a single piece carbon tub and is FIA approved. P1 GTR won't have a roll cage because the tub is simply good enough.

 

Mark, in the engine world, there is the Ferrari V12, and there is everything else. Nothing come close.

P1's engine, aka 12C's engine, IS one of the best in the industry in it's capacity class, I think the 12C's engine won an award before too. The McLaren 3.8L V8 set the standard for CO2 emission and efficiency I believe. But it's one thing to make a little 3.8L engine spin to 9000rpm, it's a completely different thing to make a gigantic 6.3L V12 with so many more moving parts to spin reliably at 9000rpm.

I do not disagree with the P1's tub, the 12C's already one of the strongest and lightest, adding a complete cover over it only means it is that much stronger and stiffer, also, it is quite a bit lighter than the 918 tub too.

 

Whoops I agree the Ferrari V12 is an amazing engine but IMO its a dinosaur. I don't buy into the argument that its better because its more complicated or more difficult. In fact I see the opposite, something that has less parts, less weight, less complicated, less cost but same or better performance is the better engine. V12 does have amazing sound, no question. But everytime I hear the argument its better because its more difficult, I think meh, its also heavier, more complicated, more expensive , higher maintenance and no clear advantage? if more cyls are better why not go for 16? Because its huge and heavy.

F40 is an amazing car, even today and its only a 2.8. Smaller, lighter and more powerful engines are the future. Not just for cost and fuel efficiency but also lighter and more fun to drive.

Just my 2 cents

 

Exactly - I used to counter the 'no replacement for displacement' argument with "technology is the replacement" all the time. Sure you can do a lot with cubic inches, but it is hardly the most ideal way to make power. The V12 is a fine powerplant and Ferrari has produced some of the best, but its days are numbered in a figure we can probably count if we tried.

>8^)
ER

 

Mclaren's one doesn't even have direct injection and already Ferrari's next 458 will have a much more modern turbo than the P1, probably even with electronically managed compressor. Evwn the California T has direct injection.

 

Respect for you sir!

 

The forth coming next generation of Ferraris will retain their V12s but the will not be turbocharged. They will have Hy-KERS, at least that's what Luca wanted. Hopefully Sergio hasn't changed that.

 

It is a dinosaur, but the craftsmanship that goes into make such a complex assembly to spin at 9000+rpm reliably cannot be understated. It's a lot easier to make a less complex and lighter V8 to spin reliably at 9000+rpm. Heck, motorcycle engines can spin to over 15000rpm with only 2 little cylinders.

The new Swatch System 51 watches broke new ground by using only 51 components for a mechanical watch, compared with hundreds of parts for a typical mechanical movement, they both tell time reasonably accurately, but is the System 51 better than a Valjoux 7750?


Not doubt a F40 is an amazing car, but you must have forgotten about the on/off nature of the old school turbo setup.

 

Ferrari and Porsche ain't better.

Here's the list of LaFerrari's 3rd party suppliers:

ATR - Rear spolier

Bosch - HCU (Hybrid control unit)

Brembo - Extrema brake calipers

CBS - Carbon-fibre components

Cima - Titanium road springs

Cytec - Chassis pre-preg carbon-fibre

Delphi - HV wiring harnesses

Getrag - e-DCT gearbox

Harman - Infotainment

KSS - Steering wheel

Lear - Seats

Magneti Marelli - Electric motor + HPU

MTA - Instrument panel

OMR - Front and rear sub-frames

Re Fraschini - Doors

Saint Gobain - Windscreen

TRW - Electro-hydraulic steering box

 

ok, i think something is wrong with those links (all of them!)
in that most cases they said P1 is actually faster not just feeling faster. but u cant compare flying with riding in a car!

if all of those 18 references are wrong, i should never use internet again! well i'll try to use the facts
and about that numbers you're right, their mistake : )

no, i didn't intensive research, as i said those were from my last 1 month archive. i tried to give him latest articles and i think those are about 1-2 months ago at most. i know it doesn't mean they are right.

u think i try to show P1 is faster car and that's not true. if u read my last quotes u can see that. BTW, in most of them they actually claim that P1 is faster. so what's wrong with them?!

u didn't read all of that 18 links, with argue that all of them are wrong. maybe they are, but it's unbelievable that all of them are bull****. and about that 918 is a road-driving car you're right.

again in the end, i think u cant discuss without offenses. i hope this will be your last, otherwise i have to do something about!

you know, if i made a mistake u can just give me a right direction. despite u don't want to see those links.

i dont know why u try to show me like i'm a McLaren fan, despite i mentioned that. problems must be solved!
and yea, i don't need any responses from someone like u. WTH

i dont understand why 918 fans don't want to listen. like i mentioned the Harris words and others experiences.

u can see some guyz agreed my info's and again Porsche servants deny them then reply them with anger and some offenses. i think thats how they talk with any new user or opposite opinions.

maybe i should follow you and forget about thease crappy discussion.
____________________
bEst regArds..

 

Most of the links that you posted are quotes from McLaren's press release and not the websites' own testing data.

Anyway, Autocar's acceleration tests are always slower than the manufacturer's claims. MotorTrend's results were inline with what McLaren said. There's a video on FB showing an acceleration run from 0-300 kph in about 17.5s. McLaren have nothing to prove, and P1 will only get faster (oops!), just like the 918.

 

This graph is ambiguous in that it doesn't state what the battery charge level is and shows two runs on a straight, seconds apart, in which operation is very different.

In both runs, the initial battery level, gear, and throttle position are the same. In the first run under full throttle, the battery charge level only drops (e-motor working) for about .5s while in the second run it drops for 2s, or whatever these x-axis units are.

I find it hard to believe McLaren would program their ECU to perform so massively different from run to run, moments apart. There is also no y-axis scale for battery charge level. It's completely unknown what the battery level is in those runs, though I kind of doubt they'd show you a simulation/test in which the batteries were practically dead. In fact, I believe it's be stated that the batteries in the P1 last at full throttle for 1.5 minutes.

I really don't think this graph is indicative of what people think it is and this is far from proof that the car doesn't have 903hp when you want it (assuming the batteries have enough power and traction allows for it.)
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yep, it's pretty clear to see that it can last more than a minute from this video. Jump to 5:25 and you'll notice that the car had only used 1/8th of the battery (state of charge bar on the top-right) during a ~13-14s full acceleration run.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj29plvUkqA

 

BTW, it would also imply that the P1 would never run out of battery power on the NR. If the battery charging is so intrusive, clearly it wouldn't let you run out of power.

I'd also point out that if the car was in fact so down on power, does that not make it the most amazing car in recent memory? Almost identical in performance to a 918/LF, but with far less power and tq?

Can't have you cake and eat it too with this no-903hp theory...

 

This is the perfect graph to illustrate why the P1 is a 727hp car with a shot of 'nitrous' instead of a 903hp car, there is a total of like 3 seconds where the e-motor added it's extra hp to the gasoline engine's output. Pretty much game set match for the argument that the P1 is not a 903hp car. The most likely scenario is that during that 3 seconds of battery discharge, the driver is using the IPAS button to add the extra boost to his acceleration. If it isn't, then well McLaren has some explaining to do.

 

Would likely be too late in the development cycle to change that on many of their upcoming models intended to be fitted with a V12, but I wouldn't expect that to last through one more model change. Has little to do with what Sergio may want, but regulations on economy and emissions standards will have an impact.

>8^)
ER

 

Um, what? You're proving yourself wrong.

If you agree he's using IPAS, then for all you know he's in boost mode where you must use IPAS for the extra boost. This would prove nothing about power availability in the regular mode where you don't need to use the IPAS button.

In fact, now that I think about it, it's almost certain that the graph illustrates using the IPAS mode. Notice that the combined torque only exceeds engine torque during that small period of time. Also notice that the car is well into the high revs and speeds, not down low where torque fill is needed. If anything the e-motor should be working low in the revs where the turbos are lagging and torque is lacking. Why would the e-motor only kick in when the ICE is already at peak torque, as can been seen by the relatively flat curve that extends the entire length of full throttle. That would go completely in the face of what everyone here agrees is the point of the e-motor.

 

Noone, the battery gets depleted just during the first few instants of acceleration and then it's the only ice that takes over in the P1. Look at the torque figure. It's also easy to understand that the lowest battery level in the graph is about 15%, where the system seems to go on recharge mode and gives no more torque. Seems battery lasts 2 seconds before going to recharge mode. You should have asked McLaren these questions before buying the car instead of listening to the fanboys' nonsense on forums.
Regarding the different behaviour in the 2 accelerations, they seem to be on different gears, the second being the higher one and requiring more electric torque

 

I agree with you that this graph does not let us know the battery's level of charge (i.e. it could be 100%, 50% or 30%). For the sake of argument, let's say the top of the line for the battery implies a 30% charge (instead of 100%). From 49s to 51.5s, the driver is slowly working his way up to 100% throttle input. From 51.5s to 59s, the battery gets depleted (or at least to the lowest level it's programmed to do, which isn't 0% by the way).

However, to side with Whoopsy's argument that the P1 is not producing the full 903hp at all times, you will see that the combined torque output from both the battery and the engine only lasted for about 2s (51.5s to 53.5s). From 53.5s and onward, the torque output drops to the engine torque alone because the battery is depleted.

So just by looking this graph, there are a few things which we can conclude:

- P1's battery will never be depleted down to 0% because it's won't allow you to (this is the same principle as the 918 in Sport and Race Mode)

- P1's ability to produce a full 903hp and consequently, how long its battery will last during a full acceleration run comes into question

I know you mentioned that the P1's battery would last 90secs on a full acceleration run, but if you use Motor Trend's video as a reference point, the battery was discharged by about 20-25% in 11s. But I'm almost certain if someone did a recording of their P1 accelerating from dead stop to about 90s, you will see the battery lasting the entire way as well. Weird right? Actually, it's not but allow me to "theorize":

Scenario 1: Do a 1/4 mile drag race 4 times in a row, where you would accelerate to the 1/4mile, stop as quickly as possible and redo the 1/4 mile without letting the car recover. Do this 4 times in a row. You will see under this scenario, the battery would be depleted at much faster rate than the claimed 90s. I think in this scenario, the P1 can do 4 or 5 runs at the most until the battery is fully depleted because the battery is giving its full boost at all times.

Scenario 2: Full acceleration run for 90s. In this scenario, I wouldn't be surprised to see the P1's battery lasting all the way through. Why you ask? It's because the P1's computer is programmed not to let the battery give it the full boost throughout the full 90s.

Again, this is just a theory, and I welcome everyone's input on this.

 

Ok, lemme show you why you're wrong before you go making more of a jackass of yourself.

1. They are in the same gear. It's a 7 speed transmission. The second run clearly shows all 7 gears. The first run shows 5 gears (2nd through early 6th.) You know that the first peak in the first run is 2nd gear because there has been no gear change and the RPM at 50 kph are very different. Then just go look at the kph at the various peaks and you'll see the same kph for each peak. Same kph @ same RPM = Same gear.

2. Battery gets depleted in the first few instances of of usage? Are you just trolling right now? The P1 batteries under full throttle will last over 1 minute, said to be 1.5 minutes. How the hell are they going to drop so much in 4 seconds? This is just absurd.

3. I didn't buy a P1 so quit trying to be a smartass. You don't know what you're talking about. You just got something wrong and can't own up to it. U mad?

 

The battery was not full (~12-13% discharged) at the beginning and it was only depleted by another 12-13% during the acceleration run. That's where you got the 25% figure from.

 

It might do but will produce torque only for the first 2 seconds. And the top of the battery level line is clearly 100% in the graph