Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

It's obvious why they didn't: They didn't have the time or money. They have an entire range of models to develop and within only a few years they put out some of the highest performing cars in class. Whether they do well in the market, who knows, but it's pretty hard to argue with what they've put out in the last 5 years.

Also, no one is lockstep in the industry. They all have their own timelines where the need to be competitive, but then fall behind, then pull ahead, over and over.

You have a budget, a goal, and a time line. You make the most of what you have. I'd say they've done extremely well compared to the competition, and are ahead of it in a lot of areas. Definitely room for improvement in stuff, but you really can't argue with the sheer performance of the cars they put out.

 

Isn't that a given? That's why the 7th gear pulls are so amazingly quick. The instant torque at low RPM is very high.

 

Arbitrary estimate. Why are Porsche fan boys so damn scared of any race over more than 1 lap? I think their fear and cowardice in itself demonstrates just how slow the 918 really is relative to a P1 or LaFerrari when pushed beyond HL mode.

All these excuses wreak with the stench of blind fear and running scared to me.

HL is a lot different to LC and you know it, since it is unsustainable and therefore unrepresentative of true track day pace.

And unlike LC, it can only be used once without recharging the battery.

You keep thinking of defunct arguments to escape the fact that the 918 is slow on long laps or races over more than one lap.

Pffft. It only managed to beat the P1 on PZCS by 0.2s and when the P1 put on its semi-slicks too, it won by 1.2s, with the 918 in HL mode. After that, probably 2.7s.

The first two laps, MPSC2 vs PZCS on Anglesey were not done on the same day anyway, so where's the problem in it being a different day?

That makes no sense at all but it's what I've come to expect of 918 fanboy arguments.

That was my point, tread wear is neither an indication of grip nor tread wear! Tyre reviews are full of comments with people saying that the actual tread wear between two tyres doesn't match the quoted tread wear.

Michelin Pilot Super Sport | the Michelin Pilot Super Sport reviewed and rated - TyreReviews

"I've had these tyres for a year now. Initially was raving over them - superb grip, seemed like the car was glued to the road - a significant improvement in control and responsiveness over the stock Pirellis.

But just a year and 10k miles on the tyres are almost down to the limit. That's shocking wear on a tyre this expensive. The car hasn't been driven to excessive speeds or offroad at all. Will have to fork out for a new set, and won't be going for these again"

2 tyres can have the same tread wear rating but different tread wear.

Non-equivalent comparison. Porsche competed in CanAm with the very famous 917/30 and won 2 championships. McLaren won 5. McLaren, in its relatively short history, has won championships in F1, Le Mans and CanAm. And a McLaren currently holds the SP9 GT3 lap record for the Nurburgring 24hr circuit.

Unfortunately Merriam Webster is not an authority on anything automotive. Look in the back of Evo, none of these cars are listed in the sports car section. The sports car and GTs/Coupes section is reserved for slower cars with <500hp or <400hp/ton in general.

Seems like they don't with 900hp and ~600hp/ton.

Pot to kettle.

I have nothing against a 24hr comparison in principle but there's absolutely no chance of any magazine doing one. These cars are bought by enthusiasts and mainly used in anger on track for substantially more than one lap, 20, 30, 40, but more than one lap. Therefore this is what's most important. Getting a magazine to do a 40 lap test is a big ask, however a simple 3 lap/6 minute test (whichever is longest) is manageable for them, and will show the 918's true track day speed. Where's the problem? Oh yeah, you'll never win that race because the 918 is slower in reality.

So basically you like stupid tests that have no actual bearing on reality. That says a lot about why Porsche fanboys like hot laps on Laguna Seca and other slow 1 minute tracks. Slow car favours slow tests.

Easy, on Spa HL will last one lap, the 918 will be slower even on that one lap, just liek at Anglesey. Then the P1 will be 3-5s a lap quicker thereafter.

No it'll drive in, refuel and still come out with a laps worth of lead.

Just like an F1 would drive in, refuel, have lunch, and still come out in the lead.

 

Race mode is sustainable, HL mode isn't.

 

It effectively already has at Laguna Seca, which favour AWD even more than Dunsfold.

918
Lap 1 - 0.8s quicker
Lap 2 - pace drops off by 0.8s
Lap 3 - pace now 1.5s down on lap 1
Lap 4 - Driver gives up realising it's a lost cause.

P1
Lap 1 - 0.8s slower
Laps 2-15 - Within 0.3s of lap 1.

So basically, this proves that the 918 can't win over 15 anywhere, since LS heavily favours the 918 with 3 40mph corners.

See above, your comments are completely wrong. The P1 did all those 15 laps on one set and could have done more but they changed to see if the time would improve.

 

Oh so you like quoting Autocar when it suits you. Here's some more.

918 / P1
0-200mph - 29.7s / 23.2s
150-200mph - 18.3s / 12.1s

MT + C&D
918 / P1
60-150mph - 8.3s / 7.3s

The difference being that these are actually relevant, because the P1 will never even use 7th gear on any track.

 

This is exactly my sentiments 1000%! .... except my 918 is not here yet

 

Porsche's originals spec for the 918 had it at 770HP, a 133HP disadvantage to the P1. Ron Dennis had every right to think his car would be faster at the point in time which he made those claims. Porsche announced their revised specs TWO MONTHS AFTER the final P1 specs, and initial LaFerrari specs, were released. What Ron smart to boast like that? No. Do McLaren owners wish he hadn't? Probably. Everyone I know who got a P1 had a chance to drive it on track and decide if they wanted it or not. It was spectacular then and it's spectacular now. I don't know how anyone could be disappointed with how the P1 feels to drive. The 918 is a fine car but doesn't deliver the same raw thrills experience as the P1.

The cars are still within a second of each other on the track. Both customers win. But you're acting like a jerk by implying folks like me got scammed buying the P1. Nothing could be further from the truth. I drove both cars in final form on RACE TRACKS (something you said you didn't do) as hard as I could. I simply liked the way the P1 drives a lot better. I didn't concern myself with a bunch of nonsense about which was more bespoke, which was built up from a prior (and amazing in its own right) car, or what the manufacturers claimed the cars would do. The P1 is an incredible car precisely because of the all the things McLaren learned building the 12C. Porsche also benefits from their past experience.

BTW, it wasn't a money thing either. If I had really loved it I could have bought both if I wanted to. If I had unlimited money I probably would have but my 650S Spider, and 458 Spider, fills the convertible supercar niche enough for me that I don't feel I needed a second hypercar that I didn't love as much as the P1.

It's people like you who are the real problem here. You call McLaren fans derogatory names and spout your holier-than-thou technical jibber-jabber trying to explain why your car with way more torque is slightly faster around a track, like that should be a surprise to anyone, and you go on an on about the connection between the P1 and 12C. You basically say P1 buyers are idiots who got scammed by Ron Dennis.

The 918, even with all that torque advantage, barely gets over the extra weight beating the lower-torque car by pretty small margins. You go on like that's the be-all and end-all and yet to me the P1 is still far more unique and pleasing to drive. Then after your talk about how this minor performance advantage is so crucial you say you would have taken the Ferrari instead even if it couldn't out-perform a car in a class entirely beneath the three we're comparing which is either a complete lie or invalidates all your other arguments - either way it sounds pretty disingenuous. So shut up already and stop with the name calling and saying that people who bought P1 got scammed.

LMFAO - you can shut up as well. I don't see how you're helping McLaren's cause in any way. You're just getting more people to line up against them for no reason. The car is great. It drives like a dream. The 918 is also great. The LaFerrari is as well. Enough already!

 

Very weak that the cars simply aren´t being raced head to head on the same day because the manufacturers are too scared.

As far as I know, they´ve all sold all their cars so who cares! Threatening to never sell an owner another car if they do lend out a car is particularly irritating and cowardly, as is not releasing a ´ring time they´ve already done (I´ve defended Mclaren in the past about it, but this is ridiculous).

I wish the test could just get done because it would shut the idiot fanboys up. I care little which one is faster. The LaF is the winner of the 3 in my book, it sounds and looks the best and neither of them are slow, so to me it appeals the most.

 

Sorry, but completely wrong!
Porsche used "more" and "less" in every performance figure announced back then. This car was clean sheet of paper and a lot of hard work was needed through the years of development.

If RD didn't know the above or haven't read what Porsche are stating... well better change his job.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I see. So when the P1 loses, it actually wins! Wow!

 

Not exactly sure if Ron had this on his mind at the time. But this is correct, when Ron made the performance claims the Optimised 918 was not available...

 

The funniest part of the abomination that is this thread is the fact that discussion on the LaFerrari is pretty much nonexistent. I thought this was FerrariChat.

Some of you guys, both owners and non-owners, have wasted quite a bit of your time arguing over literally the same thing for 800 pages. Some of you should check your word counts. If you're enjoying this "discussion" then by all means..., but every time I check this thread looking for new data, insights, personal experiences, etc I cringe at the fact that you're arguing over the same meaningless subject.

Nobody wins, nobody loses, nobody got scammed. Shut up.

To get things back where they should be... Has anyone seen/heard about an example of the LaF, 918, or P1 with an exposed carbon body? I remember reading about some inquiries into the matter but as far as I know none have been completed at the moment.

 

The funniest part of the abomination that is this thread is the fact that discussion on the LaFerrari is pretty much nonexistent. I thought this was FerrariChat.

Some of you guys, both owners and non-owners, have wasted quite a bit of your time arguing over literally the same thing for 800 pages. Some of you should check your word counts. If you're enjoying this "discussion" then by all means..., but every time I check this thread looking for new data, insights, personal experiences, etc I cringe at the fact that you're arguing over the same meaningless subject.

Nobody wins, nobody loses, nobody got scammed. Shut up.

To get things back where they should be... Has anyone seen/heard about an example of the LaF, 918, or P1 with an exposed carbon body? I remember reading about some inquiries into the matter but as far as I know none have been completed at the moment.

 

The only problem with this theory is that Ron said that the P1 was faster than any car before it or any car that comes after it. This means that no Mclaren, Ferrari, Porsche, etc of the future will ever be faster than the P1. A bold claim.

 

Unfortunately Ferrari doesn't seem to let anyone instrument test the car, so there's nothing to really talk about. That might be a good thing considering how much nonsense there is in this thread.

As for the exposed carbon, I've never seen one though I heard a couple people ordered 2nd, additional bodies for the P1 in exposed carbon. The reason they haven't been delivered, at least IMO, is that it takes a long time to make them and they are still busy building cars. Unlike a lot of the bespoke requests, the exposed carbon is probably quite a bit of works because not only do they need to figure out a good layout so the weave matches and flows well, but I'd imagine the weaves would have to be flawless as well. No idea what it costs, but probably a lot.

 

Come on, that's obviously not even remotely close to what he meant. He merely meant his car would be faster than the competition. He was wrong apparently, even if just barely.

 

918, actually has almost 600 ft lbs of torque instantly/right off the bat, and it's full 944 ft lbs in 7th gear. Unique vehicle.

If Porsche, would have added that second gear in the front motor instead of disabling it above 165-175 mph, it would dust the others to embarrassment for sure in high speed acceleration runs.

Nonetheless, it's this in-gear flexibility and torque advantage which adds up during track runs (amongst other things) vs that other vehicle.

 

Do you believe everything that McLaren claim?

 

Considering TG could call them out on it, lying about that is quite a risky thing to do, no?

I wouldn't think they'd butt heads on Twitter with the biggest motoring show on the planet unless it was something factual.

 

Why would Top Gear do that, when they already called them out!?

Top Gear wouldn't get into a shooting match with McLaren (or try to prove something) anyway.

As you said, they're the big boys, thus above the fray in this. Plus, they're an entertainment, not an Auto Journalism show. It's not that serious with them.

However, what you're saying, would appear to be more of a "Quid pro quo" between Top Gear and McLaren (we tell the truth for our journalistic integrity; you defend yourself McLaren; then we leave it at that), providing Woking cover-again.

It's not exactly like we haven't seen this already between the various British Press and McLaren concerning/protecting the P1 (shrugs).

 

Exactly.

Top Gear, or at a minimum Clarkson himself, would immediately call them out. They've done similar things in the past.

McLaren would prefer to remain silent and ambiguous on the matter than get publicly shamed by Top Gear.

I trust McLaren and it's clear IMO that Ferrari is the offender in this instance.

 

Ha! Keep telling yourself that.

 

The goal of McLaren building the P1 is to make sure that it would be the ultimate road legal race car on both road and track. It's an technological exercise of devoting their full energy into the building of the car, and to make sure that nothing would be left on the table in terms of performance. The building philosophy behind the P1 should not be aiming at simply be better than it's competitions, but to utilize the company's full capability to build a true spiritual successor of the McLaren F1. If McLaren was so confident that they have the ability to build the best hypercar in the world, then regardless what other's could come up with, the P1 would always stay on top.

So, if they were just trying to build the P1 to be better than its competitions, then I would say they either unwilling to build a true ultimate hypercar as they promised, or they just didn't have the ability to do so.

 

You're quoting something from 2011. The official released specs, at the time the P1 and LaFerrari specs were released, were 770HP. Porsche had planned to ship the car with those specs. At some point they went back and reworked the car, and subsquently pushed the release date back, to dial it up to 887HP. Good for them and good for their customers! This is not a criticism of Porsche in any way. But it is complete nonsense for you to suspect Ron Dennis knew they'd go up by 117HP at the time he made those claims. I don't think he should have made those claims. I don't think his car needed them. But you're beating him up for something he had every reason to believe was true when he said it. That's just not fair. I'm sure many of us have made misestimations our lifetimes and probably few of us on this forum have had anywhere near the kind of success that Ron Dennis has had.

Do you think Porsche and Ferrari have ever made claims that turned out to false before? Because the you stand up for Porsche one could assume you think they're perfect in every way.