Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

What nonsense is being discussed here. This is pretty simple; one driver, one day, equal tyres (or they lied, which I struggle to believe). The composition of the track/lap, the comparison with CH, all totally irrelevant. This is the best comparison so far, and it tells us that on that day, with whatever lap they used, the Porsche was fastest and the P1 slowest.

On another day, in another place, the result might vary. What else are people trying to prove, because nothing else can be proved?

 

+1

 

Maybe you didn't read my points but if both Harris and d'Ambrosio can take these cars at their limit, then their times will almost certainly be equal. A road car will always be limited by the fact that it is a road car, so if Harris can take these cars to 100% with 90% of his skill and d'Ambrosio can take these cars to 100% with 60% of his skill, then it's a moot point about who's better at putting out times. And Ferrari wouldn't trust Harris if he wasn't able to perform accordingly.

It clearly becomes evident where Harris is limited when he tested the Jaguar F1 car back in his Autocar days with him not getting the necessary aero to make the car work whereas for Martin Brundle in the video, it was cake for him to do so. This is when the capabilities of the car exceed your skill set.

 

Best comparison with no unedited lap footage? I think not.

Did they really even begin the lap with a standing start?

 

So are you implying that they lied about the times or what? I doubt the driver made a big mistake in one of the cars or drove a different track layout and they then used that lap for the official time.

The only thing that's relevant here are that the cars ran the same track with the same driver on (most probably) the same day.

 

Some folk are never satisfied. Seriously, what is the point of this argument? As far as us normal folk are concerned, these three have virtually identical performance. That's the most noteworthy conclusion of all.

 

+1

 

Anyone know anything about this from instagram:
Ferrari has begun contacting select customers about an upcoming lightweight version of LaFerrari! What are your thoughts on the addition of a LaFerrari Scuderia / TDF / Speciale from the Pride of Maranello? I wonder what it will actually weigh? Whatever your thoughts are, I am being told by multiple sources that it is coming! LaFerrari coupe, FXXK, LaFerrari Aperta, and now a lightweight edition.

 

+1

They're arguing tenths of a second over a 2 minute lap...seriously what does it matter? It's pathetic. Why we need 20000 posts on it I'll never know.

 

Now this is the supercar I want Ferrari to build...

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

 

Not specific to the car you are talking about but in the analysts comments of Ferrari earnings and outlook there was that nugget that it's becoming more reliant on the special limited edition models .

There is some foreshadowing in that analysis


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree with both of you. I think CH left some room for improvement in his hypercar laptimes.

For comparison in AIA:

CH did 2:03.02 in a 991 GT3.
Walter Wohrl did 2:03.88 in a Cayman GT4...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX88rzV2dYE
Same layout.

On TGT I think it was clearly a standstill start.

 

I believe both Ferrari and McLaren fan boys are disappointed in the results, even though the lap times were very close. When these cars were first introduced and the Porsche was winning head to head battles with the P1, there were many comments saying that the Porsche only had the advantage at low speed corners and short tracks. So now it shows that it can be very competitive at a longer faster track as well.

However, none of this really matters. The reality is this: if GT cars are fast and supercars are very fast, then a hypercar should be "stupid fast". All three cars are stupid fast.

If I were in a position to buy one of these three, I would base my decision not what lap time it was able to obtain on a specific track, but rather what I wanted the car for. If I were wanting to track the car very often, I would go with the P1 - it looks like a hoot on the track. If I wanted the most elegant looking hypercar, I would go Laferrari. If I wanted to use it fairly often on the road, the clear choice is the 918. These factors are much more important then a half second on some track that I will never drive on!

 

I can categorically prove that the edits they showed were not from the hot lap, the same lap, or even the same day, or even in the correct order for a lap. I mean seriously, would the driver really be drifting a P1 during a hot lap?

 

So how come Harris was faster here:

http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/a508/sigmafour1/Proof_zps7tzsydlj.png
http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/a508/sigmafour1/Speed1_zpsya2u5um2.png

 

I'm just extremely disappointed that a pro driver couldn't match the 1:53.5 I did in the P1 from a standing start.

 

With all due respect, I think you're taking it all too seriously! Life gets a lot simpler when we just enjoy these 3 excellent hypercars as highly comparable. There is no best or worst. There is no wrong answer. They are all magnificent. They are all blisteringly quick. They are all definitions of the peak of the automotive manufacturers art at this point in time.

 

Nice!

Im not really disappointed with the time. Im more concerned with whether or not ferrari are still "cheating" as Harris put it a while ago. I read that the ferrari didn't come with factory support, unlike the other two. If thats true and it came stock like a customer car would, and it set the time it did, then I'm happy.

 

Oh I agree but people are arguing that Chris Harris is a bad driver, he isn't, and this doesn't prove it without knowing what configuration they ran, or whether they really used a standing start for sure. To put things in perspective Harris lapped Anglesey GP in a 997 GT3 RS 4.0 0.8s faster than Autocar managed in a 488. And that's with a stick shift and previous gen Cup tyres.

Anglesey International GP lap times - FastestLaps.com

Harris has also raced in the Nurburgring 24hrs in 2015 and 2016 and 2010. He finished 4th in 2010 and 6th in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Harris_(journalist)

Meanwhile, sure Ambrosia was in F1, but he drove for a back marker and finished last, and then 2nd to last even when he drove for Lotus in 2012, who finished 4th in the WCC. So he managed 23rd with a 4th place constructor. Which makes him worse than Tiff Needell in reality. So let's not pretend this guy is some driving God capable of polishing 5s off Harris's time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_d'Ambrosio

Failed F1 driver is more accurate.

 

Watch the video on Amazon Prime. There's a 30 day free membership. All teams had support. The Ferrari wasn't even road registered so there's no way it could even have got there without support. That's why only the 918 and P1 were driven on the road by Clarkson and Hammond.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Well, the point I made was that a professional driver can extract more time out of any car. There is no such thing as an absolut limit, save perhaps in laboratory conditions where the tyre friction can be measured. In the real world though the driver can make a difference. We see that in spec racing where pros race the same machines and still turn different laptimes! Imagine the difference between a pro and a non pro.

PS: Even the worst F1 driver is from a different planet compared to a good semi-pro club racer.

Regarding the results, I am amazed by LF performance on standard Corsas!

 

... Do you suggest if all the three are with factory support that is cheating by ferrari, and if the ferrari appeared without the factory support but the other two had the support , then it is equal for test, ? i really don't get it,

PS some say that the VW group was cheating with engines ;p and on a great scale
doesn't porsche belong to volksw..? (OMG!) ;P

 

Let's not overestimate Ambrosia's capabilities here. He drove for a 4th place constructor and finished 23rd. That makes him Tiff Needell standard at best. He then moved to milk float racing. You will not see him in F1 again given his dire performance, that's for sure. Could he be effectively 5s faster than Chris Harris. Nope, no way no how.

Harris can't really be described as a non-pro either. He finished 4th in the Nurburgring 24hrs in 2010. Ambrosia finished 17th in the Blancpain endurance series in 2014, whereas Harris finished 6th in the same series this year, both in Bentley GT3s. So quit pretending Ambrosia is some kind of driving God compared to Harris

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_d'Ambrosio
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Harris_(journalist)

 

If you haven't a clue what you're commenting on, please refrain from doing so.

His first year he drove for an incredibly slow team with a dog of a car, against a much more experienced team mate (5 or so seasons in F1 at this point). He didn't ''race'' for Lotus, he did 1 race because their other driver got banned for a race.

Is he the best driver? No. But I'm sure in a head to head he'll beat Harris every time. And I've a great respect for Harris.

 

Given how much anticipation, interest and factory involvment there is for these kind of comparative tests you can't just ignore their importance, even if just for bragging rights. And over a second difference over a 2 min lap is not that insignificant.

This was the fairest test yet