Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

The excuse keep coming. Like the Energizer bunny, just keep going and going and going.

The P1 is traction limited even for intermediate speed corners, driver that navigate them well will not go full throttle. Even the 918 will have traction problems too, experienced first hand at Paul Ricard. Then even high speed sweepers, like the last corner of Portimao, needed to exercise caution as well, there is a bump on entrance and even LMP guys had to lift for a moment.


Why pick and choose the VERY BEST performance of a P1 when none of the customer cars are not even close?

And then turn around and accuse the rest of the pack from choosing the best time from the 918?

And why limit yourself to one specific constricted scenario where a P1 WILL win? Stacking the deck much?

Everything you did online does nothing to improve McLaren's image, in fact you made them worse. Like a sore loser.

Ferrari never play this game, they do their own thing.

Porsche welcome all comers, they are very confident in their products and performance, most of the time they just drop the cars off and pick them up later. Win or lose they are just as happy, most of the time though they come out on top anyway.

McLaren however wanted to play, but they are also afraid to lose. So if they loses they keep quiet like Ferrari. But then we have this big mouth Mycroft who try to justify anything and everything, from the absurd to the ridiculous.

There are many owners here who have 1st hand experiences with their cars, be it 918, P1 or the LaFerrari and Mr Mycroft thinks he knows even better than the owners themselves, whatever he sees on youtube has to be true, and the owners are wrong. This is quite possibly the funniest bit since the beginning of mankind.

 

Nice!

 

Im surprised that you forgot about the 962 road car conversions *wink*, and a very particular one too: Porsche 962c Prowls The Streets - Speedhunters

That is much better than arguing about the 918/919. That particular car has very little changed from the racing car to the street car, if i read it right. I doubt the LM can get close to the 962 on modern tires.

 

Car and Driver did manage to get excellent numbers with a non WP car...

0-60: 2.2 sec
0-100: 4.9 sec
0-120: 6.7 sec

with slicks, or even stickier track tires, and further agressive launch algorithm, maybe a couple more tenths can be taken off? possible

 

this dude Mycroft has turned out to be the most determined/delusion/unhinged of the Mc 'supporters'. Bar none.

 

a few F40s had sliding windows, what they didn't have was straight-cut gearbox, keyless start and ultra stiff suspension (F40 LM is probably more uncomfortable than the F40)

 

can i say that i don't support either side when it comes to Lanzante?

i view Lanzante not as a 3rd party tuner, i view Lanzante as a motorsport company because that's what they do. have you ever seen a Lazante tuned Porsche or Mclaren on the road, no, that's because their not like Gemballa or Mansory.

look on their wikipedia page and it's nothing but racing, it's even in their name Lanzante Motorsport.

 

You obviously didn't get my sarcasm........................

Mycroft is being ridiculous and I am outdoing him by being more absurd.

 

Oh I did. I honestly don't see how anyone couldn't get it. I was just saying that you could've done even better and shot down his later arguments about the 919 not being street legal.

 

No easy feat!

 

Okay thats your opinion,fine.

But if you say that about ride height of F1,then FYI almost all supercars come up with adjustable settings,they also mention about adjusting tire pressure in the Nurburgring video of Mark Basseng.

So alignment may be modified but it doesn't matter if the parts of car is stock,as far as I know owner never said he added aftermarket suspension in 2006,he only said about tuning the car.And concerning Estoril,I am confident in what I said because the sponsorship board they showed in photo were only available in 1994 and that red barrel was there only in June.

I think that all cars are setup for track before setting lap time,they also mentioned about that in Top Gear CCX lap.

 

If you want to know how does Estoril in 1994 compare with modern circuit.I have found lap times of ITC in 1996 in similar configuration
Qualifying lap 1:40.686
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_ITC_Estoril_round
At Mugello(circuit which is unchanged) it qualified with 1:47.732,to put it into perspective it is as fast as a GT3 car
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_ITC_Mugello_round
Italian GT Championship Mugello 2015 - Racing Sports Cars
A GT3 car qualified at estoril with a time of 1:37.959
International GT Open Estoril 2015 - Racing Sports Cars

 

You answered yourself by the abstract quality of you answer, for those who are confident with the fact of what it means to be within delivery specifications.

Thanks.

 

Well if both cars are an homologation of the GTR version with 5+1 examples, it doesn't really does it. That said, McLaren was involved, and the car bears the McLaren badge.

According to your logic, the F-35 isn't a Lockheed.

 

Actually several customer P1 have been faster than the factory examples. E.g. the one that did 0-200mph in 20s at Prestwick. The one lafars posted hitting 205.3mph in the standing mile, despite changing into 7th just before the line, which was a mistake. And the best part? The P1 that did 0-100mph in 4.7s was on Corsas.

LMAO. P1 00V. You do realise that isn't a customer car at all right? Same one Harris used in the Portimao test. At least two customer cars are faster. Testing surface is key.

Not every corner exit is below 60mph though. The 918 has just benefited because most magazine tests are on slow tracks, rather than F1 GP tracks.

 

Well, let's face it, a sub-7 minute lap for a P1 requires little proof, given that an SV has done it, whereas being 6s faster than Chris Harris is a lot less plausible. Not to mention a completely different result.

 

The faster ones require much less care than second gear ones though. If you're 4th and above it's much easier, and the P1 is so much faster than the 918 from that point onwards.

Actually, as already pointed out, the P1 in Bohmer test was faster than a factory car to 186mph, 205mph and in the standing mile, despite not doing a proper launch.

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

Like I said, you're just fortunate that magazines test on short, slow club tracks.

 

In your opinion,right?Well also idea about #40 being modified in ride height for Evo test is also abstract and pure speculation when it was of same height in other photos and whats more funny is that you tried to prove that it had lower ride height by comparing photos taken in different views.And now coming up with after market exhaust system and suspension when you can't even see suspension from outside to verify and explain it.

And you tried to claim that F40 LM had only 680hp when all the sources I read said about 700hp and also you claimed that F1 GTR had 662hp/637hp based on one article which also said it was for unrestricted one there itself and also claimed F1 GTR reached 205mph (which was reached by drafting LMPs if you see the video) on straight which is impossible without draft if you consider its cd.It just takes common sense to think that.If the speed and power are in same way then good luck.Almost all the other articles I read said only 600hp which includes Driving Ambition,Autocar,CAR Magazine and Auto Motor und Sport.

And you also said F1 GTR had reached 200mph in 1995 when Andy Wallace didn't even mention the topspeed,without knowing its configuration,without knowing the gearing and most importantly without the speedo visible.Yeah man,I have to absolutely agree with that because it is said by someone who is never wrong.

Thanks man you made my day.Keep up your good work sir and have fun.

PS. No hard feelings.

 

Poor guy! You have to long way to get the half. lol

Note: the article say that "without restrictors", according with Claus Weber, the V12 engine could spin 10.000 rpm and 1000 hp. "Restrict" BMW 6.1l V12 to 633 horspower (down the picture). So. If you aren't able to read, do you want to talk?

Note2: To get the Wallace speed it need to save the video portion of the straight with a stopwatch, then it need to extract the restaurant lenght on the left with the time. I know, it's too much fo you.

 

Wow,when I proved you wrong on the ride height case,you are resorting to insults.BTW why should I believe that article when all the other reliable sources I read say about the power to be 600hp at LM.Okay if the F1 GTR had that amount of power and the F40 LM only had 680hp like you said,shouldn't F1 GTR be faster in straight line?And it isn't like magazines can't print wrong statement,like I pointed out in my older comment.

Like Autocar article of F1,if you are a man who knows about F1 you can find the error in this article
McLaren F1 1992-1998 ride & handling | Autocar

F40 LM was faster than F1 GTR on tracks like Monza,Paul Ricard,etc where speed is needed while F1 GTR was faster at Jarama,Brands Hatch where cornering is needed.In all the videos I saw F40 LM was faster than F1 GTR at the straights.But again who am I to argue with know it all?I am done.

 

Guy, you are mentioning absolute power but it seems that you are not confident with how the engine works with the torque at the gearbox . A twin turbo engine at the period no needed too much power to be really quicker than a N/A engine.

No, in the specification opinion behind the factory quality checking. Also alignment on any car produced must be delivered within factory angles tolerances.

 

F40 vs MclarenF1GTR is amazing. No idea what they're talking about and why this thread but wow.

 

LOLOLOL now we are talking about jets! You're really getting desperate sport! What's next, a Falcon 9 isn't really a Space-X??? Keep it coming chief!

Hey Sport neither car is a homologation of a GTR. McLaren had this car called the F1, have you heard of it sport? It was a road car that homologated the GTR so it could go race for real. Another incorrect statement by you (keep em coming sport!).

One (F1LM) was built by the factory to celebrate their impressive LeMans success and how they had five cars finish the race. However the tuner P1 LM that is built by a 3rd party raceshop "COPIED" Mclaren's formula and built 6 cars to "celebrate" a car that will never race. The 5 + 1 has nothing to do with homologation like you seem to think. It was purely commemorative of Mclarens success. What success is the tuner P1 LM commemorating sport?? oh rightttt. None.

When I tune my Porsche or Ferrari with, wheels, exhaust, suspension, and engine mods to make it unoriginal do I take the Porsche badge it came with off?? No I don't think so, another stellar argument sport!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Actually our discussion started with the Nurburgring time of 7:45 for F1 and then I showed that it was just an estimate,then he stated about Estoril laps and I tried to correct the configuration info.Thats how we came to this discussion though I think I shouldn't argue with him anymore as it is no use.

 

If you don't believe its surface dependent, look at these times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9FUAvxsrf0

All three slower than a stock 570S on a good surface.

Fast McLaren 570Ss 1/4 Mile 0-60 Drag Racing - DragTimes.com