i had a similar reaction... a couple of other comments: pros: -720s seating position I think is the best ive ever been in. Ferrari is a great and familiar place to be but I think the new mono cage really allows for the best seating position to date at this level of car. -720s is more of a "use-able"/"comfortable" super car and still looks nuts. This usability/comfort is sometimes equated to a lack of emotion. I think thats incorrect. If you are really pushing the car it equates to the capability of more speed. It will be the car that you end up driving the fastest most often. You will be closer to the limit most often. You will be drag racing the most often etc. If that is what you are after, that is what will evoke the most emotion from you. It's not for everyone but for me that's the most fun. -The usability/comfort also allows for the car to generally be driven more often. There seems to be more customer feedback from Mclaren owners that want to drive their cars all the time whereas the 488 might be a little more of an event. I have this listed in the pros because I try to be in a sports car as much as possible. -Mclaren's carbon technology at this level of car jumped them ahead of everyone else. maybe cons: -488 is excellent when approaching the limit. Like the speciale, you could really get it to grip and put alot of the power down. The 488 filled in the gaps where the speciale was lacking as a street car (a little more power, alot more torque) while remaining just as stable and grippy as you worked your way up towards the limit. (I never had 'cup 2' tires on my 488 which I would consider if I have another 488 at some point.) I am not sure if the 720s has this part down. I've only been on a test drive and while a really good one, understandably didnt involve real deal turns. I look forward to finding out. cons: -you will no doubt lose more money on the mclaren. how much more money? I think we'll not see quite the same level of depreciation on this round of cars. conclusion: I had a novitec tuned 488 for about a year and sold it recently. I'm happy I don't have to choose between the two but after driving the 720s, I think I might go for the Mclaren. It's an "I really love that car but I really really love this car" thing. If funds and space were not factors, I'd have both.
I'm not sure. They guy was obsessively compulsive with details and "lightness" and "technology". It depends on what the post Ron brand managers think of their future projects.
Having reflected a little on this, I think it is bigger news for McLaren than it seems. I remember RD on a well-known chat show in the late 80's in the UK with Ayrton Senna, recently crowned world champion. He was talking about how Ayrton was the best he had ever seen. He got that right. He also identified Hamilton from the age of 12 and won a world championship with him in only Lewis's second year (was mighty close to being a 21 year old rookie world champion too). He has a link back to Bruce McLaren and inspired their golden era in F1. He is as close to an Enzo as McLaren have. I know stuff happens and people fall out but somehow there seems to be an under-appreciation of the value of history and heritage here. Some people may think that a customer should judge a car on the rubber and metal in front of them only - that's the only tangible thing on which to make a decision. But I believe the rubber and metal in front of you finds its relevance and context in the history of the marque. Car design is about overcoming a series of compromises (weight v power, traction v body control, size v packaging etc.) And solutions to these questions should reflect modern technology but historical values. In some way this connects us to those people who have been part of the brand's history, in the case of McLaren Senna, Prost, Hakkinen, Coulthard, even Bruce McLaren himself. Losing RD doesn't necessarily break that connection but it seems to undervalue it. It was different with Enzo. Some of the same things occurred - Ferrari had to sell out to the Agnelli family but they at least understood the importance of keeping him involved and active. His personality pervades the brand, even today. And I personally think it is important.
RD's name has no recognition outside the F1 world and today's media have marginalized him Whereas Enzo came from a different era and the non F1 public also view him as a Legend. So going forward nobody's gonna care about production cars during the 4-5 years he was at the helm - just my humble opinion
I would argue the primary McLaren under the RD era, 12c, missed the mark and started this reputation of being soulless. All numbers and unexciting. A reflection perhaps?
Barely anyone even knows what a McLaren is, let alone Ron Dennis. Yesterday I was asked if it was a Murcielago. His name is of no importance to the brand.
Just spent 30 minutes driving 720S on track, holy smokes it's sooo good for a road car. I had a private instructor who owns a race team in Portugal and he was blown away by the 720s as well. The 570 is a lot of work wheras the 720 drives like a go-kart.
Stefan thanks for your input. Did you also get a feel for what it's like in roads versus track? How compliant? How'd the interior quality and layout look/ feel? Was there any noticeable turbo lag? How would you compare it to a 488 if you've driven one? Thanks
Not a lot of people know what a Lusso, Cali, or F12 is unless they can clearly see the shields they wouldn't know it's a Ferrari not sure what the point is. Apple has done ok without Jobs, Ferrari without Enzo, the list goes on. The 720S looks to be a very serious leap forward in many ways not just a small evolution glad to hear more on this forum share their actual user experience and all but one seem to be quite impressed... glad to hear it
McLaren has been learning quickly, each new model being a real improvement. The 12C was (to me at least) a big disappointment because it did not deliver on the promises of its fancy technology and was left behing by the 458 using more conventional solutions. The 650S and 675LT were good steps forward, but still not that impressive considering the "hardcore" 675LT was only marginally performing better than the regular 488. The first reports on the 720S are actually very encouraging, it may put McLaren on par with Ferrari (between equivallent manufacturers, it's reasonable to expect the latest model to be better, specially when it's a brand new platform and a more powerful engine). That's not the end of the world for Ferrari, only McLaren eventually catching up. Which is good for the competition.
The problem is still reliability, poor parts supply, and their dealer network. Unless they solve these they will never equal Ferrari because depreciation will quickly set in from people using it a few months or a year and then turning it back in, no matter how good it is. It takes more than a great car today. People expect more. Blame Lexus but they made customer service a high priority even for a base model customer with a cheap lease.
Mayor Agree on dealer network and possibly poor parts supply. But we really don't know about reliability with respect to the 720s yet. Agree it was a problem with prior mclaren models though..
Not sure where people are located but I have 4 dealers near me in PA, NJ, NY and CT. Parts never an issue and my cars have been super reliable. Also, dealers opening in several locations. The issue with McLaren isn't dealers....it's the lack of independents.
Nah, it's a lack of dealers. Many people are still 300-400 miles away from a dealer. The cars have still been finicky and going 400 miles just to get a small thing fixed kills the experience of ownership. McLarens definitely have worse reliability than others and the distance to dealers makes even fixing something simple a huge PITA.
And the parts supply. They still don't have their own distribution center in the USA. Many complain it takes too long to get parts from the UK or they are out of stock. Ferrari is not perfect but Mac is worse. They were going to put a Mac dealer in Vegas to cover the middle west. Now that seems to have fallen through. Right now anyone in Vegas who gets a Mac has to send it to Newport Beach. Not many are willing to do that.
MacL should really think about that imo. Paying that sum for a car and having trouble getting something fixed ... would YOU buy a car from MacL ??
Just an example. I need to get something fixed right now. It's 4-5 hours drive each way or $1500 each way shipping. Keep in mind that assumes I would be staying while it's getting fixed and that it would be fixed in a reasonable amount of time with no surprises. I was going to do this, but now I can't because I have to be somewhere else. So really, if I drive it there it's 4-5 hours. Then I either need to rent a car and drive back 4-5 hours, or pay for a flight. Then I need to either rent a car to drive 4-5 hour to pick it up or fly there, and then drive another 4-5 hours back. Either all that, or spend $3000 on transportation just for warranty work. Kinda makes warranty work far from free.
Why are they charging you for transport? Transport shouldn't be a cost. I never paid for transportation. That's nuts. Anyway, company really only 5 years old. Infrastructure takes time...distribution, independents, parts suppliers etc...guess I am spoiled in east coast. My dealers have good inventory of normal replacement items and cover never needed to be there overnight.
No dealer does free shipping that far. McLaren has roadside in cases of severe problems up to $800, but literally no dealer does free shipping/pickup at such long distances, especially if the car is still drivable.
Agree 100%... Was looking forward to the Las Vegas dealership for that exact reason. Guess I'll just have to suffer with my 488 Spider for now
