EVO TV: McLaren MP4-12C Long Term Test. Part 1.

What dumb questions they are answering. Is this a long term test or a video version of Facebook?

I thought this was a long term test and not a video instruction manual.

 

I own a NSX and I don't consider it an Exotic or Supercar. Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder. IOW- you are in the Minority when you don't think the NSX isn't attractive. Remember that same year Ferrari was selling 348's! I would say the NSX has aged very well. Mine has only 70,400 miles on it. It is just broken in! Only issue so far - blown Bose Amp and a broken door handle.

 

Mark- This is Ritesh from the McLaren site. The 12C Coupe has plenty of room behind the seats. I used to carry an Umbrella And a folding chair back there for my son's soccer games. Alas - you lose that when you get the Spider but I much prefer my Spider to my Coupe!

 

Hey now Ritesh this is Tony from the McLaren Site, easy there, I have a Coupe.

 

I think they are nice looking cars. I drove one and I liked the car.

Best

Lee

 

I turn off the Intake Sound Generator except on track and will probably turn that off, too. I feel like I have to use the feature just because it exists, but I have to say the ISG is to me pretty useless

 

Snooooooooooze. This is a long term test? Taking a random guy on a 5 minute drive?

Evo strikes out this time. There's like a million youtube videos of people riding in super cars.

 

I have to say, this is the silliest part of the car. I hope this trend dies quickly before clever software engineers sample the noises of super cars and makes a Kia sound like a 12 cylinder Lambo.

 

Tesla should so do this!

 

Post some Qs for Trott, Mayor. I'm sure he'd love to discuss the car in more depth.

 

I think the most revealing comment came in episode 2... "17 MPG" for "everyday driving" vs. 24.2MPG (com.) as quoted off the company's website. Since Nick Trott was commenting from the UK, he almost certainly meant 17 UK MPG. The McLaren website also quoted 11.7L/100KM so therefore, the 12C's 24.2MPG is not US gallons, it's 24.2 UK MPG, a lot higher than the 17 UK MPG experienced from the 2,000 miles of the EVO long term test (on a 7,000 mile car).

17 (UK) MPG = 14.15 (US) MPG.​

I recall several people on the California forum, (deppi0, ebobh15, jumpinjohn) calculated 13 - 13.6 (US) MPG fuel consumption for their Californias

Actually, 14.15 (US) MPG (vs. 13 MPG) isn't bad (an 8.8% advantage over the California) but it is a far cry from the first impressions one would receive from the "24.2MPG" claim which simply shows there isn't any particular magic to the 12C's turbocharged fuel/engine efficiency as the 12C also weighs 3033 lbs. (dry) vs. the California 30's - 3,593 lb. (dry), 18.5% heavier than the 12C. Similarly, CO2 emissions from the 12C is quoted as 279 gm/km vs. 299 gm/km for the California 30, an 7.2% advantage for the 12C.

So if I understand correctly, based on the weight differences of the 2 cars, the California 30 is technically as efficient or better than the admittedly faster 12C in everyday driving.​

IMO, the efficiency hype surrounding the 12C is unfounded. I still think it's a great supercar but from the figures I quoted, it appears the marketing hype regarding its efficiency needs to be put in its place.

 

The 12C is the only current car that "does it" for me. (I dont own one ... yet)
I like the concept from the carbon tub to the active suspension.
Conceptually its ground breaking just as the NSX changed the world in its day.

I do like the EVO series as the fellow seems a normal type not the over-the-top Jeremy Clarkson screaming and yahooing showman.

Co-incidentally I stopped by the Dallas showroom yesterday (before knowing of this thread) where they had a bare sample with no skin so you could see the workings.

The car is just impressive top to bottom.

 

Don't understand someone nitpicking gas mileage with a supercar...

That doesn't even register on the list of reasons to own one... or not to own one.

 

Hey Michael, I average about 24 MPG when it is set on Normal Mode and the car is in Automatic on the Highway. Around town I am lucky to get 14 MPG, but racing around I have seen as low as 4.2 MPG (That Number is nuts) but it is pedal to the metal.

 

Well, I'm sorry you don't understand this… but evidently EVO does seem to understand why and more importantly, it also does seem to realize their owners are interested to know. So if you don't understand it then perhaps there is more to it than you currently realize.

 

Yes, I think your figures do make sense. 24 MPG highway should be achievable with a modern V8 in a 3,000lb. car. 4.2 MPG is the sacrifice the design makes for the sake of performance. I think the trickiest deal is in-city driving. That's probably where the magic comes into play.

 

Yeah, the price of fuel in the UK/EU, as well as all kinds of fees/taxes/penalties/regs that are meant to deter . . . joy.

 

I can't own both due to both space and cash issues. I did just test drive both and was really surprised. I fully expected to like the 458 better, and instead I am McLaren shopping. The McLaren is a bit harder to get in and out of that's true, but the 458 wasn't easy like a 911 or R8 at all.

And I seem to be in the very small minority on this but I hated the steering on the 458. Way to light and quick, which IMO is an awful combination. I'd say the same thing about the throttle. On the plus side, that's the best brake pedal feel I've encountered in a street car.

Generally speaking I think we live in a golden age mechanically and both cars are good examples of that!