"Acceleration 0-100 km/h was in poor 9.7 sec instead of the promised 8.8 sec." Surely you mean 0-200km/h?
Thank you for posting this Walter. This group of people objectively test cars better than anyone. As for the result, even if the engine had its full quoted hp output I believe that might bring down the Ring lap time maybe only 5-10 seconds. More importantly, I remind anyone that these cars were designed as road cars first, track car, maybe. The MC20 pulls off being a road car better than Mclaren/Ferrari/Lambo by everyone’s account. All of these cars are absurdly fast to the point that discussing things such as hp and 0-200kph times as almost pointless unless they are competing for lap times, which these road cars most certainly are not, unless just for pointless bragging rights. Who cares to split hairs when ALL of them are terrifyingly fast.
That is exactly why I am not interested in these moderns and enjoy a classic far more; you can drive it close to its limits on the right traffic free twisty road but you can't do that at all with these "Zupercars." Many of their owners, usually the ones who never drive them fast, are indeed obsessed with sterile statistics.
YES. There's a reason Dino's are so prized now! Fast? Absolutely not. Fun because you can rip them around at their limit and not get arrested. Alfa Romeo's or BMW 2002s are the same way but of course not nearly as pretty.
Precisely. In a way it's the Bora vs the Miura, Daytona, Boxer, Countach argument all over again, throw in the Pantera if you like.
Of course you are basically right - but matching the old `Ring became somewhat a prestige issue for these sportscar manufacturers. No Ferrari GT-, McLaren- or Lamborghini-GT (not to mention Porsche!!!) ever would lack so many hp`s and with that stupid explenation.
After Maserati's amazingly incorrect listed weight of the car, why should we believe anything they say? And they weren't a little off, they were way off, to the tune of 170Kg/375lbs heavier than Maserati's claim. Did they think no one would weigh the car? It's not like getting "dry/wet weight" correct takes a bunch of engineers. Some scales, one minute, you got it.
This reminds me of how political "facts" are often presented. You are exactly right of course. It engenders distrust from the get go. What a way to market your new, pinnacle, breakthrough product! They shouldn't be hiding this but explaining why their design of such a CF tub makes sense for their vision of this car, unless it's a design FU. There's been speculation on here as to the why. They should end that speculation.
The ting about moderns, as someone recently put it to me. All the tech and performance should be additive to the experience. Sadly excess weight eps/no steering feel, and a whole host of other ills detracts from the experience. I love ac that works, and the practical reality of a car thta can work in traffic, but if the end result is effectively a very very fast 2 door gt sedan experience, what's the gain. The excess speed is great, but not it it is at the cost of that speed is robbing feel and experience at road attainable speeds. These days a tesla can give one unbelievable acceleration, so a sports car is doubly redundant if thats its party trck. Add to that anodyne or really fake engine sound, and turbo lag. the sports car should give an experience no other car can. that's sound, drama, feel, looks, modern tech can make that all workable. the Maclaren f1 pulled that off beautifully, and 25 years later no one has figured out how to do that in series production except maybe the gt3. part of the issue is also chasing volume. the fact is the buyer for a +200k, or even+150k car is likely to be over age 60. When the vette came out in 1954 it was aimed at the youth market, as it was during the 60s, not anymore. Still its got to be possible to do both in one package. Porche does this with the Gts series cars and they're ligh, whereas they still alsoi make a 911 targa and turbo. the sin of the mc 20 is its weight, this is a acr that at least 500-650lbs heavier than a metal porche, so what's the cf for, its even heavier than a metal hybrid ferrari. A powerful turbo engine(with excess low down tq) is meh, so what everyone does that. Sports cars should have fizzy alive engines, a turbo can do that, but not this way. If youre not chasing numbers, why not go Na like the vette z06. That to me is the mc 20, a Italian corvette. A bit too big, way too heavy, compensating with power and tires. Its got looks prob the best of any of the current crop of supercars, and its got power. I've looked a a few closely, the panel gaps, build are somewhat atrocious, the engine bay once you poke about is a bit of a birds nest, all excusable in an talian exotic if the rest was truly evocative. Then you gotta believe this thing will be relaible, given recent history hard to believe with a new motor from Maserati, put that all together with brand history and there will be horrible resale 5 years out. if i didn't mind tossing some $ and was in it for the warranty duration, yes this is easily a competitor to a 911 turbo, and maserati can deliver you a car now, but thats a kida narrow market. maybe in a few years when these are 100k uysed, and if there are some aftermarket specialists who will sort the foible's and make really reliable use out of them(the hard mechanical bits may be strong) these coudl be a great buy. If thye had made this car suitably light, and given it a great motor, thye would a had something truly usp, its certainly got the looks. All that weight is there because they designed this car to be electric too, and you need a lot of inbuilt structure to be able to carry battery weight. in other news ferrari is building a new challenge car out of the 296, no hybrid something like 680 hp and just below 3000lbs. Too bad they wont make a road version.
Putting it another way. besides styling, a z06 vette is simply a way better car in every way, form build, to real road performance, to emotion etc. the weighs are not that different and there is a 75-100k price delta. I'm sure for a number of people the Italian suit is compelling, but I point out the z06 as an example of what the mc20 should objectively and subjectively beat, and besides the styling its instead outclassed. The Italians gave us two cars with cf tubs the Alfa 4c, a car 80% developed, but let down by powertrain and strut suspension. They then went in the opposite direction and gave us the Mc 20 let down by weight and size. Something in the middle for 150k would a really been the halo imo. Bigger than a 4c, Na v6 manual 3000lbs and Tt v6 paddles. That would have been a usp, and they coulda used the alfa motor which already exists. Was always hoping Alfa would do that with some evocative T33 styling. Alfa and Maserati are imo lost at sea. The Gulia and Stelvio are excellent, but the rebadged dodge hornet toenail is simply not an alfa in terms of underpinnings and the way it drives. Once again brand engineering a cheap car will destroy the hard won territory they created. Maserati, the new coupe looks like the old coupe except bigger, I guess its ok. the Quattroporte hasn't looked good since the first rebirth and the ghibli is pointless. The levante is basically ugly. The grecale looks really nice, could a hit the ball out the park with this one, but a turbo 4cyl for the price no thanks. If you wnat to be premium then your ars need to be premium and strand out. Mc20 Greacale have the looks. If grecale wants porche suv prices, then put a v6 in it.
They (Maserati), to my knowledge, have stuck with their fantasy listed weight and have never given a "true" weight, even though everyone knows the car is morbidly obese, especially for a CF tub, V6 car. In the meantime, the car (at least the coupe) does not seem to be selling. You don't have to look hard to find just about any spec/color coupe you want. It's too bad. I think the car is great looking but...
I think the whole super car fad/trend is running out of gas (pardon the pun). I've always loved Alfas and Maseratis, and sometimes they come up with some wonderful if imperfect cars. I'm on my third Giulia with the 2.0 liter engine and there is more than enough power to get me in trouble, any place, any time. I drive it actively, whether in normal or dynamic modes. The 4c and the Quadrafoglio are nice press cars but I would find little use for either in the real world. Same with all the new Maseratis. I'm searching around for a 2008 to 2010 (post duo select/F1 trans) Generation 5 Quattroporte. I love the clean elegance of the lines. The 4.7 engine would be nice, but I can live with the 4.2...I don't see any places to use the difference in horsepower. I would love to find one with the original 18" wheels, but I'll buy some if the car I get doesn't have them. Big watches are running into the same buyer resistance that Super cars are. Enthusiasts are beginning to return to the classic 34mm to 36mm dress watches. How funny that Maserati is back to twin turbo V6s...now they need a sport coupe that is more like the original Biturbo than the current coupes they are offering.
Don't ever buy a Bora. I met my best friend AFTER I bought one many years ago. Sadly he's gone now though he did live a terrific life for 84 years and survived a major bout with colon cancer in the late 1970's. He wasn't expected to survive and he promised himself if he did was going buy himself as exotic an Italian sports car as he could find. It would be his first which was ironic since he was a part of the Jacuzzi family, his father an Italian immigrant had married one of the daughters. So he spent many months trying to find a Daytona he liked but he was always left with the impression of a crude brute of a car which was beautiful to look at and very fast but it just didn't sit right with him. In High school he had a Cord Sportsman. Later a Mercedes Gullwing, 6.3 and two 6.9s, a his and a hers. But one day the salesman let him try a Bora and it was instant love. In fact you should stay away from Maseratis completely. You say the Levante is ugly. Which SUV is beautiful? They did.
Funny I looked at boras several times, love the looks. But yes you’re right the critique of the bora was it was too complex and civilzed Whereas the countach raw as it was survived.. Your freind had Mercedes 6.9 that the type of drive he was looking g for. Ghiblis the old ones are great one just has to understand what they are. imo when you build a cf rubbed me car, that’s one type of car, and when you build a front engines gt that’s another type of car. Trying to make a cf me car be like a front whines gt car seems like an episode in market failure. I guess the stingray has succeeded at that so it can be done, but the. They’re still basically Vets’s and not expensive so stones a car has to know what it wants to be. That was also the critique of the boxer, that it fell between two stools, nether lux gt nor hard core enough. It’s why the 288 gto is iconic in a way the 959 is not. the failing of the mc20 ultimately is weight and no excuse for that in a cf rubbed car. 500lbs less weight and you could have different version of the mc20 as porche does with the 911. I was at a at event that had everything from 296 Ferraris to koninsegs. The mc20 was at least as good looking as the best of the rest and arguably better. Well oter than a 458 speciale but they don’t make those anymore.
I still want to know how Maserati managed to get a car with a carbon tub to weigh north of 1600 kg. Imagine if they had not used carbon? Would we be looking at a 2000 kg mid-engine coupe that rivals some mid-sized SUVs?
I have wondered this myself. Did they just lay up carbon extra thick literally everywhere? I know the drivetrain isn’t overall very heavy for this car, so is it the brakes, suspension? Bizarre that Maserati were not paying closer attention to this. I am not a big fan of cars like this being much above 3000lbs let alone nearing 4000…. A sub 2300lb 911 with a properly built twin plug engine with 350hp is a far more fun (terrifying in a 911) experience to me and I believe the market is showing that with BaT trends being how they are with hot rod 911s
Ill guess the mc20 is so heavy recuse theyre planning an electric version so there is a lot of exra structure everywhere to carry what will be 1000lbs more. The aventador was CXf tubbed and heavy too. the Cf tubbed 4c weights 600lbs more thana metal tubbed elise. In the end a cf tub is but one part of a car, esp is there are metal front and rear subframes. CF seems to make avery stiff car, but if attention is not paid it does nto yeild alight car. As for Mc20 value a 250k sticker new no miles at the dealer MC20 was on bat, it didn't bid to 200k. This ina an era when almost any new 911 variant has a 30-100k upcharge over msrp.
That's been the guess all along. But it is a guess. Still, that's no excuse to misrepresent the weight of the car. Maserati also doesn't have the resources to to do two very different structures. They're older GT cars were always very robust and thus heavier than the equivalent Ferrari, Lamborghini and even the Pantera. But they were much more solid cars. Heavier GT cars also ride better but sacrifice agility and acceleration. I have no idea what they thought they were doing with pricing on the MC2o or Levante Trofeo and other models.
bmw is similar lazy approach heavy cars and then just add lots of turbo hp to compensate, assume the customer is too dumb to notice. harder to do when your customers cross shop porche to mclaren all of who. Weigh 500lbs less. heavier cars can ride better unless you want handling esp at the limit, then to contain the weight you need way stiffer springs and shocks. That’s why amg mercs ride so atrociously, whereas a lightweight lotus can let its suspension articulate and correspondingly rides great. as to battery structure for a mc20, they kinda said there would be an electric version, and the electric version of the Alfa t33 which is essentially a mc20 weights 1000lbs more than the ice version. Even if the cf tub is stiff light you need way stronger subframes suspension bits etc to co rain an extra 1090 lbs. pricing, from what I’ve read Maserati was supposed to slot in as premium above Alfa. The issue is the ghibli and quadrupole are not really premium vehicles and the Levantine lacks panache, looks line something Nissan could have done.Aston and lambo suvs look like something, Maserati dropped the ball. Freckle looks great for an suv, but all screens and too expensive for not a macan. Alfa has its platforms and then Maserati has its bespoke platforms and engines, neither has the volume to justify this, and both are looking for similar customers. mc20 could carry the price if it was standout besides styling. But then they built a heavy gt and yet it has a minimalist feel interior. It never pays to think the customer is too stupid, esp in the premium space. my guess is you have different teams fighting for budget in stellantis and Maserati gets budget but then struggles to execute because the presentations are for a Broad segment. Vette pulled that off broad segment but they’re doing several versions and have the pricing both of which drive volume, not to mention an established client base maybe Maserati thought they’d drive volume with electrics instead of mild to wild lighter less expensive ice focused cars still if mc20s prove reliable these are going to be 100k used cars in a few years and a potential great buy that n.
I spent a fair amount of time looking at the Levante 6 months ago, specifically the GTS which is a Trofeo slightly detuned. I don't know what you consider to be panache. I just think you're so biased against Maserati. I think the problem their high end Levantes suffer from is pricing. I thought the interior of the GTS/Trofeo was beautiful for an SUV. As has always been the case with Maserati they don't have quite as many technological gimcracks as their BMW, Audi, Mercedes and Porsche competition. But the performance was very competitive and if you're a sporting driver all of the important stuff is there. I asked you this before, which of those competitors has such a good looking SUV? As for the MC20, they're attempting to break into a very competitive niche marketplace WO the recent technological experience and far less resources. They are finally beginning to design and build their own engines again but reviewers still refer to them as Ferrari derived even when that's no longer the case. They've used Ferrari for the manufacturing of so many things over the last 30 years that I doubt that will ever stop. One of the posters in this thread is a long time Merak owner/fanatic. While I personally think that car was grossly under powered two things it did do very well was packaging and beautiful design. It has a real trunk up front and real interior space (2+2) so that a touring vacation for a couple is actually possible. It's also a V6, MC20 powerful but this was designed in the mid 1970s during a terrible fuel and economic crisis. To me that would have been a competitive breakthrough especially if priced right like the Corvette which I happen to think is downright ugleeee. Most car in that segment struggle for practicality. I watched a review of the 296 yesterday. That's barely a weekend car especially if you have woman onboard who dresses.
The weak point of the Merak is not the lack of power - its the weight. And: if you are talking about beauty wth SUVs - look at the Range Rover Vela! Great, modern design inside/out. That car would be mine had it a better media system (so its now a BMW X5M).
Walter, I’m on vacation but next week I’ll contact you as the 200S guy is back in touch. It won’t go anywhere but it should be interesting.
