It seems the McLaren is winning... Let's make a deal. You all take the McLaren... ...I'll take the Enzo, an F40 and an F355 F1 Spider... The Mc is beatifull, yes. But something is missing... Image Unavailable, Please Login
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/f332/ http://www.mclarencars.com/ FACT FILE All 100 McLaren F1s have now been built, sold and delivered. Of the 100 cars -64 were F1 road cars, - 5 were F1 LM versions built to commemorate victory at Le Mans in 1995 and - 3 were F1 GTs. -28 (9 GTR 95, 9 GTR 96, 10 GTR 97)were F1 GTR race cars built for private customers competing in the FIA GT series and the 24 Heures du Mans. plus apparently 5 prototypes, XP1 - XP5. -The F1 used to break the record is XP5 the fifth and final prototype built to production specification. This remarkable car has now covered over 50,000 miles, being used for everything from marketing demonstration driving to development programmes and of course record breaking. Last year XP5, driven by Andy Wallace, established the McLaren F1 as the worlds fastest production road car with a top speed of 240.1mph. Ok, so now the car I want is a 95 F1 LM because: "the LM runs the most powerful engine of any F1, road or race, by using an 1995 GTR engine without the air restrictors. It also features the race car aerodynamics, gearbox and 18" inch wheels. With 680 bhp and weighing some 60kg less than the F1 road car, the F1 LM is the fastest accelerating F1 of all. As a tribute to the memory of Bruce McLaren, all the F1 LM's were painted in the same Papaya Orange that was used on his contemporary Formula One and Can Am cars. Inside the LM, the driver sits in an all carbon fibre race seat, and the passenger seats are moulded into the moncoque. With minimal trim, the interior carbon is beautifully finished in high gloss lacquer." Now, what did I do again with my tax return?
Jordan, I stant corrected as "Ferrari" seems to have verified your claim that the car was a prototype but there is no mention of taking the cats and mufflers off the car. Regards, Jon
I would much rather have the Mclaren, The thing I like most is the fact that the driver seat is in the middle and there are three seats. My wife and kid both love to ride in the Ferrari with me but we all cant fit, with the Mclaren problem solved
That Road and Track article lists the weight of the McLaren F1 as over 2800lbs, but every other article I've ever read has it weighing in between 2450 and 2550lbs. Does anyone know why it was so much heavier? Maybe something to do with getting it to be street legal in the United States? Also how is is that they managed to make a car 500lbs lighter than the Enzo? I've seen an Enzo in person and it doesn't appear to be that big (although I know the McLaren F1 is smaller). It just seems that Ferrari did almost everything it could to lighten weight and the F1 is still quite a bit lighter? I know the McLaren doesn't have things like power breaks and ABS, is it just this kind of stuff that accounts for the difference?
I have that issue, and have read the story several times over the years. It was in '87, I believe. The Benetton was Teo Fabi's, and it had a turbo 1.5-liter BMW motor producing 900 hp in race trim, and over 1,100 hp in qualifying trim. It's numbers blow away any street car. That is the most awesome road test I have ever read. I remember seeing stats on a later Williams, when Damon Hill was driving. It did 0-60moh in 2.2 seconds, and 0-100 in 3.5 seconds, or something along those lines. As awesome performing as both the Enzo and McLaren are, F1 cars are in a different stratosphere in terms of performance.
This is correct. March, 1987. I found my issue as well and wanted to edit my post since it was Fabi's development car, not Berger's. However, we only have a 60 min. window in which to edit our posts, so I could not correct my mistake in that earlier post. 0-175 in 10 seconds is not bad at all. Greg A
Kizdan and Teflon, Don't forget that it's even more amazing when you consider the amount of drag created by the downforce package on many of the F1 cars even the turbo cars of the 80's. I looked for through most of my McLaren stuff and couldn't find the accleration quote vs. the F1 car but a friend in the UK (who worked for McLaren race team) pointed me to this website which confirms the quote: "Zero to 200 mph takes 28.0 seconds. What's impressive is the figures show that above 125 mph, the F1 supercar accelerates faster than last year's McLaren MP4/8 Grand Prix race car." He said the information was contained in early McLaren literature. The webpage is here: http://www.angelfire.com/biz5/extremesupercars/cars/mclaren/mclaren2 The article starts here: http://www.angelfire.com/biz5/extremesupercars/cars/mclaren/mclarenf1.html Don't foget that the F1 made minimal downforce compared to an F1 car. It also has nearly twice the torque of an F1 engine (not really an issue at 125 mph I suppose). The amazing thing is that we can even talk about a car that can be driven on the street with an F1 car. While the Fabi F1 car goes 0-175 in 10 seconds the F1 road car can go 0-150 in 12.8. Not a bad comparison. This same article on the website above lists the weight in the 2500 for the road car. Maybe Audiguy can confirm how much weight was added for US bumper regulations. Can't imagine it would be 300 pounds. Compared to the F1 in either 2500 or 2800 guise the Enzo seems a bit bloated. There is no way with equal horsepower (Enzo only makes a few more) that an Enzo will ever hang with a car that is anywhere from 400-700 pounds lighter. Regards, Jon
McLaren. It is truly beautiful from every angle, IMO, and also comes with a proper manual transmission.
reasons why f1 wins 1. winning on FERRARI site poll ferchristsakes 2. sit in middle allowing for 2 hot chicks riding shotgun 3. no one questioned its styling when it was new as opposed to enzo whose styling is "controversial" to say the least. (plain ugly to me) 4. no competitors when it was new as enzo would have trouble winning today vs cgt, zonda, etc
When are you all gonna get it, The F1 was clocked at 231mph, it never did 240mph in any tests. The f1 leans like a pig in fast curves. Only does .87g in lateral! It sold at 1 million because back then the f 40 was selling second hand market for that much, but the f40 had a sticker of somewhere around 215,000 u.s. dollars. So maclaren's smart move was to sell at that much and make a huge profit, it is obvious that the f1 was overpriced by the factory from the get go. The f1 is a great car but in total reality its a goner and the king in everything is the Enzo. More to the point a street Porsche gt1 destroys the f1 all the way to its 177 mph top speed and laugh at its performance envelope anytime.
as i dont have the luxury of ever driving either, this is an armchair racer opinion but none the less having multiple archives of videos, stats, and test results on the Mc, I would have to say the McLaren. without a doubt. as far as the motor alone, some of you can say it has a lowly BMW engine, but have you ever seen the kind of components that went into that motor???!!! stop and think for a second.... write down the kind of things that an ultimately superior supercar motor would have. reliability? driveability? a pleasing exhaust note? power with low weight? christ! so what if its a BMW! its got everything most design engineers would want in a motor. if you want to just compare motors lets drop the finicky this brand and that brand argument. pound for pound that BMW motor will absolutely destroy most anything out there that is street legal(passes emissions), and is naturally aspirated. one of the reasons the motor cost is so high is due to the amount of design that went into it. ive looked at the research that went into both of these cars quite heavily and to call the F1 a "hodge podge" of parts is an abomination. it has many many more hours of design testing and work into it than the enzo. did you know the engine bay of the McLaren's were lined with GOLD foil solely because it had the best capability to reflect heat? to be truthful youd be more accurate saying the enzo was underdeveloped and premature-if you want to try calling the F1 a hodge-podge of parts. they are both beautifully designed cars. the fact that the McLaren is over ten years old from design, and that it can STILL be compared against the new Enzo is more than enough to be incredibly impressive. on top of that... it is more of a drivers car than the Enzo.. better visibility, stronger acceleration and yes, better grip in the corners. yet still it has better ground clearance and more driver anemnities with less weight. as far as body roll... yes it has more than the enzo but you can afford to have body roll in a car with handling as predictible as the F1 because of the increased clearance and suspension travel. its an incredible design. 6000 man hours went into each McLaren just to build it once the assembly was finalized. the light weight motor that i was talking about weighs only 266 kilos. thats pretty impressive for a V12 built in the 90's by ANY manufacturer. christ the wrenches in the tool kit are made of titanium to save weight. the car has enough storage to pack up for a weekend, the enzo, does not. in fact the F1 has roughly the same amount of storage room as a new honda accord. both are beautiful, well designed cars, but if I had the choice id take the F1
What planet are you on. It did do 240.01 certified independantly. Show me the performance numbers on the GT1. Everything you said is baseless. Cheers, Jon
And for those of you still hung up on the lowly BMW motor consider the following: The BMW F1 (road car) motor was designed by the same person at BMW motorsport that designed the 1400 hp F1 race car engine in the 80's that kicked Ferrari's ass on it's way to the world title. And the same lowly F1 road car engine kicked Ferrari's ass again to two World Sports Car Championships and an overall win at LeMans. They didn't take a production engine and stick it in the F1, they designed a fully functional race engine from scratch. And lastly, don't forget that had BMW had a decent chassis at the start of the last f1 season they would have won the driver's championship. It was their motor that was the first to rev to 19,500 rpm's. Picture of the motor below! Jon Image Unavailable, Please Login
The test was verified by Autocar magazine. The F1 did do 240.01mph but it did have its rev limiter disconnected for the test.The numbers recorded by Autocar also show the F1 out accelarates the Enzo (0-60 3.2 Vs 3.4) although I Beleive some other magazines have recorded quicker times for the Enzo. Both cars are very evenly matched and its probably going to come down to the capabilties of the driver up to 200mph anyway
The video of the run is located on this page (need Quicktime to view it). http://www.mclarencars.com/content/sections/mainfr/gall.htm Jon
I get the feeling Mclaren and Ferrari are both laughing at us when we discuss which car is "worth" $1m. One can want and afford these cars but worth is very subjective. I know I'm stating the obvious, but that don't make me unique...do it? Porsche is different...if you don't have $1m....you can go away now little man!
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally Posted by Testacojones The f1 is a great car but in total reality its a goner and the king in everything is the Enzo. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- im gonna have to go with Testa on that one the Enzo is the car to end all cars IMO right now.
F1, 10 years old and still the daddy. Greatest car I've ever seen, and it still looks new, the enzo will date quickly.
