Yes it's as simple as that. Technology in and of itself does not translate into the necessary magic that can captivate a driver/fan. The car must have something about it beyond sterile performance benchmarks. Lots of cars today have impressive benchmarks. But fewer possess the magic. Using the 328, as you have, is a perfect statement to this. It's simply a beautiful car but by today's standards is a technological dinosaur. But that doesn't matter. It's magical.
I dunno about this... The thing with the SLR is that many people (me included) considered it just to be a top of the line Mercedes. And when you look at the car that way, it's not that much different from an SL65, just about 4 times the price. But the MP4 I like. I can't say it's as attractive as a Zonda, but it's certainly better than a 599 or a Gallardo and such, and the performance is out of this world. I think McLaren has a very respectable name in the world... anyone who would be interested in the car is going to know who McLaren are, and I'd say their name carries more weight than Lamborghini. I know some will scoff at that, but Lambos heritage is outrageous looking cars with big engines, whereas McLaren has a racing pedigree you can't argue with (not just in Formula One, but with the McLaren F1's as well). It's definitely an interesting car, IMO. I think I would get one of them before a 599 any day.
0-60 is meaningless and has always been... but 1/4 mile (and 0-100) are very important to me. I agree a lot of people buy these high end cars as fashion accessories or status symbols, but a lot of people love the thrill of them too. You know you loved the kick-in-the-ass torque of the Viper as much as I did Well, I want that, times 10. And the MP4-12C claims to do 0-125mph in <10 seconds? That is amazing. That is Viper * 10. I would be grinning from ear to ear whizzing around town in this thing.
I'm sure Bruce would be proud of the car. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_McLaren Image Unavailable, Please Login
They stated in the factory presentation to the press last week that it is 1300 kg dry. It does seem bleh. The technology is advanced and the crash tests are impressive. The tub and aluminum crash structures do a great job as shown in the crash test videos. I like the fact it has a flat-plane crank but I don't like the twin turbos. I'd rather have the normally aspirated F430, even with 100 less hp. The pre-cog on the shifter seems kind of silly too. If your accelerating, the car should know it and the trans should be prepared to upshift, if you're breaking it should be preparing to down shift. Maybe it will be worthwhile, I would have to try it to know. The front-on shot of the car looks way bland. According to McLaren, the car's body panels do nothing but clothe the car and direct the air, the crash tests weren't even done with the body panels on as they weren't necessary. Given the freedom this allows with design, the look is disappointing, at least in photos. It looks like it was computer designed for the best airflow characteristics, and beauty wasn't part of the equation. The name MP4-12C is just plain cumbersome, and reflects the technocrat nature of McLaren. The intro to the press at the factory this week was just about the least inspiring presentation imaginable. The guys speaking, including Dennis and Whitmarsh, sounded like they were giving eulogies. There was no hint of anything other than a very sterile precision. A far cry from the passion that still emanates from Ferrari. It's kind of surprising McLaren isn't a German company, given their technical nature. They have all the technical expertise of German engineering, combined with the soul and passion of English cooking. Give me a 458 Italia any day over the McLaren.
Eh 1/4 is meaningless to me once we hit the 12's. I dont need to black out doing a run I love the torque in my viper but I have no craving for any more. In fact the torque in my vette, while less than the viper, is satisfactory to me. I do know some people honestly love the engineering of cars like this. I appreciate that and my remarks arent towards them. Im not into engineering or technology so I dont get it...but I can respect it. I just think most people are simply buying status and bragging rights. If I run into an owner of an Enzo and they cant run through the technological achievements of the car it turns my stomach as really all they bought was status. Same will go with this car. If someone loves the engineering and has bothered to learn all about it then great. I applaud them. If they cant then they are the definition of a poseur.
me, i love the engineering that went into this thing--especially the carbon tub and aluminum subframes. however, i really really don't like the way it sounds (just a loud blah blah woosh noise), and the way it looks...to me it just doesn't 'look right'...bland and awkward too... but hey, i don't have the $300k anyways so whatever
Those who say the performance doesn't matter probably don't drive their cars all that hard. If you do, on occassion, drive it hard, there is nothing more embarassing than having someone in another car go by you, when you've got what is supposed to be an ultimate performance machine. I don't like the styling of either the 458 or the McLaren, but the performance is another matter. Problem is that neither are made in a manual format. If you've got to get an automatic, you might as well get one that will blow the doors off all of it's competition. Art
Yeah' I feel the same here.... Maybe its meant to be so that Mclaren can bring out slightly better looking model the next time round without much redesign.
Really Art ?? You would be embarrassed if someone passes you in another car ? Im kind of shocked. I would think you would be far more secure in yourself to feel that way. I couldnt care less if someone passes me. In fact I usually do the opposite...if someone wants to race me I give it one tiny bit of gas and then let the other person take me. Then when we reconnect I say something like 'yeah I guess you're cooler than me' And you are right. I dont drive my cars hard at all.
id rather have a blander more generic car than a car that is too outthere as far as styling. Also, I would say that there is a lot of Mclaren F1 in the rear quarter windows and c pilar. That entire shape is F1esq. As far as the 360 nose and the testarossa sides.. i see zero resemblances in the testarossa sides... other than there is a scoop on the side. That is about it. the 360 nose... well, thats a little closer but ill still point at the mcf1 at that one seeing as how that car was about a good 5-6 years before the 360. The doors, are not enzo... they are F1. Hell ferrari has never really used non conventional style doors on there road cars.
I'm trying to figure out this idea (which has also come up in the 458 section) that "I don't care how fast it goes as long as it looks good", or "you can't get all the performance out it anyway so just make it better looking" when it comes to super cars. Sedans... I get it. SUV's... I get it. But, a super car? Isn't it supposed to be faster than it's predicessors? If the 355 were slower than the 348, would it still have been considered some kind of step forward for Ferrari? I think we would be roundly bemoaning the lack of performance while praising it's looks. So, I don't get this notion that speed doesn't matter. And, if it takes technology (like sequential gearboxes and aerodymanics) to get there, I don't see the problem either. Not one person has belly-ached here that the McLaren doesn't come with a manual 6 speed. Yet, with the 458, it's still being debated months after the announcement. To me, the entire idea of making a super sports car is to make it perform better than the one that came before it.
I don't think that represents what some are saying in regards to performance. It absolutely does matter. The argument is not an either or one.
You're taking an extreme point of view. Of course the new model shouldnt be slower than the outgoing model but it doesnt necessarily have to be faster either...especially at the sacrifice of aesthetics. There is no right or wrong here. Its just personal preference. Some fill in their insecurities by buying a car that can outperform the rest...some fill in their insecurities by buying a car that looks better than the rest. I dont consider a 458 a supercar. A supercar should exist for one reason. To use cost no object state of the art technology to achieve maximum performance for its time. I can respect that even if I dont get down with it because the engineering involved is an art form unto itself
The first Ferrari that replaces the one before it but does not improve on the performance will be booed off the stage by the people on this forum.... mark my words. If the Enzo replacement does not go faster around Fiorano but looks better, it will be called nothing but a poser car. If the McLaren did not have better performance than the Italia, it would be viewed as a failure. I don't think I'm taking an extreme view at all.
Corrected it for you. I think you would be surprised how many wouldnt care if the next gen didnt improve on the performance of the previous generation. I just cant believe I would be the only one. The Enzo doesnt count because it IS a supercar. This is where you tend to exaggerate and veer off point. The Enzo successor is a cost no object state of the art technology supercar. Its successor needs to follow that. You are right some of the people on a car forum will feel the McLaren is a failure if it doesnt better the Italias performance figures. I think thats an immature attitude but you are right some will feel that way.
No, MOST of the people. Not some. I can just imagine what people would be saying today if the McLaren was slower than the Italia.... Here's a hint: "Great technology... but it's SLOW! LOL!" You HONESTLY believe that if the Italia were no faster than an F430 that it would not get roundly booed by most on this forum? I find that hard to believe. We might as well start counting how many cup holders it has...
I think it would be a minority so we will agree to disagree on that since we cant prove it..oh wait. I smell a poll !
