Why does everyone hate the McLaren SLR???

For me personally I can't stand the look and design of the SLR.

Interior and everything else is great.

 

Nice car, but it is just too big and bloated to be considered a 'supercar'.

The performance numbers are there, but the whole body design is way off.

It looks 90% Mercedes, and looks 10% McLaren. If it was vice versa, then there might have been a totally different outcome for the SLR.

 

personally, I love it. I think it is beautiful, and right now it's a supercar bargain.

 

I like it. I would take one.

 

Boring to drive, boring interior. When I drove one it did nothing for me. My SL65 has a better interior (although both are very close) and is almost as fast. Waaaay overpriced. Makes my SL65 seem like a bargain!

 

I love the SLR. For the price, I am astonished it wasn't as popular as the Carrera GT which (don't get me wrong, love the engine) looks nothing special.

 

I think its a really nice car,
the only think i dont like is .. Paris drives one... lol

 

..caue it looks like a regular SL BUT MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE

 

Pretending to be a "real" hypercar but actualy an auto,. Built out of many great bits but, engineered for poseurs.

 

How is it different then any F1 gearboxed Ferraris? Dont they all have an auto mode as well? I think the cars cool personally, I think it would be very very cool with a set of 61mm hair dryers on it.

 

I think its a great car but was overpriced by a couple hundred grand. Should have been $250k

 

MB stuck an auto trans in a supercar
WTH were they thinkings ?

Thats just lame

 

It's ugly and an automatic.

 

MB's only have Auto trans in all of their cars.......its a shame the new SLK and CLK series don't offer a manual or paddle shift.

 

Like Jerry mentioned, I think the retail came out way over the planned price (I thought it was supposed to be low $300ks, not $400ks). The visual proportions are very different from other cars with the seating so far in the back, which a lot of people didn't like. Automatic transmission.

Ultimately, I think the car was not really a "McLaren" car as planned, and Gordon Murray sure pointed that out. Nearly 1000lbs overweight and un-sporty transmission.

 

+1. I agree. Its a funny looking contraption and reminds me of those wonky Bristols, too much distance between the base of the windshield and the centreline of the front wheels. Embarrassing, passe doors add to the weirdness. I do like one thing; a wash doesn't make it look any better.

 

It seems more like a high speed luxo barge than a proper super car. I don't care much for the 40 foot long hood and surprisingly cramped interior.

 

Actually you can get a manual transmission on the Mercedes C300 Sport Sedan and the SLK300.(atleast in the US) Also if you add the sport package on either the SLK350 or CLK350 you get optional paddle shifters. Basically an automatic that allows you to change the gears via paddles. The SLK55 comes standard with the paddles too.

 

The car looks ugly and out of proportion for my taste.
Since Mercedes is also producing a V 12, I do not understand the logic of building up a V 8 instead of the V 12 and then giving the car such a streched out hood to make it look like it has a V 12 in it.

 

the problem is that mercedes and mclaren both envisioned different things for the car, so it turned out to be a mismatch. also, the interior is plastic

 

I believe there is no auto mode on the Enzo.

 

1; It looks like a Batmobile
2; V-8
3; supercharged instead of turbos, we're going backwards here.
4; The front wheels are actually in a different time zone.
5; Its the exact opposite of the greatest Supercar of all time; Mclaren F1

 

too much Mercedes and not enough McLaren