McLaren MP4-12C

Breaking news, useful data or technical highlights or vehicles that are not meant to race. You can post commercial vehicle news or developments here.
Please post topics on racing variants in "other racing categories".
User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

Marcush,

In Autocar I read with amazement that when Wendelin Wiedeking was in charge the Porsche 911 turbo was operating at a 60% profit margin.

That is just incredible.
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

marcush. wrote:the mac is unique in terms of carbonfibre chassis in that segment?
But what is it going to give the owner that a aluminum monocoque can't give? Listening to the reports the competitors have found stiffness and lightness in the competing technology as well. We might be talking 3 or 5% contribution to a weight advantage. If you look at it from a safety point of view it is not going to be better because it does not protect you from above. The "tub" really is just as deep as an American bath tub to sit in. If you ever roll this baby aluminum will probably have to protect everything above your guts. So it is more like a talking point for nerds than a real customer benefit.

I think the MP4-12C will be an amazing car and certainly worth having. But from a uniqueness point of view I think it will be only a gradual improvement on a product that will be two years in the market and that is an awfully long time.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

@WB

No one else in the sector has a unique feature in their cars. The c/f Monocell is unique so that's a selling point right there. And the MP4-12C's engine has the lowest co2/hp of any road car on the market. So that's another 'good thing' they can hang sales on.

Also, don't forget that the -12C is the first of a series of cars that McLaren are intending to produce. A lower segment car is also planned as well as a 'hypercar'. Expect both to be better than anything else in their segments. If I were Porsche I'd be very worried about a £90,000 McLaren. Such a car is likely to take serious sales away from the upper end of the 911 range (Turbo / GT2 and 3). I've read that the -12C will also be offered as a convertible (easy to do because the chassis is so stiff that little if any weight will be added).

If McLaren also go racing with one of the the range (I'd guess the -12C and the lower segment car will both be homolgated for racing) then both Porsche and Ferrari will be worried (especially Ferrari as they have a fairly low-key racing presence outside of F1 (unlike Porsche of course)).

There are only two things that can scupper McLaren's return to road cars - the double-dip recession pointed out by Segendum and McLaren themselves.

Ron Dennis might not be the most liked man in the world but one thing he is very good at is organisation. If he thinks McLaren road cars can be successful it would be a brave man to bet against it...
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:But what is it going to give the owner that a aluminum monocoque can't give?
Nothing. Why the entire industry is moving to carbon fiber is beyond me. :roll:

Here's the relevant bit of the previous article which you didn't read. In the future, it would be most helpful if you would take the time to read through a thread before commenting.
McLaren Automotive uses composites only where they bring major benefits and prove to be cost-effective. Santoni still uses metal in many areas where other automotive companies have started to use CFRP. For example, the rear structure, which carries the rear suspension, engine and gearbox, is a spaceframe made from welded aluminum extrusions. Cost and early uncertainty about engine operating temperatures drove this decision. Similarly, the front energy-absorbing tubes are aluminum extrusions that can be replaced inexpensively after a minor impact. And unlike the Aston Martin DBS (see "Gurit CBS for the Aston Martin DBS," under “Editor's Picks”), which makes use of Gurit’s (Newport, Isle of Wight, U.K.) CBS composite panels, most of McLaren’s body panels are aluminum or sheet molding compound (SMC). In particular, the rear quarters and the doors, which have a complex double curvature, are manufactured by Sotira (Change, France) from glass fiber-reinforced SMC.

When it came to the passenger cell, however, CFRP was clearly needed to take the high loads from the varied design requirements. In keeping with the principle of a strong composite driver’s cell developed in McLaren’s racing cars, the new road car has a monolithic CFRP cell structure known officially as a MonoCell, but nicknamed the “tub.”

The tub forms the main structure of the car. It takes most of the road loads via a subframe at the front, but it also handles the seat belt loads and, ultimately, the crash loads. The main mechanisms for passenger protection are the previously noted aluminum front and rear crush structures, which crumple to absorb impact energy, leaving the tub undamaged to protect the occupants, even during severe impacts. The success of this design feature has been demonstrated in the crash test program. A single tub has been used in no less than three high-speed impacts, without sustaining significant damage.

The one-piece structure incorporates several hollow sections. Some smaller voids are filled with Rohacell foam from EVONIK Röhm GmbH (Darmstadt, Germany), but the biggest sections are left hollow with removable mandrels. The total volume of these cavities is a massive 120 liters/33 gal (US), keeping tub weight to a mere 176 lb/80 kg.

Although the tub’s immediately apparent function is to carry the main operating loads between the front and rear of the car and protect the passengers, Santoni developed other criteria for its design, including the less obvious requirements of corrosion prevention, overall structural stiffness and ease of access to the passenger compartment.

Corrosion has been a problem in some expensive cars that are made in small numbers, especially when there is a reasonable customer expectation that the expensive new car will survive long enough to become a classic car. McLaren’s use of a composite tub avoids corrosion in the floor and hollow structural sections where metals are most likely to fail.
The hollow sills along the tub sides enhance the stiffness of the tub and, therefore, the car’s overall structure. The sills’ unusual width overcomes one problem common to most supercars, that of getting in and out of a low passenger compartment over a high sill. In the MP4-12C, exiting passengers can sit on the sills as they slide out of the seats.
Although the tub is well protected by crush structures, most areas of the tub are repairable, if necessary. But the design philosophy is that in most moderate frontal accidents, the damage will be limited to the extruded aluminum energy absorbers, the body panels and, possibly, the subframe.

In any case, tub maintenance is expected to be minimal. “The service intervals of modern carbon fiber aircraft have doubled those achieved by aluminium designs,” Santoni points out, noting that this is “a testament to the superior longevity of a carbon-based structure compared to aluminium.”

In line with the company’s policy that carbon fibers are in the vehicle to do a job, not perform cosmetic or marketing functions, McLaren designers resisted the temptation to have CFRP in the MonoCell visible to the customer. The interior of the tub is covered almost entirely with good-quality carpet.
Last edited by Pup on 07 Sep 2010, 17:39, edited 1 time in total.

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

that reminds my of my old GT STS mountainbike bike frame made of blown thermoplastic Carbonfibres..the sound of it when a small stone hit it was ...plastic ... very uncool and cheap that was .. the bike itself cost monster money.... :mrgreen: and got stolen first time i left it in the garage instead of taking it into the house... :shock:

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

Pup, I had actually read this piece which is nothing but a glorification of a manufacturing technology and your condescending post is irritating. CFC chassis structures with RTM will eventually come to the automotive industry but at nowhere near the speed that you are intimidating.

The anti corrosion effect is much over emphasized when you look at good practices with aluminum chassis and the weight saving effect isn't radical either. After all a huge chunk of the car's chassis is still made from aluminum. The front , the rear and the top structures are all aluminum.

A big part of the weight saving of the MP4-12C vs the 458 Italia is in the lighter engine which has lower capacity, higher boost and possibly higher rpm. The RTM carbon tub simply is not a customer benefit that will have a significant impact IMO. McLaren deserve some praise for developing the technology but this isn' going to give them 10% more customers. When BMW start to use the technology for the Megacity car the impact will be much bigger due to the economy of scale they get from the city car numbers.

The F1 had magnificent technology and specs but it was only build in some 80 copies. For this car McLaren are pulling all the stops from their marketing machine, but only time will tell how the venture will turn out.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

My posts toward you aren't intended to be condescending, WB, though I understand that being scolded in public can hurt. The lesson to be learned is that if you take time to read other's comments, and treat them with respect, you will be spared similar embarrassment in the future.

And by respecting another's comments, I mean that you should not dismiss them simply because they undermine your argument. Provide evidence to support your arguments, and all will be well.

The advantages of McLaren's CF tub are clearly stated:

1. Additional structural rigidity
2. Weight savings
3. Additional crash protection
4. Simplicity of manufacture
5. Cost of manufacture
6. Ease of repair
7. Corrosion resistance
8. Ease of access

In addition to these, I would add adaptability of design to the list, since a simple structural frame has advantages over a monocoque design which should be obvious. For example, creating a convertible version of the car can likely be done with minor changes, if any, to the underlying structure.

If you have any actual evidence to counter those points, please present them. But as yet, all you've done is dismiss them as unimportant, which is the very definition of sour grapes.

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

Pup

Carbon Fibre better in a crash? It hasnt any crumple qualities, which leads me to ease of repair. If the carbon fibre has shattered the whole panel will need replacing. Whereas metals can be manipulated.
Or is it a case of the carbon fibre is so cheap to produce that the cost of replacing a panel will be less than that of repair alumunium/steel ??
More could have been done.
David Purley

thestig84
thestig84
10
Joined: 19 Nov 2009, 13:09

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:Pup

Carbon Fibre better in a crash? It hasnt any crumple qualities, which leads me to ease of repair. If the carbon fibre has shattered the whole panel will need replacing. Whereas metals can be manipulated.
Or is it a case of the carbon fibre is so cheap to produce that the cost of replacing a panel will be less than that of repair alumunium/steel ??
Id say its sounding pretty good when it comes to crash qualities actually......
The car passed its first crash test without any damage to the tub. So they repaired the front and rear 'sacrificial' structures' damage and put it through again. Still no damage. So the test car went through an unprecedented three high-speed crash tests, unscathed and unscratched. Even the windscreen was undamaged. Suffice to say McLaren are confident this a very safe car.
http://speedhunters.com/archive/2010/03 ... -line.aspx

User avatar
747heavy
24
Joined: 06 Jul 2010, 21:45

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:Pup

Carbon Fibre better in a crash? It hasnt any crumple qualities, which leads me to ease of repair. If the carbon fibre has shattered the whole panel will need replacing. Whereas metals can be manipulated.
Or is it a case of the carbon fibre is so cheap to produce that the cost of replacing a panel will be less than that of repair alumunium/steel ??
It´s not so much about the panels JET, it´s about the core structure.
Think F1, how often is a monocoque or tub a write off?
Sure after a crash they need to replace some bodywork, front nose etc., but most often not the tub.
I think the MP4-12C concept is similar. You will still need to replace your door or quarter panel etc. after a crash, but I don´t think, they plan to make these parts from C/F.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver."
- Colin Chapman

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

Thank you Stig and 747,

That does indeed sound very impressive. Revolutionary I would say! Just read Mercedes and BMW have looked into this and have purchased companies that specialise in Carbon Fibre production. Must be the way forward then.
More could have been done.
David Purley

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

Yes, the design of the crash structure is appealing in it's simplicity. Whether that simplicity translates into a real-life advantage we'll have to see, though I don't see why it shouldn't. Mercedes made a big hoo-hah over the carbon crash structures in the SLR, but I can't imagine the repair bill associated with that in anything over a fender-bender.

All in all, Mac seem to be making very pragmatic choices in the design here. They're using CF only where it counts, yet are able to get a major marketing buzz from it. The tub itself, seemingly cheap and cheaply transported, may well be a big cost advantage to them as well.

Contrary to what WB is suggesting, I think the idea of the tub in itself is enough to drive a lot of interest in the car. Add to that the McLaren mystique and track record of obsessive build quality and I think they'll have no problem whatsoever clearing their showrooms.

And who knows, maybe the car will actually perform well, too. :wink:

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

the modern aluminium structures are a cut and throw away thing ,culminating in complete chassis into the bin ...if you happen to drive a lotus elise....so much for ease of repair-it is replace.
The Mac looks like a well thought out concept,much better than anything I have seen yet. in terms of repair concept and replaceable deformation elements.

I´d almost think the big ones will need a new view into things..
As for Ferrari I look back with tears in my eyes when thinking about the crasj repair cost of the 430 Challenge cars.....maybe i can find some old pictures...
Image
Image

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

All these points are incremental improvements if they are real at all and do not constitute a unique customer advantage as I have already pointed out. Nobody but a few geeks will buy the car for the manufacturing method of the cabin frame.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: McLaren MP4-12C

Post

More could have been done.
David Purley