again..
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_fKkyG_ ... ture=feedu[/youtube][youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTX_w-GS ... ture=feedu[/youtube]
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
cheers. I think you have a point about Mclaren's earlier road car experience being irrelevant. The F1 was designed solely by Gordon Murray. The mp4-12c I believe is more of a work of all of Mclaren's road car dept.richard_leeds wrote:Thanks. I think it was the use of capital letters and the use of tiny numbers (1%) and huge round numbers (400%) that made me wonder about your post. Apologies.Pierce89 wrote:I chose 400% because Mclaren has 15 years and Ferrari 60 years of road car building
I'd say McLaren are effectively a new entrant to this market. One car 15 years ago isn't really relevant, or is it? On that basis Ferrari have infinitely more road car experience. Now infinity is a stupid silly number so I'll stop now!
It is not about rattles or squeaks, at least my brother never talk to me about that. It is how they are finished. Some have huge gap between hood / doors and the bodywork, leather not well tighten, visible screws, etc. JohnsonsEvilTwin also talk about adhesive so it is not just him...Pierce89 wrote:Lurk wrote:You should try a Ferrari. On client car they even aren't capable to apply leather correctly. Any journalist say that because it is Ferrari, but they really are badly assembled...
Pure BS. My father owned a 355 now a base model 360, both bought used. They both had magnificent interiors. I prefer the more classical interior of the 355, but the poit is they WERE WELL ASSEMBLED with NO RATTLES or SQUEAKS. Only negative thing in build quality is the way the light weight doors sound tinny when you slam them closed. But there is nothing wrong with the way either car was put together and they were both surprisingly reliable.
) but my brother take care on some because of his costumers so he saw several of them and other sport cars to compare. Maybe already more than a lot of us could ever seen...
They've made an engineering or marketing decision to design a car without an LSD and with electronic systems that help drivers get around corners without the tail sliding wide at every push of the throttle. They've made a decision that, having developed these systems they don't want them turned off (presumably because to do so is too complicated as the systems are so closely integrated; or perhaps turning them off makes the car undriveable?). The result is that the car needs to be driven in such a way as to maximise these systems in order to extract maximum lap performance from the car. In this regard it is no different to Formula cars that generate significant downforce; you drive them differently to a Touring Car for example. Horse for courses etc.JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:Come now JAF,
Are you suggesting McLaren made concessions?
What they are saying is their customer base isnt talented enough as that of Ferrari's?
Or have no compromise McLaren(vaunted as the reason for their split with mercedes) in fact compromised?
It's certainy one of the 2, wouldn't you say?
That was 1.3, not 0.3.Lurk wrote:Back to the McLaren, 0.3s slower on Evo....
Just_a_fan wrote:Been thinking about the McLaren's "required" driving style. In some ways, thinking about the likely customer demographic, having the system apply the brake steer if you add lock at the onset of understeer is quite helpful. It means that when the wealthy but under-talented owners try to go too quickly the car will help them out when they realise they're too quick for the corner and blindly add lock to try to get round.
From the reviews, if you do that the car will dig in even more and slingshot round and out the corner. It's this "system" that the journos etc. are stuggling with in their track tests and why the McLaren test drivers are showing much quicker times. Perhaps McLaren have just gone too far with the "system"...
If "fun" means hanging the tail out in the corners which is what the journos have been moaning about. And "as quick" applies only to the track. Most reviews say the thing is faster across country than anything else. But then it's a road car.CHT wrote: There is nothing wrong with the 12C, it is just not as quick and fun to drive as Ferrari.
They talked the car up as being quicker than the competition. Which it was when the competition was the 430. They basically talked the car up too early because Ferrari launched the 458 before they got the -12C out of the door.Those "wealthy" guys over at Ferrarichat.com are pretty disappointed with the 12C, especially after hearing so much of McHype about it. Maybe Mclaren marketing team should take it down a notch so as not to over promised something which they cant deliver.
Pandamasque wrote:That was 1.3, not 0.3.Lurk wrote:Back to the McLaren, 0.3s slower on Evo....
Text on the brackets implies Corsa tyre & McLaren team. So a time of 1.19.6 for the McLaren.0.3s slower on Evo (Ferraris are always setup and Michelin SuperSport are the best F458 can have, so same weapons than the McLaren)
All this focus on the two cars at the front of the picture. What about the other 4 in the background?CHT wrote:Ron's biggest nightmare..
http://www.mclarenlife.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202the car suffered a suspension failure and it was found to be between two sections of hydraulic pipe not torqued correctly and taking in air.this meant that the damping control was not optimal.the loss of roll stiffness and optimal damping therefore allowed the car to roll much more freely in braking/turn in phase causing a balance-change which was triggering a pre-mature ABS intervention.
The car used was PP18 ,This is a pre-production car and although representative of a production car was assembled in the protoype area. We understand that this problem may cause concern amongst our customers but please be assured this specific error cannot occur online with production cars as this build process is done using a digital tool that monitors torque pressures.
With just eighteen hours notice, three cars return to Rockingham later that week (including PP18) and, as witnessed by two journalists from car magazine, set the faster time reffered to at the end of their video. Infact, three laps with three cars set times of between 1:27.5 and 1:28.1. This was all timed and fed back to car magazine who were offered the GPS data for the record.
The cars used were standard cars representative of production cars with configurable corsa tires. We belive that the cars tested by the media should be as can be bought by the customer. Therefore, these cars were in no way set up for track lap times.They were simply the three remaining cars that were from our fleet.
