F1technical.net

There's no doubt about it being a great car, but to me it's too generic and dull in terms of appearances. Luckily it makes up for that with what's under the skin. I can't wait to see one in person, and hopefully hear it as well.

mx_tifosi wrote:There's no doubt about it being a great car, but to me it's too generic and dull in terms of appearances. Luckily it makes up for that with what's under the skin. I can't wait to see one in person, and hopefully hear it as well.

This might be a bit difficult to xplain, but the MP4-12C is clearly an engineer's car and as such, form follows function.

Why would it be difficult to explain? Because I'm not an engineer?

That's a pretty poor and disrespectful statement, if you don't mind me saying. Many other cars also share the same 'form follows function' credo but are moderately to extremely good looking, even if that in itself is subjective. And while I don't think this car looks "bad, per se, it doesn't catch my eye. But your implication of that it is an "engineers car" is not a good enough excuse or reason (IMO).

And I did say that what mattered most is what's under the skin. Thus I appreciate and understand the chassis, suspension, and engine, as hard as that might be to consider seeing how I'm not an engineer, right?

As they say, you're definately pushing the envelope on the moderator concept, mx!

But now that you ask, I'll give you an xample, gull-wing doors has nothing to do with functionality whatsoever.

xpensive wrote:As they say, you're definately pushing the envelope on the moderator concept, mx!

But now that you ask, I'll give you an xample, gull-wing doors has nothing to do with functionality whatsoever.

Ah, but in the original car they did. They were there because the sills were so big (in order to give the structural performance required with the methods available at the time).

The only way to make the thing accessible with a roof was to have gull wing doors. Likewise the tilting steering wheel to assist access.



In the SLS, the gullwings are merely there as a stylistic link to the original however.

Aren't all supercars about having fun and great performance? Functionality is not considered I think. The faster the car is, the better a supercar it is

BTW, thanks Just_a_fan. So having gullwing doors was not optional, it was compulsory

the gullwings are a Mercedes trademark so it is a famous quote of their living history and clever marketing as well.

300Sl was referred in germany only as :Flügeltuerer Benz - Gullwinged Benz - nobody would know what a 300SL is...

The door concept of the Mac is not really impressing me ,I have to say...to near to Lambo stile i have to say .
Mercedes Gullwings are better in parking ,as would be sliding doors(god beware us from vertical sliders, though..!)

A friend of mine bought a 300 SL in the early 90s and spent a fortune renovating the thing, only to find out that his mistress refused to climb in and out, why he sold it for an even bigger fortune and bought a Porsche 928 S4 instead.

Now that's form follows function for you marcush!

marcush. wrote:the gullwings are a Mercedes trademark so it is a famous quote of their living history and clever merketing as well.

marcush. wrote:The door concept of the Mac is not really impressing me ,I have to say...to near to Lambo stile i have to say .

Every McLaren road car has had this type of door (even the early M6 (basically a road-homologated race car) if I remember correctly). You can't say the same for Mercedes (or even Lamborghini).

I think it is more accurate to say "wing-style doors (and carbon chassis) are trademarks of McLaren cars"...

They are in fact "butterfly doors" using the A-pillar as its fixed point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_doors

Fair enough.

Just_a_fan wrote:Fair enough.

aint no thang

'The faster it goes the more of a supercar it is'?
I think the faster it goes the more like a vacuum cleaner it looks and the less relevent it becomes.

autogyro wrote:'The faster it goes the more of a supercar it is'?
I think the faster it goes the more like a vacuum cleaner it looks and the less relevent it becomes.

Yeah, that would be the most aero efficient But what I meant was that the main idea in designing sport cars is performance not functionality o comfort.