F1technical.net

Ouch!! indeed

Mclaren had sent a full sized technical support team with the car for the test (where is the outrage Mr. Harris?) who then fitted Pirelli Corsas on the MP4.... they still lost, 1:19.6 , The Ferrari was on Michelin Super Sports.

More troubling for Mclaren are reports magazine testers found the handling "unrewarding", the brakes laking feel and the ride "citroen like" (yikes) at regular road speeds. at fast road speeds the MP4 "...suddenly feels all at sea, with only moderate loadings to deal with, the strange Citroen like ride reactions are back and the chassis feels out of tune with road''

http://axisofoversteer.blogspot.com/201 ... -ouch.html

It's pretty well known that test Ferraris are never what they sell on the road in a month of Sundays. I would expect that no one would be able to talk about what Ferrari did at these tests.

On paper, you've got a car that has less power, doesn't have a one-piece CF construction, is heavier, doesn't have better cornering speed and handing as a result and doesn't have better traction control still beating a car in the McLaren that is widely acknowledged to have those things. I'm just smelling a lot of BS here because nothing about what I know of the McLaren in comparison to the Ferrari tells me that the Ferrari is even remotely close, let alone faster.

Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job. The Mclaren completely trumps it in every way. The 458 is still spanking new, and was not a target when the Mp4-12c was designed.

Now that the target is there, and the reviews are in, an mp4-12c "S" or "R" or "XsIgta-vSPEC-qq" will HAVE to compare to the 458 more favourably.

Ferrari have made a stellar car and got the jump on Macca while they were in gestation.

But the cars are so close, Mclaren has to do very little to bring it 'up to speed'.

richard_leeds wrote:

alelanza wrote:i'd say that's half the answer to your earlier question, with the 2nd half dealing with the mclaren being a very expensive sports car.

So the two things are not completely different after all?

They are completely different in my view.

Giblet wrote:Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job...

I would have hoped they noticed the 430 came out at some point. Especially the scuderia.

Back in the real world, both cars will have a long queue of buyers regardless of what the reviews say. Shocking as it may seem, those fallible humans have different tastes and to some the McLaren will be the perfect car, while others will prefer the Ferrari.

Giblet wrote:Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job. The Mclaren completely trumps it in every way. The 458 is still spanking new, and was not a target when the Mp4-12c was designed.

The 458 was the target Giblet. Perhaps not in name, as they wouldnt have known it.
But they knew by the time the 430 was due to be replaced, it's replacement would be some way ahead of its predeccesor.

Mclaren can change things around, they have the nous for that ad its a bloody good effort. But they missed their target, we cannot skirt around that from the reviews i have read of it.

As you say the problems arent insurmountable, but they need addressing if McLaren have any desgin on reaching the top this generation.

richard_leeds wrote:Back in the real world, both cars will have a long queue of buyers regardless of what the reviews say. Shocking as it may seem, those fallible humans have different tastes and to some the McLaren will be the perfect car, while others will prefer the Ferrari.

The success or failure of a new car like 12C will really depend on the sales numbers in the 2nd to 3rd years, and how many variants they can produce without having to redesign the car from clean sheet.

IMO Mclaren might have been too ambitious to position 12C as a everyday supercar and yet still able to challenge 458 in terms of performance and pricing.

Giblet wrote:Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job.

I never realized how much Lada and McLaren have in common. Turns out they both compete with cars that have been out of production for about a decade

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:

Giblet wrote:Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job. The Mclaren completely trumps it in every way. The 458 is still spanking new, and was not a target when the Mp4-12c was designed.

The 458 was the target Giblet. Perhaps not in name, as they wouldnt have known it.
But they knew by the time the 430 was due to be replaced, it's replacement would be some way ahead of its predeccesor.

Mclaren can change things around, they have the nous for that ad its a bloody good effort. But they missed their target, we cannot skirt around that from the reviews i have read of it.

As you say the problems arent insurmountable, but they need addressing if McLaren have any desgin on reaching the top this generation.

Yes, but as I said it was a moving target, they didn't have numbers and struck quite close. Still, to me, it is very impressive foray into the supercar field.

Ferrari are supposed to be the best at what they do, and have an amazing car in the 458. It's their best in years and I love it. Thing is the tweaks to make the MP4-12c are easy to apply to make it faster. Dial up some boost, allow TC off, etc. I'm sure they can reprogram their own ECU Slapping a couple of turbos on a 458 might present some packaging and drive-ability issues.

The mp4-12c to me is more of a 'platform' than the 'complete car' of the 458, but if I was in the market I would likely be looking at the Ferrari or waiting a couple of year and seeing what the next car will be.

Pandamasque wrote:

Giblet wrote:Considering the Mp4-12C was designed to take out the car that was at Ferrari at the time, the 360, they have done a great job.

I never realized how much Lada and McLaren have in common. Turns out they both compete with cars that have been out of production for about a decade

Ugh, I meant the F430.

munudeges wrote:It's pretty well known that test Ferraris are never what they sell on the road in a month of Sundays. I would expect that no one would be able to talk about what Ferrari did at these tests.

On paper, you've got a car that has less power, doesn't have a one-piece CF construction, is heavier, doesn't have better cornering speed and handing as a result and doesn't have better traction control still beating a car in the McLaren that is widely acknowledged to have those things. I'm just smelling a lot of BS here because nothing about what I know of the McLaren in comparison to the Ferrari tells me that the Ferrari is even remotely close, let alone faster.

Please!! Mclaren is a good company, but Ferrari has a LITTLE BIT more experience with street cars. I'm sorry you don't like what the experts said, but to just say Ferrari cheated sounds a little bit like sour grapes.

Lurk wrote:[quote="Just_a_fan

Lurk wrote:They also said that.

More troubling for Mclaren are reports magazine testers found the handling "unrewarding", the brakes laking feel and the ride "citroen like" (yikes) at regular road speeds. at fast road speeds the MP4 "...suddenly feels all at sea, with only moderate loadings to deal with, the strange Citroen like ride reactions are back and the chassis feels out of tune with road''

Very strange for a car who was fully acclaimed in March... Do McLaren totally change its setup or is it something else?

Where is that quote from?

Every review I've seen has said how great the ride and handling are (ESP-off notwithstanding).

It was from this blog which was quoting Evo.

TheRMVR wrote:I've seen the car, I sat in it, I've heard it and seen other people drive in it.

And to me it is an unfinished product. The interior is made out of beautiful materials but it has been put together very poorly. It rattels, some plastics used under the leather are too soft so you can dent them.

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...[/quote]


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.

CHT wrote:Ouch!! indeed

Mclaren had sent a full sized technical support team with the car for the test (where is the outrage Mr. Harris?) who then fitted Pirelli Corsas on the MP4.... they still lost, 1:19.6 , The Ferrari was on Michelin Super Sports.

More troubling for Mclaren are reports magazine testers found the handling "unrewarding", the brakes laking feel and the ride "citroen like" (yikes) at regular road speeds. at fast road speeds the MP4 "...suddenly feels all at sea, with only moderate loadings to deal with, the strange Citroen like ride reactions are back and the chassis feels out of tune with road''

http://axisofoversteer.blogspot.com/201 ... -ouch.html

Judging by the banner graphic, that blog is run by someone who is a Ferrari fan. Which is fine, of course. And probably explains why there are only negative quotes from the Evo review. None of the positives are quoted from either that review or others.

The Evo test is pretty balanced ISTM and gives equal and fair billing to the good and the bad aspects of the new McLaren. I wouldn't be surprised to read in a future edition that Evo journos have been helping McLaren iron out some of the "real world" issues...they've been involved with Caterham development in the past for example.

Pierce89 wrote:Please!! Mclaren is a good company, but Ferrari has a LITTLE BIT more experience with street cars. I'm sorry you don't like what the experts said, but to just say Ferrari cheated sounds a little bit like sour grapes.

Unfortunately, Ferrari don't have any experience of the production processes that McLaren have which has produced a lighter car with fewer parts, and it has more power to boot. You only need to think about it for five seconds. The 458 as it is in that test simply doesn't match up to the vital statistics of the car as it is on the road.

If the 'experts' want to continue to test Ferraris then they keep their mouths shut.

munudeges wrote:

Pierce89 wrote:Please!! Mclaren is a good company, but Ferrari has a LITTLE BIT more experience with street cars. I'm sorry you don't like what the experts said, but to just say Ferrari cheated sounds a little bit like sour grapes.

Unfortunately, Ferrari don't have any experience of the production processes that McLaren have which has produced a lighter car with fewer parts, and it has more power to boot. You only need to think about it for five seconds. The 458 as it is in that test simply doesn't match up to the vital statistics of the car as it is on the road.

If the 'experts' want to continue to test Ferraris then they keep their mouths shut.

so your argument is that because Mclaren claim their car to have 10 more HP and a few less kilos, that their car JUST HAS to be better than the Ferrari? That's what I'm reading. I at least admit that I'm biased.