McLaren MP4-12C official pics and specs.

[Tave]

Did I say that?

I'm asking.

[Raza]

I'm asking.

The idea that manufacturers put in paddle shift gearboxes (be they DCT or SACT) as a part of "racing pedigree" or in a way to make it a "race car for the road" is a marketing ploy.  If they want to say that they chose the ACT boxes because they shift faster, well, that's a joke too, becuase while they do, 99% of the people that buy these cars wouldn't care if they came with two speed automatics.  They chose to use an ACT to increase sales, period.  

[S204STi]

Tits!

Where?!

----------

I dig this car.  Looks like an evolution of the original F1, and it should move like hell with that engine and such a light body.

[Galaxy]

Well he'll have to clarify what he meant.

I know weight doesn't really matter for top speed. It's more about gearing and torque, right?

The drag plays the biggest role.  i wonder what would happen to top speed if one stuffs this engine/transmission into a Prius.

[Galaxy]

Do modern Formula 1 cars have:
Roof
Doors
More than one seat
Trunks
Dual clutch transmissions
?

Is this a Formula 1 car?

Was the Mclaren F1 a Formula 1 car?  I must have missed the heyday of F1, when they had three seats and fixed roofs. 

No.

That's completely irrelevant.  If that's the marketing excuse they want to use, that's fine.  It's bullshit and fucking stupid, though. 

Hardly anyone would want a street legal F1ish car, they just want some racing technology, and most race cars today do use autos or semi autos that have an auto clutch. I do think a dual clutch paddle shifter fits the character of a McLaren better then a manual. This is a high tech car. The F1 inspired brake steer system shoots in the same direction.

[Galaxy]

The thing is only maybe 200# less than a 458 Italia, and is only up 38HP, plus it won't have the sharp throttle response of an N/A motor. Supercars are either supposed to have some kind of pedigree or be groundbreaking in design/performance. This is an impressive car, but not really earth shattering.

I have to say the 3000lbs disappoints me somewhat. I thought they would get closer to 2500.

[Galaxy]

The idea that manufacturers put in paddle shift gearboxes (be they DCT or SACT) as a part of "racing pedigree" or in a way to make it a "race car for the road" is a marketing ploy.  If they want to say that they chose the ACT boxes because they shift faster, well, that's a joke too, becuase while they do, 99% of the people that buy these cars wouldn't care if they came with two speed automatics.  They chose to use an ACT to increase sales, period. 

I disagree. First of all the average poser will not buy a McLaren. That would make no sense from his point of view, since McLaren does not have the recognition that a company like Ferrari has, especially in the USA where 99% of people probably have no idea what a McLaren is. I really think they choose this transmission because it will shave of time during exceleration.

[Raza]

I disagree. First of all the average poser will not buy a McLaren. That would make no sense from his point of view, since McLaren does not have the recognition that a company like Ferrari has, especially in the USA where 99% of people probably have no idea what a McLaren is. I really think they choose this transmission because it will shave of time during exceleration.

You can disagree, but you're wrong.

There was a time when no one knew who Enzo Ferrari was. 

[Galaxy]

You can disagree, but you're wrong.

There was a time when no one knew who Enzo Ferrari was. 

Well that has changed somewhat.  The customers who helped build up Ferrari at the start where most likely not typical posers. They where enthusiasts.

[Raza]

Well that has changed somewhat.  The customers who helped build up Ferrari at the start where most likely not typical posers. They where enthusiasts.

The point still stands.  Mclaren is trying to expand their line, increase sales, and, you know, sell cars.  You can't do that by selling cars to the ultra rich enthusiast crowd.  Jay Leno can only buy so many cars. 

They need to sell to the kind of Sunday drivers who buy Ferraris for posing, and they do it with F1 transmissions so they don't stall and embarrass themselves when they're trying to look cool. 

We wouldn't be having this argument if they sold it with a torque converted automatic.  They're just doing the same thing with a different name, and fooling most of you into believing it. 

[Galaxy]

The point still stands.  Mclaren is trying to expand their line, increase sales, and, you know, sell cars.  You can't do that by selling cars to the ultra rich enthusiast crowd.  Jay Leno can only buy so many cars. 

They need to sell to the kind of Sunday drivers who buy Ferraris for posing, and they do it with F1 transmissions so they don't stall and embarrass themselves when they're trying to look cool. 

We wouldn't be having this argument if they sold it with a torque converted automatic.  They're just doing the same thing with a different name, and fooling most of you into believing it. 

Let me put it this way. Poser or no poser if you spend this much money you  do not want to be blown of the road by a Nissan GT-R. And the McLaren engineers also want to be spared the humility. A manual transmission, even with a proficient driver is going to sabotage the performance.

I do understand your view. I would love to own an early 30s car which gives me the feeling of operating a machine instead of just driving a car.

[Raza]

Let me put it this way. Poser or no poser if you spend this much money you  do not want to be blown of the road by a Nissan GT-R. And the McLaren engineers also want to be spared the humility. A manual transmission, even with a proficient driver is going to sabotage the performance.

I do understand your view. I would love to own an early 30s car which gives me the feeling of operating a machine instead of just driving a car.

Let me put it this way: if you're spending this much money, you don't give a shit about the Nissan GT-R.  Because if you did, you'd probably own one already. 

[Galaxy]

You don't give a shit about a manual either because you also own a Morgan for the back to basics fix.

For me a McLaren is about maximum performance without having to make the sacrifices that an Arial Atom comes with.

[Raza]

You don't give a shit about a manual either because you also own a Morgan for the back to basics fix.

For me a McLaren is about maximum performance without having to make the sacrifices that an Arial Atom comes with.

And to Mclaren, Mclaren is about turning a profit. 

If you want maximum performance with no sacrifices, save your pennies and buy a Veyron.  A Mclaren, if we're judging off the F1, should be special, not just fast. 

[Galaxy]

And to Mclaren, Mclaren is about turning a profit.  

If you want maximum performance with no sacrifices, save your pennies and buy a Veyron.  A Mclaren, if we're judging off the F1, should be special, not just fast.  

The Veyron is all shock and awe on the straights but in the twisties i would rather have the MP4. I do agree with you on your second sentence. I don't want to see a US$50-60.000 McLaren and I fear it might come. I think this has the potential to be special. We will have to wait for the road tests.

[Vinsanity]

I agree that the DCT was chosen largely for performance purposes. Going into the second decade of the 21st century, the dual-clutch gearbox is the unit of choice for lightning-quick gear changes whether for an acceleration run or entering into a turn. The days of the clutch pedal are numbered, and the latest McLaren has to showcase technological progress.

[sportyaccordy]

You can disagree, but you're wrong.

There was a time when no one knew who Enzo Ferrari was. 

That was a totally different time.

Again, why would a playboy type dude buy this over a 458 Italia? Yea, you would lose a little performance, but you'd get a better looking car with much more brand panache. For w/e they're charging, I'm sorry, that shit matters in this segment. The McLaren looks like a kit car.

[Tave]

You should tell the buyers before someone does something stupid.

[nickdrinkwater]

That was a totally different time.

Again, why would a playboy type dude buy this over a 458 Italia? Yea, you would lose a little performance, but you'd get a better looking car with much more brand panache. For w/e they're charging, I'm sorry, that shit matters in this segment. The McLaren looks like a kit car.

I think the McLaren looks better than 458 judging by early pictures.  The Italia is more dramatic but I think it will age more quickly as a result.

[Raza]

That was a totally different time.

Again, why would a playboy type dude buy this over a 458 Italia? Yea, you would lose a little performance, but you'd get a better looking car with much more brand panache. For w/e they're charging, I'm sorry, that shit matters in this segment. The McLaren looks like a kit car.

You completely missed my point.  Maybe Lamborghini would have been a more appropriate comparison.

I'm sure, way back when, there were chaps sitting around talking "why would I buy a car from this upstart Lamborghini when I could get a Ferrari?"

Every company starts out small and with no reputation. 

And yes, it was a different time.  It was the past. 

[Submariner]

The point still stands.  Mclaren is trying to expand their line, increase sales, and, you know, sell cars.  You can't do that by selling cars to the ultra rich enthusiast crowd.  Jay Leno can only buy so many cars. 

They need to sell to the kind of Sunday drivers who buy Ferraris for posing, and they do it with F1 transmissions so they don't stall and embarrass themselves when they're trying to look cool. 

We wouldn't be having this argument if they sold it with a torque converted automatic.  They're just doing the same thing with a different name, and fooling most of you into believing it. 

Is learning to drive a stick that difficult? 

I think you're right though.  There is a reason we see "F1" transmissions in cars, and it's not to shave 1:10th of a second off of the cars 0-60 times.

[Submariner]

You completely missed my point.  Maybe Lamborghini would have been a more appropriate comparison.

I'm sure, way back when, there were chaps sitting around talking "why would I buy a car from this upstart Lamborghini when I could get a Ferrari?"

Every company starts out small and with no reputation. 

And yes, it was a different time.  It was the past. 

Take a look at Pagani and his upstart Zonda.

Of course, he had Mercedes backing him with their engines, so maybe that too isn't an accurate comparison.

[sportyaccordy]

You completely missed my point.  Maybe Lamborghini would have been a more appropriate comparison.

I'm sure, way back when, there were chaps sitting around talking "why would I buy a car from this upstart Lamborghini when I could get a Ferrari?"

Every company starts out small and with no reputation. 

And yes, it was a different time.  It was the past. 

Yea but McLaren already has a reputation. Plus the Miura is undoubtedly one of the best looking cars of all time. In addition, it was also the first mid-engined road car. Yea reliability wise it was a piece of shit, but it set the precedent for other Italian supercars.

The F1 was about 4 leagues ahead of everything out at the time, and it was an effort by an otherwise unknown manufacturer. I don't know if it's been topped as all followers have had some kind of compromises.

It's hard for me not to compare this to the F1 or other cars. It's def. not even in the league of the F1 so that's out. And it doesn't have the looks to put it ahead of the competition. Yea it has all the parts to perform... but honestly, the supercar market is super saturated now, and this doesn't really offer anything over the competition.

[nickdrinkwater]

MP4 also happens to be the name of their F1 car right now.  This makes sense.

According to Autocar:

Its designation comes from three sources: ?MP4? because every McLaren grand prix car has used that designation since 1981, ?12? because that?s its efficiency coefficient according to a secret McLaren performance scale, and ?C? because the important bits are made from carbonfibre.

Though like people are saying, it will most likely be abbreviated by journalists.

Yea but McLaren already has a reputation. Plus the Miura is undoubtedly one of the best looking cars of all time. In addition, it was also the first mid-engined road car. Yea reliability wise it was a piece of shit, but it set the precedent for other Italian supercars.

The F1 was about 4 leagues ahead of everything out at the time, and it was an effort by an otherwise unknown manufacturer. I don't know if it's been topped as all followers have had some kind of compromises.

It's hard for me not to compare this to the F1 or other cars. It's def. not even in the league of the F1 so that's out. And it doesn't have the looks to put it ahead of the competition. Yea it has all the parts to perform... but honestly, the supercar market is super saturated now, and this doesn't really offer anything over the competition.

I have to disagree with you there sporty.  Again courtesy of Autocar:

The MP4-12C?s chassis is special, even among carbonfibre tubs. Unlike others, which consist of several major carbon components bonded together, the 12C?s ?Monocell? chassis is a hollow one-piece affair built using a new process that has taken five years to develop.

McLaren believes the Monocell process could revolutionise car design by finding its way into more mainstream cars. A 12C chassis can now be built in just four hours at less than a tenth of the cost of the McLaren F1?s chassis in 1993. It weighs a mere 80kg, yet it provides most of the car?s class-beating rigidity and does a myriad of jobs, including providing direct mounts for the steering and front suspension.

The 12C tub bolts directly to an engine/suspension cradle made of aluminium extrusions and there are crushable alloy structures at either end, beneath the SMC body panels.

Why no carbonfibre panels? Carbon would be costly and deliver no extra function; better to spend the money on fruitful refinements in other areas.

The 12C has electro-hydraulic rack and pinion steering and double wishbone/coil spring suspension at both ends. There?s the usual suite of electronic aids, including ABS, ESP, ASC traction control, electronic brake distribution and hill hold.

To that, McLaren adds something it pioneered in its F1 cars: brake steer, which applies the inside rear brake as the car corners, to aid turning.

The new McLaren also has a unique rear deck-mounted airbrake, in effect an electrically operated spoiler that can deploy much faster than usual (aided by clever use of aerodynamic forces) to improve stability under braking and increase retardation.

However, the big suspension story is the 12C?s pioneering use of electronic interconnection of all four adjustable dampers. This has allowed the engineers to ditch conventional mechanical anti-roll bars and create what they call ?a unique relationship between ride and handling?.

When the car?s various wheel and motion sensors detect cornering, they increase cross-car damper rates to keep it nearly flat. But when it is travelling in a straight line they adopt more supple rates to provide something close to an executive saloon?s ride quality.

[Raza]

Yea but McLaren already has a reputation. Plus the Miura is undoubtedly one of the best looking cars of all time. In addition, it was also the first mid-engined road car. Yea reliability wise it was a piece of shit, but it set the precedent for other Italian supercars.

The F1 was about 4 leagues ahead of everything out at the time, and it was an effort by an otherwise unknown manufacturer. I don't know if it's been topped as all followers have had some kind of compromises.

It's hard for me not to compare this to the F1 or other cars. It's def. not even in the league of the F1 so that's out. And it doesn't have the looks to put it ahead of the competition. Yea it has all the parts to perform... but honestly, the supercar market is super saturated now, and this doesn't really offer anything over the competition.

You just implied that Mclaren doesn't have the name to stand with Ferrari, and now you're saying that Mclaren has a big reputation.  Make a decision. 

And you're still fucking forgetting that every large company starts as a small company.  You get bigger by giving the customer what he wants, and the customers are new money, tasteless fucks who can't drive for shit.  This is clearly the market that they're targeting.  I can't believe you don't see this.

[sportyaccordy]

nick,

The revolutionary chassis doesn't mean much IMO... car is still 3000#; not exactly an Elise or even an F1, which used antiquated CF tech, 3 seats + bigger interior and had a big ass V12 as opposed to a little V8.

And that inside brake deal sounds an awful lot like that goofy BMW "fake lsd" system that used the same kind of inside braking system in place of a well sorted LSD. With a good LSD such a system wouldn't be necessary, and I would hope and pray that for this kind of $$$ this car would come with a fully computerized LSD system.

And the electronic interconnection is cool, but again nothing new. Any car w/magnetic shocks prob has a similar system, and more importantly more control over dampening. Plus the previous gen Audi RS4 had electronic damping force control and a physical hydraulic connection between its diagonal shocks, which proved to be very effective.

Raza, temper temper. Facts are facts. #'wise yes the car is slightly ahead of cars like the GT2 & Scuderia, and to the uninformed has a lot of 'innovative' cool new features. But again, for this kind of money, if one wants a supercar they don't plan on turning into an endurance racer, I think its safe to say they will go with the better looking brand name car over the unknowns... esp. with such a vast selection of better looking big brand cars. You keep mentioning Ferrari wasn't known at one point; but don't see my point- that back when they came out, there was really no competition for them anyway. Now you have supercars from Audi, Ferrari, Lambo, Aston Martin, Pagani, Mercedes, Porsche, Ford, Koenigsegg, Bugatti, etc etc. This car, at least on paper, doesn't seem to bring anything new or crazy to the table, and isn't even that good looking IMO (def has a generic kit car feel to it).

[Raza]

But first you call Mclaren an unknown and then say it has a reputation.  You can't have it both ways.  But Zach's point is also relevant.  Zonda came into a fairly saturated market and he's doing fine. 

[sportyaccordy]

But first you call Mclaren an unknown and then say it has a reputation.  You can't have it both ways.  But Zach's point is also relevant.  Zonda came into a fairly saturated market and he's doing fine. 

McLaren was known in F1 circles but had no road car reputation until the F1. So yes they have a reputation if you can call it that. However unlike other supercar manufacturers they have basically been out of the game for 15 years (I don't t count the joke that is the SLR). I'm not sure we can even say they have a reputation in road cars anymore.

In any case the odds are def stacked against them. Bad economic times, heavily saturated supercar market, nothing really special about this car in any category. What's the point?

[Raza]

When did I say the odds weren't against them?  I said the DCT was an attempt to get more sales.

[Sigma Projects]

Could both of you guys be correct? That the paddle shifters are for both a selling gimmick and for performance? Why does it have to be only one or the other. I mean these cars are for only profit , if there was no money incentive at all of the company either being a marketing promotion or a volume seller they wouldn't be making it. But just because they are trying to make a profit doesn't mean they would do things that would also increase performance since this is a segment where performance does matter, mostly as bragging rights.