Comparison tests Porsche 918 vs McLaren P1 vs LaFerrari

[ajjers]

The physics on that just don't work out I'm afraid. Just as a launch is critical to quarter mile ET, so too is corner exit critical to lap time, however neither affects peak speeds much at all. This is because acceleration is much faster at lower speeds, and quicker ground coverage leaves less time to accelerate. In circuit driving, higher speeds also mean earlier braking. Only hp, weight (to a lesser extent) and drag affect peak speed I'm afraid.


Rubbish, P1 owners have clocked exactly the same 60-130mph times as the yellow P1 used in MT's Dunsfold test. Furthermore, Treynor's P1 is not the lightest spec and was still comfortably faster than the 918 at Laguna, even though that 918 was much faster than the one which lapped last year.

You and your Fchat buddies never cease in spamming the net with false garbage, like the 5 mechanics and dozen sets of tyres used at Laguna... or the 7:04 'ring time... At the end of the day, Porsche and Ferrari are the only ones who have failed to provide a customer car for a test. Ferrari have even taken the extra step of prohibiting all instrumented testing and forbidding customers from providing a car for such tests. McLaren have never been anything but straight up and willing in all these tests thus far. McLaren is not the one with the question mark here.

So the speed at which you enter a straight and the traction you have available has no effect on the speed you exit it? Right. So if the 918 exits the corner at 100mph and the P1 exits the corner at 10mph, spinning its wheels, the P1 will definitely have the higher speed at the end of the straight will it? Bollocks I'm afraid. Also, the peak speeds at Castelloli were about 150mph, still very much in the 918's sweet spot and well before the front motor decouples.

An easier way to refute your point is the recent Z06/Nismo test at Willow where the Nismo managed a peak speed of 154.7mph and the Z06 managed 148.3mph despite a significant PWR disadvantage. Perhaps that Nismo was a 1000hp ringer as well!

As for the 458s owner, you're either dense or being deliberately dense I'm afraid. The time here is irrelevant as the Trofeos are obviously knackered. The point is here we have very capable driver who has ditched bespoke MSPC2s in favour of off the rackTrofeos because they perform better. This is recurring theme. In all your internet trawling you've yet to find a single example of a car which has been quicker on MSPC2s than on Trofeos yet we have several examples where the Trofeo has been quicker, often by quite some margin.

 

[Emu]

So the speed at which you enter a straight and the traction you have available has no effect on the speed you exit it? Right. So if the 918 exits the corner at 100mph and the P1 exits the corner at 10mph, spinning its wheels, the P1 will definitely have the higher speed at the end of the straight will it? Bollocks I'm afraid. Also, the peak speeds at Castelloli were about 150mph, still very much in the 918's sweet spot and well before the front motor decouples.

It has very little affect on peak speed. That's the problem, even a difference of 10mph on exit speed (which is unrealistic anyway) still wouldn't cut it for a delta of 4mph. Same speed as the Laguna Seca straight where the 918 comes round the corner 1mph faster and has AWD traction advantage. Also check out T6, P1 is 2.4mph slower in the corner and 3.2mph faster on the straight. You won't agree with me because you have you heart set on disagreeing with me, but deep down you know it's true.

An easier way to refute your point is the recent Z06/Nismo test at Willow where the Nismo managed a peak speed of 154.7mph and the Z06 managed 148.3mph despite a significant PWR disadvantage. Perhaps that Nismo was a 1000hp ringer as well!

The Z06's drag problems and heat soak issues were well documented before this test. For some reason it traps no higher than a C6 Z06 (505hp) in the quarter either. I believe one magazine even timed it as slower to 150mph. The C6 Z06 was able to out-accelerate earlier GTRs with ease, even with a manual gearbox.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0510_2006_chevrolet_corvette_z06/

Whereas the P1 has been faster than the 918 on acceleration in all testing.

As for the 458s owner, you're either dense or being deliberately dense I'm afraid. The time here is irrelevant as the Trofeos are obviously knackered. The point is here we have very capable driver who has ditched bespoke MSPC2s in favour of off the rackTrofeos because they perform better. This is recurring theme. In all your internet trawling you've yet to find a single example of a car which has been quicker on MSPC2s than on Trofeos yet we have several examples where the Trofeo has been quicker, often by quite some margin.

Sadly they aren't the same MPSC2s as the 918 and the Trofeos were a size-for-size swap, not an undersize swap. It's a bespoke MPSC2, hence why there is no comparison available. Your argument is shot down by the fact the Trofeo R was only 1.4s faster than the PZCS at Anglesey and the fact MPSC2s are 2.4s quicker than MPSC+ at Jerez. These tyres are all bespoke and OTS comparisons are therefore void.

The cornering speeds in the MT test are not indicative of a tyre advantage and Randy Pobst, who actually knows what he's talking about, said as much. A focused racing driver knows the difference between effects caused by car and effects caused by tyre.

 

[ajjers]

I just read that. Very true article.

Just the usual click bait nonsense. Ferrari have almost certainly been up to shenanigans in the past but the fact is 458s, Speciales and F12s have all performed similarly in magazine tests as they have for customers. Treynor will tell you that his 458 was quicker than his 12c on some tracks and slower on others which is pretty much what the magazine tests showed. Also the same things were said about never seeing a proper test for the Enzo yet eventually customer cars found their way into the hands of magazines and they performed pretty darn well.

As for Laferrari, it is undoubtedly heavier than the "dry" weight that Ferrari claim but in the owners manual it says that it is about 1490kg with lightweight options which seems about right.

http://www.rennteam.com/forum/page1.html?vs=15

The problem with customer Laferrari's going up against the P1 and 918 is that it will obviously be at a tyre disadvantage unless it goes stock for stock against the P1. I've always said that for a test to be fair all the cars should be on the same tyres. If the Top Gear test goes ahead then the Laferrari should be on MSPC2s or Trofeos which I think would be fair, any owner who tracks the Laferrari regularly will change the tyres at the first opportunity.

Hope to hear some insights on how the Laferrari performs on track from Treynor when he and his wife take it to Laguna Seca.

 

[Emu]

Just the usual click bait nonsense. Ferrari have almost certainly been up to shenanigans in the past but the fact is 458s, Speciales and F12s have all performed similarly in magazine tests as they have for customers. Treynor will tell you that his 458 was quicker than his 12c on some tracks and slower on others which is pretty much what the magazine tests showed. Also the same things were said about never seeing a proper test for the Enzo yet eventually customer cars found their way into the hands of magazines and they performed pretty darn well.

As for Laferrari, it is undoubtedly heavier than the "dry" weight that Ferrari claim but in the owners manual it says that it is about 1490kg with lightweight options which seems about right.

http://www.rennteam.com/forum/page1.html?vs=15

The problem with customer Laferrari's going up against the P1 and 918 is that it will obviously be at a tyre disadvantage unless it goes stock for stock against the P1. I've always said that for a test to be fair all the cars should be on the same tyres. If the Top Gear test goes ahead then the Laferrari should be on MSPC2s or Trofeos which I think would be fair, any owner who tracks the Laferrari regularly will change the tyres at the first opportunity.

Hope to hear some insights on how the Laferrari performs on track from Treynor when he and his wife take it to Laguna Seca.

No Trofeos in that size, hence why the P1 uses undersized ones.

I also think it's a very fair piece on Ferrari. They have worked long and hard to earn such a reputation and this article isn't the only one to mention it. At first they wouldn't allow any LaFerrari to be tested and now they will only allow a factory car?? Yeah that sounds legit. 1590kg is also nearer the actual weight. Definitely has nearer 600hp/ton than 700hp/ton.

 

[kingjr9000]

Just the usual click bait nonsense. Ferrari have almost certainly been up to shenanigans in the past but the fact is 458s, Speciales and F12s have all performed similarly in magazine tests as they have for customers. Treynor will tell you that his 458 was quicker than his 12c on some tracks and slower on others which is pretty much what the magazine tests showed.

That's what I've been saying. Tests and owner reports have shown that current gen ferraris perform the same as specs indicate. But after that chris Harris piece, everyone thinks ferrari still cheats.

 

[ajjers]

It has very little affect on peak speed. That's the problem, even a difference of 10mph on exit speed (which is unrealistic anyway) still wouldn't cut it for a delta of 4mph. Same speed as the Laguna Seca straight where the 918 comes round the corner 1mph faster and has AWD traction advantage. Also check out T6, P1 is 2.4mph slower in the corner and 3.2mph faster on the straight. You won't agree with me because you have you heart set on disagreeing with me, but deep down you know it's true.


The Z06's drag problems and heat soak issues were well documented before this test. For some reason it traps no higher than a C6 Z06 (505hp) in the quarter either. I believe one magazine even timed it as slower to 150mph. The C6 Z06 was able to out-accelerate earlier GTRs with ease, even with a manual gearbox.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0510_2006_chevrolet_corvette_z06/

Whereas the P1 has been faster than the 918 on acceleration in all testing.


Sadly they aren't the same MPSC2s as the 918 and the Trofeos were a size-for-size swap, not an undersize swap. It's a bespoke MPSC2, hence why there is no comparison available. Your argument is shot down by the fact the Trofeo R was only 1.4s faster than the PZCS at Anglesey and the fact MPSC2s are 2.4s quicker than MPSC+ at Jerez. These tyres are all bespoke and OTS comparisons are therefore void.

The cornering speeds in the MT test are not indicative of a tyre advantage and Randy Pobst, who actually knows what he's talking about, said as much. A focused racing driver knows the difference between effects caused by car and effects caused by tyre.

I won't agree with you because you are wrong. The P1 at Castelloli was on Corsas and would have been struggling for traction out of the corner. No surprise to see the 918 get the jump and hold on to record the faster peak speed. Of course if the 918 was a 1000hp ringer it would have monstered the P1 in the straightline testing at Castelloli which it didn't. As I say it is the same exact car that was slower than the P1 at Bruntingthorpe. Tell me if Porsche had a 1000hp ringer available why didn't they send it to the Bruntingthorpe?

Your point about tyres is equally ridiculous. We now have several examples of Trofeos and MSPC2s on the same car and the Trofeo has been faster every time. EVERY time. The 918 may have superior traction/braking than the opposition but that is because of the way it is set up/engineered and not because of the voodoo properties of its tyres.

 

[ajjers]

That's what I've been saying. Tests and owner reports have shown that current gen ferraris perform the same as specs indicate. But after that chris Harris piece, everyone thinks ferrari still cheats.

All you need to do is look at the cars Chris Harris has owned recently and which car he would like to own given the opportunity!

 

[ajjers]

No Trofeos in that size, hence why the P1 uses undersized ones.

I also think it's a very fair piece on Ferrari. They have worked long and hard to earn such a reputation and this article isn't the only one to mention it. At first they wouldn't allow any LaFerrari to be tested and now they will only allow a factory car?? Yeah that sounds legit. 1590kg is also nearer the actual weight. Definitely has nearer 600hp/ton than 700hp/ton.

Agree that most Laferraris will be nearer 1600kgs than 1500kgs.

 

[Emu]

Furthermore, I'm yet to see one video on YouTube showing the LaFerrari to be decisively faster over any speed interval, or even as fast. Now the P1's speedo isn't that inaccurate, only a few mph out at 200mph, and there's nothing to say the LaFerrari doesn't over-read a little too (in fact it must be over-reading by at least 6mph in this case, so all square). So unless the wind always blows with the P1 and against the LaFerrari, all Ferrari's acceleration claims are pure BS. Where is the extra 100hp/ton and extra 47hp? I looked long and hard for them but I can't find them. It wouldn't surprise me if the FXXK struggled to match the quoted times.

In these videos it's 1s slower 150-180mph (5s vs 6s) and 150-190mph (8s vs 9s) (2up in both cars, 1 gear change for both 5th-6th).

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

In this video it's slower 0-224kph and 50-224mph (1up in each car)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Highest speed at Vmax - 209mph (P1) vs 207mph (LaFerrari) (1up in both)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[ajjers]

Furthermore, I'm yet to see one video on YouTube showing the LaFerrari to be decisively faster over any speed interval, or even as fast. Now the P1's speedo isn't that inaccurate, only a few mph out at 200mph, and there's nothing to say the LaFerrari doesn't over-read a little too. So unless the wind always blows with the P1 and against the LaFerrari, all Ferrari's acceleration claims are pure BS. Where is the extra 100hp/ton and extra 47hp? I looked long and hard for them but I can't find them. It wouldn't surprise me if the FXXK struggled to match the quoted times.

Well there's a guy on this forum who has both cars. I'm sure he'll put them side by side at some stage and let us know which is faster in a straight line.

 

[lbonu1967]

Data clearly says otherwise. There's nearly 2s being lost under braking. Scary but check out the trace. Zero out the braking advantage in the graph and the P1 wins by ~1s. Also clearly highlights areas of AWD traction advantage (T2, T8 and T11).

Yes the 918 outbrakes the P1 and so ? Do you want to tell us that it's only a problem of ABS calibration ? As just said this is a clearly showing that the alleged donwforce of the P1 is just on the paper. 20/30/40 % more of mechanical grip due to downforce are useless because ABS doesn't work properly ? that's is Mc laren engineering ?
Tracked my Elise 111s mk1 for years, no brake assistance and ABS. With sticky A038 no one was outbraking me

At least we can take part without cheating, unlike the great chicken-horse. A 'DNS' is still a loss in racing and cheats get disqualified, which is again a loss. So Ferrari have been losers for a very long time

Of course because ferrari will apply invisible extension to his ringer car body to match 600kg@161mph and provide the car of with the FXX_K engine and so on. When EVO tested the MP4-12C versus the 458 Italia in 2011 the car were tested in Wales for four days before to be tracked on Bedford on the same tires.
Results : 458 was better on the road and faster in track
Why ferrari want to send a Factory car ? So easy. To avoid variability that accompanies production and present his product at his best.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Plain and simple.
Guys how many components I have sent to customers after 100% check and fully quality documents with a big signboard :
To the attention of mr xxxxx Components for Press Car fleet
Audi, Lamborghini, Bmw etc etc.

Sadly they aren't the same MPSC2s as the 918 and the Trofeos were a size-for-size swap, not an undersize swap. It's a bespoke MPSC2, hence why there is no comparison available. Your argument is shot down by the fact the Trofeo R was only 1.4s faster than the PZCS at Anglesey and the fact MPSC2s are 2.4s quicker than MPSC+ at Jerez. These tyres are all bespoke and OTS comparisons are therefore void.

The cornering speeds in the MT test are not indicative of a tyre advantage and Randy Pobst, who actually knows what he's talking about, said as much. A focused racing driver knows the difference between effects caused by car and effects caused by tyre.

I'm confused.
You showed to us the same boring Autobild chart to compare MPSC2 on the Speciale versus the Trofeo R on the Huracan and now that a Speciale user switchs to trofeo R .... Ehm no, the MPSC2 of the Ferrari are not the same of the 918.
Lol are you real EMU ?
The Treynor P1 was on standard alignment. That's why the Trofeo R gaves no advantage. Unless the car Mclaren bring back in Anglesey.
Check the Z06 (Z07) lap in LS with MPSC. Both P1 and 918 outclassed for lateral g pulled.
Any other comment about the Michelin Jerez test ?

 

[lbonu1967]

The problem with customer Laferrari's going up against the P1 and 918 is that it will obviously be at a tyre disadvantage unless it goes stock for stock against the P1. I've always said that for a test to be fair all the cars should be on the same tyres. If the Top Gear test goes ahead then the Laferrari should be on MSPC2s or Trofeos which I think would be fair, any owner who tracks the Laferrari regularly will change the tyres at the first opportunity.

Don't be so sure about this.
The PZCS of laferrari is really suited to the car.

 

[ajjers]

Don't be so sure about this.
The PZCS of laferrari is really suited to the car.

Well I'm sure they're fine for the road but I have a hard time believing that the Laferrari wouldn't be faster on track with MSPC2s or Trofeos.

 

[lbonu1967]

Well I'm sure they're fine for the road but I have a hard time believing that the Laferrari wouldn't be faster on track with MSPC2s or Trofeos.

As far I know one of three compound used in laferrari PZCS is the same of the Trofeo R. In term of performance they are better than MPSC2 (availlable with LaF size)
Source = LaF chassis engineer
In term of weight. We received last year a PS vehicle to finalize test on the car (below a picture while unloading the car), weight was 1480 Kg but tank was about filled at 75% so we can calculate a kerb weight around 1500 kg. It was an euro spec.
Perfomance. Compared to Laferrari, the 458 speciale is pratically a bus.

Luque

 

[Mafalda]

At least we can take part without cheating, unlike the great chicken-horse. A 'DNS' is still a loss in racing and cheats get disqualified, which is again a loss. So Ferrari have been losers for a very long time.

Defeat? Yes. Heavy? No. Time set is still way beyond what anything else bar the 918 manages, with an imperfect lap and lots of room for improvement.

Emu , after ton os posts where you to try to show us who was the "real winnner", now you're just tring to show "the real loser..."
and about your link, it's not a scoop or a masterpiece too, but just a poor 4 years old copy-paste.
as ussual, the sense is ever teh same: " only Ferrari manipulates (every) test with afterburner!"
unfortunally for you
- the others (sometimes) also send press cars in "very good form"
- The others (sometimes) also refuse comparo
- the same C. Harris wrote " mnfrs optimized the press-cars? sometimes, but I can understand." (It's funny the differences between "optimized" and "manipulated"
- the same UK mags, just few months later the "scandal", compared the 458 Vs Mp4-12c, and the winner was... 458...
- In the masterpiece article I canno t finde hwen Autocar wrote "we've tested an official 458 Speciale and a stock one, and performances were the same"

 

[Mafalda]

LaF

As far I know one of three compound used in laferrari PZCS is the same of the Trofeo R. In term of performance they are better than MPSC2 (availlable with LaF size)
Source = LaF chassis engineer
In term of weight. We received last year a PS vehicle to finalize test on the car (below a picture while unloading the car), weight was 1480 Kg but tank was about filled at 75% so we can calculate a kerb weight around 1500 kg. It was an euro spec.
Perfomance. Compared to Laferrari, the 458 speciale is pratically a bus.

Luque

LaFe 1.500 Kgs Kerb?

 

[Emu]

Well there's a guy on this forum who has both cars. I'm sure he'll put them side by side at some stage and let us know which is faster in a straight line.

Don't bet on it, remember they already prevented him allowing it into the Laguna test.

Yes the 918 outbrakes the P1 and so ? Do you want to tell us that it's only a problem of ABS calibration ? As just said this is a clearly showing that the alleged donwforce of the P1 is just on the paper. 20/30/40 % more of mechanical grip due to downforce are useless because ABS doesn't work properly ? that's is Mc laren engineering ?
Tracked my Elise 111s mk1 for years, no brake assistance and ABS. With sticky A038 no one was outbraking me

It's the only thing it can be. The brakes are powerful enough to lock the wheels, downforce is there aplenty and the tyres are sticky enough. Nothing else it can be. Having actually watched the P1 at Dunsfold compared to Treynor's car, this issue may even be specific to his car??? Note squirelling under braking on Treynor's car.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Of course because ferrari will apply invisible extension to his ringer car body to match 600kg@161mph and provide the car of with the FXX_K engine and so on. When EVO tested the MP4-12C versus the 458 Italia in 2011 the car were tested in Wales for four days before to be tracked on Bedford on the same tires.
Results : 458 was better on the road and faster in track
Why ferrari want to send a Factory car ? So easy. To avoid variability that accompanies production and present his product at his best.

Plain and simple.
Guys how many components I have sent to customers after 100% check and fully quality documents with a big signboard :
To the attention of mr xxxxx Components for Press Car fleet
Audi, Lamborghini, Bmw etc etc.

Sorry but that's typical Fchat garbage. It's all here:

http://www.topgearbox.com/2015/news/why-well-never-see-a-true-laferrari-lap-time-2/

How come McLaren never had any problems with MT testing a customer car? Basically Ferrari are never going to allow a loss and they know that with Trofeo Rs the P1 has a good chance of beating the LaFerrari, regardless of like-for-like tyre performance, they also know that the 918 has a good chance on a track like Dunsfold. They will use the Huayra tyre trick as a minimum. Apparently a football playing a long time ago went to play in Italy, when he came back he was introduced diving to the national league for the first time.

The McLaren 12C was on PZeros at Bedford against a 458 on MPSS, it then switched to an equal tyre (Corsa System) and there was nothing in it. It then went on to most other tracks and destroyed the 458.

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ferrari_458_italia-vs-mclaren_mp4-12c.html

Track 458 Italia MP4-12C
Top Gear Track 1:19.10 1:16.20
Nordschleife 7:38.00 7:28.00
Hockenheim Short 1:09.70 1:08.70
Vairano Handling Course 1:15.14 1:14.81
Laguna Seca (post 1988) 1:36.22 1:34.50
Balocco 2:43.90 2:43.46
SportAuto wet handling test 1:33.60 1:38.70
Bedford Autodrome West Circuit (post 06/2008) 1:19.30 1:19.60
Autocar Dry Handling Track 1:08.90 1:08.60
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:12.70 1:19.10
Anglesey National 0:59.20 0:59.30
Spring Mountain (Radical loop section) 1:17.99 1:19.23
Mireval 1:31.60 1:30.58
Rockingham International Super Sportscar 1:28.30 1:29.24

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/mclaren_mp4-12c_my2013-vs-ferrari_458_italia.html

Track MP4-12C 458 Italia
Sachsenring 1:33.61 1:34.30
Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours Club 1:19.51 1:20.16
Ring Knutstrop (Conf 2) 1:08.00 1:10.00

I'm confused.
You showed to us the same boring Autobild chart to compare MPSC2 on the Speciale versus the Trofeo R on the Huracan and now that a Speciale user switchs to trofeo R .... Ehm no, the MPSC2 of the Ferrari are not the same of the 918.
Lol are you real EMU ?
The Treynor P1 was on standard alignment. That's why the Trofeo R gaves no advantage. Unless the car Mclaren bring back in Anglesey.
Check the Z06 (Z07) lap in LS with MPSC. Both P1 and 918 outclassed for lateral g pulled.
Any other comment about the Michelin Jerez test ?

The fact is that the 918 tyres are very bespoke. Randy knows the difference between effects caused by the car and effects caused by tyre and he said there was nothing in it.

Most of your CoG arguments have been bollox too. The P1's battery comprises about 5% of its overall weight with a driver. Every single other part of the 95% sits lower in Race mode than it is in the 918. The engine sits lower and is shorter in height, the e-motor sits lower, the transmission sits lower, the axles sit lower, the wheels sit lower, the tyres sit lower, the seats are lower, the driver is lower, the tub is lower, the body is lower. So that battery you keep pointing out would have to be suspended several feet about the roof to make the P1's CoG higher than the 918's.

Oh the alignment BS again. You argue the tyres are better anyway and then put the difference down to alignment. Kind of contradicting yourself. Different g, hotter track. C7 Z06 recently made 1.2g on Cup 2s on the skid pad.

 

[Emu]

As far I know one of three compound used in laferrari PZCS is the same of the Trofeo R. In term of performance they are better than MPSC2 (availlable with LaF size)
Source = LaF chassis engineer
In term of weight. We received last year a PS vehicle to finalize test on the car (below a picture while unloading the car), weight was 1480 Kg but tank was about filled at 75% so we can calculate a kerb weight around 1500 kg. It was an euro spec.
Perfomance. Compared to Laferrari, the 458 speciale is pratically a bus.

Luque

I guess it must only have 900hp then, because one way or another, it's only got 600hp/ton.

 

[Emu]

Emu , after ton os posts where you to try to show us who was the "real winnner", now you're just tring to show "the real loser..."
and about your link, it's not a scoop or a masterpiece too, but just a poor 4 years old copy-paste.
as ussual, the sense is ever teh same: " only Ferrari manipulates (every) test with afterburner!"
unfortunally for you
- the others (sometimes) also send press cars in "very good form"
- The others (sometimes) also refuse comparo
- the same C. Harris wrote " mnfrs optimized the press-cars? sometimes, but I can understand." (It's funny the differences between "optimized" and "manipulated"
- the same UK mags, just few months later the "scandal", compared the 458 Vs Mp4-12c, and the winner was... 458...
- In the masterpiece article I canno t finde hwen Autocar wrote "we've tested an official 458 Speciale and a stock one, and performances were the same"

Oh the denial of the Fchat Cosa Nostra is staggering. The problem is that we don't really know whether the 458 in that test was genuine either. Autocar did once write to Ferrari about a 360 that did 0-100mph in 8.8s.

Why does Ferrari threaten their customers with prohibition if they allow their car to take part in a test? Why wasn't Treynor allowed to send his LaFerrari to Laguna Seca for this test? Ferrari have a massive attitude problem and their extreme reluctance to allow customer cars to compete is further evidence of what everyone already knows.

 

[Emu]

Well there's a guy on this forum who has both cars. I'm sure he'll put them side by side at some stage and let us know which is faster in a straight line.

You might also note that the 150-180mph time in those videos is much faster than in Autocar. The problem with averaging in 2 directions for wind is that, whilst it's an accepted norm, scientifically it doesn't work. Take a 205mph and a 60mph wind. With the wind it gets a good 180-190mph time, against the wind, it doesn't make 180mph, so no time. The car is adversely affected by headwind more than it is helped by tailwind. This is why record attempts are generally not made when there's a gale.

Also curious in the Autocar P1 test is the absence of a 0-200mph time. The McLaren F1 had one, the CC8S had one, the Noble M600 had one. All these cars are substantially slower to 200mph than a P1, yet the P1 never made 200mph with Autocar. Yes there was one hell of a wind that day and it played havoc with times, hindering far more than it helped.