Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano or Mercedes SLR McLaren

[martinbo]

Ferrari should send a spy to Mercedes or Audis design studios. they need to do something and QUICK. the 599 looks too big and bulky. its HUGE. not only that, its design is subpar next to cars like the SLR. awful flow, awful details next to its competition. lines appear and go random directions whereas on the SLR they flow with one another.

I dont really care what the magazines say, the 599 will not beat faster than an SLR, at least not in a straight line. two owners I know both have raced a 640 rwhp FGTs in his SLRs and they were pretty much equal.

yes, the 599 has the faster gear shifting, but it is also down 130 ft-lbs of torque to the SLR. and the only way the SLR is losing is if it loses traction off the line.

Couldn't disagree more with this post if I tried...

The key to assessing the GTB's extraordinary achievement is in the understanding that the Fiorano is a GT that acquits itself admirably as a supercar. The SLR on the other hand is a supercar that didn't quite make the grade dynamically and ended up being a GT after all.

When it comes to cornering and braking the GTB is streaks ahead of the SLR. Corners; those nasty little f*&kers that join straights together.

 

[Tarek]

When it comes to cornering and braking the GTB is streaks ahead of the SLR. Corners; those nasty little f*&kers that join straights together.

Not really.The one in control really decides that,i've seen tests where it was faster and others where it wasn't,one fact remains for sure is that the SLR is much reliable and solid than the 599 GTB!

 

[DeDe]

Nordschleife cornering speeds / top speeds

Which? Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano / Mercedes SLR McLaren
Flugplatz: 172 kph (1,2 g) / 154 kph (1,1 g)
Aremberg: 100 kph (1,3 g) / 102 kph (1,2 g)
Ex-Mühle: 111 kph (1,25 g) / 101 kph (1,25 g)
Kesselchen: 240 kph / 234 kph
Hohe Acht: 105 kph (1,2 g) / 103 kph (1,2 g)
Döttinger Höhe: 293 kph / 292 kph
Time: 7.47 min / 7.52 min

 

[Deleted member 182]

SLR. I don't like those 599's tooth braces.

 

[klier]

Shouldn't we have a 722 SRL instead here? That's a big upgrade over the old SLR, imo.

Still, The 599 all the way for me. Stunning from the outside, nice from the inside and awesome performance and tech

 

[DeDe]

Shouldn't we have a 722 SRL instead here? That's a big upgrade over the old SLR, imo.

That's not really a 'big upgrade' IMO. Makes the 722 only 0.6 sec faster at the Hockenheimring (1.13,5 min <> 1.12,9 min).

And it's not faster at the straight line:
SLR / SLR 722 (at AMS High Speed Tests)
0-100 kph: 3,8 s / 3,8 s
0-200 kph: 10,7 s / 11,1 s
0-300 kph: 30,6 s / 35,8 s
Vmax.: 334 kph / 328 kph

 

[lambornima]

Couldn't disagree more with this post if I tried...

The key to assessing the GTB's extraordinary achievement is in the understanding that the Fiorano is a GT that acquits itself admirably as a supercar. The SLR on the other hand is a supercar that didn't quite make the grade dynamically and ended up being a GT after all.

When it comes to cornering and braking the GTB is streaks ahead of the SLR. Corners; those nasty little f*&kers that join straights together.

the SLR is THE GT. its got a great trunk too . I dont know on what basis you are saying what you are saying. I dont know where you got the idea that the SLR was a supercar gone bad rather than a GT-miracle. perhaps it was because it came out at the same time and thus was initially compared to the great supercars when it came out (ie Murcielago, CGT, Enzo etc), but the fact remains that it was a GT that outran two of three of those cars in the straights. I think if the duo of Mercedes and Mclaren wanted a supercar, they could have delivered a SUPERCAR *looks back ~10 years and sees CLK GTR and Mclaren F1 *

magazine times dont mean jack. I too was really into them, but am starting to see their many flaws. different conditions both in terms of the track conditions, weather conditions and the condition of the cars. a couple SLR owners I have spoken to said their cars got unstable at high speeds. the problem turned out to be with the shocks. how do we know that the SLR SA tested was running its best? we dont, its not documented. as we have seen many times before, Ferrari sends SEVERAL team crew to fiddle with the car during testing. this was perfectly documented by EVO when they tested the 599.

I had spoken to an SLR owner (and got a ride in his 722) and he said that the car initially was unstable at high speeds and downright scary during braking. it turns out the rear wing was not working properly. once that was fixed it was a world of difference according to him. the car is very stable (and this is saying a lot considering he used to own and frequently tracked a modified AWD Gallardo, (put 40K km on the car)). he says the braking is absolutely amazing. on the same straight that the Gallardo reaches 270, the SLR does 290 and he can even brake 5 meters later!



and you only need to see the SLR's hood to open to fall in love two times over. the first with the engine itself which is delivered BEAUTIFULLY. and second with the WAY the hood opens. it is a work of art and brilliance. and the sound! the 599 doesnt sound bad but the SLR has one of the most unique sounds ive ever heard. next to the LP640, it is THE best sound ive heard in person.

and the 722 is faster than the regular SLR. I dont know why one would say otherwise.

 

[Zafiro]

Today I saw three 599 GTB (+ a murcielago roadster and a Gallardo roadster).

 

[Tarek]

I wonder how the 599GTB will perform three years from now against MB's future supercar/super GT

 

[martinbo]

the SLR is THE GT. its got a great trunk too . I dont know on what basis you are saying what you are saying. I dont know where you got the idea that the SLR was a supercar gone bad rather than a GT-miracle. perhaps it was because it came out at the same time and thus was initially compared to the great supercars when it came out (ie Murcielago, CGT, Enzo etc), but the fact remains that it was a GT that outran two of three of those cars in the straights. I think if the duo of Mercedes and Mclaren wanted a supercar, they could have delivered a SUPERCAR *looks back ~10 years and sees CLK GTR and Mclaren F1 *

magazine times dont mean jack. I too was really into them, but am starting to see their many flaws. different conditions both in terms of the track conditions, weather conditions and the condition of the cars. a couple SLR owners I have spoken to said their cars got unstable at high speeds. the problem turned out to be with the shocks. how do we know that the SLR SA tested was running its best? we dont, its not documented. as we have seen many times before, Ferrari sends SEVERAL team crew to fiddle with the car during testing. this was perfectly documented by EVO when they tested the 599.

I had spoken to an SLR owner (and got a ride in his 722) and he said that the car initially was unstable at high speeds and downright scary during braking. it turns out the rear wing was not working properly. once that was fixed it was a world of difference according to him. the car is very stable (and this is saying a lot considering he used to own and frequently tracked a modified AWD Gallardo, (put 40K km on the car)). he says the braking is absolutely amazing. on the same straight that the Gallardo reaches 270, the SLR does 290 and he can even brake 5 meters later!



and you only need to see the SLR's hood to open to fall in love two times over. the first with the engine itself which is delivered BEAUTIFULLY. and second with the WAY the hood opens. it is a work of art and brilliance. and the sound! the 599 doesnt sound bad but the SLR has one of the most unique sounds ive ever heard. next to the LP640, it is THE best sound ive heard in person.

and the 722 is faster than the regular SLR. I dont know why one would say otherwise.

Great post Lambornima, great post.

It clarifies for me your stance on what makes the SLR such a great car and, clearly, you're analysing this from a different perspective from what I am. If you feel that the SLR was meant to be the ultra-GT that it is now from the outset, then who am I to argue?

You are correct that Ferrari's engineers did spend a great deal of time prepping the Fiorano for EVO's tests at Millbrook and Bedford. All credit to you. I feel that you've reinforced your point to an extent where I can disagree with you no longer.

I must say though, I took the MercMacca SLR at the time of its presentation to be a supercar with a traditional front-mid mounted engine tasked with bearing the sentimental mantle for the erstwhile SLR - especially in the light of McLaren's involvement in the gestation of the car. One immediately associates the McLaren moniker with that of a supercar... I didn't quite think that hallowed McLaren would want to be associated with a "mere" GT.

Now it's just down to horses for courses and I still feel that the 599 GTB carries more value and capability than the SLR but that's now purely subjective on a personal basis.

 

[Merc1]

Great posts Martin and lambornima.

M

 

[Merc1]

The SLR's perceived flaws have been written about over and over, from steering to brakes to automatic only, but I think the 2 biggest problems the SLR has/had is that it came out during the same as truly stunning machinery, the Enzo and my favorite the Carrera GT. I say this because I just don't believe the SLR is just so awful to drive as certain magazines have made it out to be. They act as though an Enzo or CGT is like driving an Accord and the SLR is like trying to get a hippo to rollerblade. That said I can just tell by watching video of the 3 cars that the SLR doesn't match the moves of the Enzo or CGT, but it isn't this pathetic, botched piece of carbon fiber either. The other flaw is price. Mercedes serverly misjudged the market thinking they could sell 3500 450K cars. Even Porsche and Ferrari can't or won't attempt that. Even CGT production ended early to prevent unwanted cars.

The new roadster version is though many more times desireable than the coupe though.

M

 

[martinbo]

Thanks Merc1. Y'know, the problem with the SLR is that it was so over-hyped to begin with. We saw the Concept (previewing both coupe and roadster variants) long before the production version of the coupe and there was this sense of anticipation - the McLaren association and all. Perhaps if the marketing team hadn't been so vocal so early on then the SLR may not have had all the expectation around it. Initial reactions from the media resulted in less than glowing reviews and the poor old SLR never shook the stigma off.

The 599 GTB on the other hand was anticipated, for sure, but kept very secret by Ferrari. When it arrived its looks were an instant surprise and many lamented the passing of the 550 / 575's more classic silhouette. The 599's introduction was intentionally low-key and altogether circumspect. But then, practically overnight, people warmed to the design and then some of the driving impression and tests surfaced - the car was sensational!

So, purely from a psychological aspect the 599 has an advantage over the SLR.

 

[lambornima]

The SLR's perceived flaws have been written about over and over, from steering to brakes to automatic only, but I think the 2 biggest problems the SLR has/had is that it came out during the same as truly stunning machinery, the Enzo and my favorite the Carrera GT. I say this because I just don't believe the SLR is just so awful to drive as certain magazines have made it out to be. They act as though an Enzo or CGT is like driving an Accord and the SLR is like trying to get a hippo to rollerblade. That said I can just tell by watching video of the 3 cars that the SLR doesn't match the moves of the Enzo or CGT, but it isn't this pathetic, botched piece of carbon fiber either. The other flaw is price. Mercedes serverly misjudged the market thinking they could sell 3500 450K cars. Even Porsche and Ferrari can't or won't attempt that. Even CGT production ended early to prevent unwanted cars.

The new roadster version is though many more times desireable than the coupe though.

M

just FYI:

1. one of the SLR owners I spoke to says the handling is great.

2. there was a recall on the SLR brakes that sqeeled.

3. the other breaking issue was that there is nothing and then, BAM, your head is ripped off your neck. according to owners, this is true initially, but once you get used to you know how much pressure to apply to not crash or give yourself and the person behind you a heart attack. on that note, the 722 owner spoke of close calls he had when he was almost rear ended. can you imagine being behind an SLR, probably not paying attention and drooling, then, all of a sudden, the car that at one point had the best brakes in the world (now its the Veyron) slams on them?! heart attack in a box!

 

[Sunny]

The SLR's perceived flaws have been written about over and over, from steering to brakes to automatic only, but I think the 2 biggest problems the SLR has/had is that it came out during the same as truly stunning machinery, the Enzo and my favorite the Carrera GT. I say this because I just don't believe the SLR is just so awful to drive as certain magazines have made it out to be. They act as though an Enzo or CGT is like driving an Accord and the SLR is like trying to get a hippo to rollerblade. That said I can just tell by watching video of the 3 cars that the SLR doesn't match the moves of the Enzo or CGT, but it isn't this pathetic, botched piece of carbon fiber either. The other flaw is price. Mercedes serverly misjudged the market thinking they could sell 3500 450K cars. Even Porsche and Ferrari can't or won't attempt that. Even CGT production ended early to prevent unwanted cars.

The new roadster version is though many more times desireable than the coupe though.

M

I think you have summed up the SLRs problems (perceived or real) very well. One other personal disappointment for me was that the car diluted McLaren's image. It would have done both the car and McLaren good if Mercedes had left McLaren out of it and made it a just an AMG. The instant people heard the McLaren name, people were thinking about a F1 successor and it was expected to be able to play with the CGT and Enzo. And of course the leaks from McLaren about how they were not happy about the car either didn't do it any good.

 

[martinbo]

^ Too true Sunny.

Furthermore, it's not like the SLR has been on the receiving end of some subtle tweeks to enhance its driver appeal. Let's face it, SLR's still don't get rave reviews comensurate with the looks and price tag.

Heck, it is an epic piece of machinery but, ultimately, in my opinion it doesn't do the McLaren name any justice.

 

[coolraoul]

This is a hard choice... Can't decide...

I've sees a SLR, it is wonderful. the Ferrari is not that beautiful, less pure, too complicated... The look is clearly in favor of the SLT for me, inside as outside.

But on the technical point of view, seems that the Ferrari has the best cards.

The automatic gearbox is a crap on a supercar, does not match downshifting I think, the way the motor goes shuts down when you stop throttling... Big big advantage on the Ferrari here.

I did not drive them, so don't know which is the best to drive, but all revue says it is the Ferrari: better handling, steering, brakes, more feeling...

Maybe the SLR is easier to drive? Easier to live with everyday with luggage space...

Funny, the SLR has almost the same weight... The 722 should have come without electrical seats and steering, leather dashboard and all that. (maybe it was the case, as I know the 722 has no GPS?)

I've never understood: Why on hell did they not make a biturbo 6.3 SLR??? The 6.5V12 is not sporty enough, ok, but the 6.3... Need to test it for reliability reason maybe, with turbos.

The SLR also has a better safety, even knee-airbag and real aluminium shock-absorbers and deformation zone, that is heavy.

I love the noise of the 55AMG, the brutality of the power, but on the other hand the high-revving Ferrari must be fabulous, maybe more sporty.

I can't really decide, did not drive them.
Slr beautiful, Ferrari more pure-supercar...

Two fabulous cars.

 

[Tarek]

^Awesome posts guys ,to me the choice is easy SLR for me please,i've seen both and the SLR looks more advanced and expensive than the 599GTB and certainly graps much more attention,plus i love the grunt of that ferocious V8 brutal engine!

 

[lambornima]

This is a hard choice... Can't decide...

I've sees a SLR, it is wonderful. the Ferrari is not that beautiful, less pure, too complicated... The look is clearly in favor of the SLT for me, inside as outside.

But on the technical point of view, seems that the Ferrari has the best cards.

The automatic gearbox is a crap on a supercar, does not match downshifting I think, the way the motor goes shuts down when you stop throttling... Big big advantage on the Ferrari here.

I did not drive them, so don't know which is the best to drive, but all revue says it is the Ferrari: better handling, steering, brakes, more feeling...

Maybe the SLR is easier to drive? Easier to live with everyday with luggage space...

Funny, the SLR has almost the same weight... The 722 should have come without electrical seats and steering, leather dashboard and all that. (maybe it was the case, as I know the 722 has no GPS?)

I've never understood: Why on hell did they not make a biturbo 6.3 SLR??? The 6.5V12 is not sporty enough, ok, but the 6.3... Need to test it for reliability reason maybe, with turbos.

The SLR also has a better safety, even knee-airbag and real aluminium shock-absorbers and deformation zone, that is heavy.

I love the noise of the 55AMG, the brutality of the power, but on the other hand the high-revving Ferrari must be fabulous, maybe more sporty.

I can't really decide, did not drive them.
Slr beautiful, Ferrari more pure-supercar...

Two fabulous cars.

perhaps the 6.3 is heavier?


in defence of the SLR, the tranny is aperantly VERY good. yes, it is auto, but thats just during normal driving, you can change gears yourself if you want (buttons with SLR, paddles with SLR 722). that said, according to owners I have spoken to, the SLR has a very aggressive automatic. it seems that if you are in a gear too high, even slightly, the car will downshift to 6500 rpm whereas the redline is 7000! I think this is why when you watch the SLR in the revlovers videos, the car seems to downshift and then gear up almost immediatly.

I LOVE the noise of the SLR. it suits the car perfectly. the noise is big, powerful and heavy. you can compare the looks of the two, but not the sounds, which are obviously VERY different.

 

[Tarek]

^Of course the auto box is excellent it's from MB ,after reading the EVO test of the roadster version he said that the auto is very good it only has five speeds but that is irrelevant next to it's pace