Detailed road tests, driving evaluations, performance impressions, and real-world experiences.
- Messages
- 2,309
Test in Classic driver, with some new elements related to the complaints on the steering:
Now, you might have read some earlier reports in the specialist motoring press which comment on this aloofness, citing fractional delays in the active dampers' stiffening-up as the reason for a momentary tactile uncertainty when turning into a bend. I don't buy this; the McLaren is never less than completely accurate and faithful to every steering movement, but the problem in these very early test cars is friction in the steering mechanism. It's within the upper column assembly, it filters out subtle messages and spoils the self-centring, and the engineers are on the case. It's a surprising error and it may have sullied the MP4-12C's initial reputation.
Now, you might have read some earlier reports in the specialist motoring press which comment on this aloofness, citing fractional delays in the active dampers' stiffening-up as the reason for a momentary tactile uncertainty when turning into a bend. I don't buy this; the McLaren is never less than completely accurate and faithful to every steering movement, but the problem in these very early test cars is friction in the steering mechanism. It's within the upper column assembly, it filters out subtle messages and spoils the self-centring, and the engineers are on the case. It's a surprising error and it may have sullied the MP4-12C's initial reputation.
Mafalda
Stuttgart Specialist
- Messages
- 1,893
- Messages
- 458
Autocar road test :
McLaren MP4-12C - Autocar.co.uk
Even straight line performance is a bit disappointing. 0-100km/h in 3,5s and 0-200km/h in about 9,9s. If british mags extracted all the performance and we won´t see better times.... Shame, considering the 8,9/9,1s 0-200km/h claims with McLaren representatives reassuring customers at their events these results were done without special attention and can be easily reproduced. Even with better launch Autocar results would be still way off.
Hope Soup will provide scans. At least the lap time could be good.
McLaren MP4-12C - Autocar.co.uk
Even straight line performance is a bit disappointing. 0-100km/h in 3,5s and 0-200km/h in about 9,9s. If british mags extracted all the performance and we won´t see better times.... Shame, considering the 8,9/9,1s 0-200km/h claims with McLaren representatives reassuring customers at their events these results were done without special attention and can be easily reproduced. Even with better launch Autocar results would be still way off.
Hope Soup will provide scans. At least the lap time could be good.
Mafalda
Stuttgart Specialist
- Messages
- 1,893
according with other tests, MP4 is so fast, but still far from claims (0-200 is about 1s slower than claims!), and just a little bit faster than the 458 (probably the 458 tested by autocar is the slowest test ever)
the hotlap excellent, but in this case the excessive expectations create a small disappointment: only 0.3s faster than the 458 (but tested with PS2).
I've read "MP4 rumored 7m00s @ Ring" , IMHO it's not possible
the hotlap excellent, but in this case the excessive expectations create a small disappointment: only 0.3s faster than the 458 (but tested with PS2).
I've read "MP4 rumored 7m00s @ Ring" , IMHO it's not possible
F40 LeMans
Tarmac Traveler
- Messages
- 304
The Mecca's 0-193 km/h 9"2 means 200 about 10"...And other confirmation that the factory 458s are around 600 hp.
I'm happy to see the 0-170 mph 23"3 and 23"6 for these cars when my old Ferrari is faster with 22"3. Much faster from 60 to 170.
I'm happy to see the 0-170 mph 23"3 and 23"6 for these cars when my old Ferrari is faster with 22"3. Much faster from 60 to 170.
F40 LeMans
Tarmac Traveler
- Messages
- 304
a faster high speed partial time does not means exclusively more power
Mafalda
Stuttgart Specialist
- Messages
- 1,893
As like as the laptimes, the point is not the 458, but the MP4.
Evo did similar results: from 0 to 1/4 mile the Mp4 is great (more than 130mph about 11s), over 130 Mph is quick, but not the quickest....
F40 LeMans
Tarmac Traveler
- Messages
- 304
Is not possible conclude something about "power" at high speed with different cars, different gearing, different tires size, different aerodynamic figures. Is possible only if part of these are similar, an approximation anyway. Do you remember the QR F40's 240-280 km/h compared to the 240-281 km/h of the Diablo? 9"5 vs 15" both with about 500 hp engines. Even, do you remember how was fast the F1 with 627 hp compared yersterday with the 660hp Enzo, with the 612hp CGT and today with a twinturbo 650hp Noble M600... so, to the opposite looking just power we are going not so far.
Human
You. The Road. Nothing else.
- Messages
- 6,118
- Name
- Naas
^
Nothing short of impressive! That lap time says allot.
Martinbo enlightened me with the excellent tech of the dampers and suspension that does away with conventional anti-roll bars. In their place, hydraulic plumbing, complete with spherical accumulators and pumps, and controlled by electronics, interconnect all four corners, allowing very rapid changes in both roll rate, and as critically, absolute roll angle. So, on a straight, the car rides as if it has no anti-roll bars at all, soft and smooth. Enter a corner and the computer produces the roll angle and roll rate you've desired (there are three settings; in competition mode it's virtually solid, for instance).
The system is constantly adjusting things. A glance at the rear suspension appears to actually reveal an rear anti-roll bar, but it isn't. It's what's called a Z bar in operation, it has no effect on roll, but instead resists heaving or squatting, so the rear wheel's actual coil springs can be softer, again, for a better ride.
Amazing!
This may be a re-post, but it's a good short summary of all the McLaren MP4-12C technologies.
Nothing short of impressive! That lap time says allot.
Martinbo enlightened me with the excellent tech of the dampers and suspension that does away with conventional anti-roll bars. In their place, hydraulic plumbing, complete with spherical accumulators and pumps, and controlled by electronics, interconnect all four corners, allowing very rapid changes in both roll rate, and as critically, absolute roll angle. So, on a straight, the car rides as if it has no anti-roll bars at all, soft and smooth. Enter a corner and the computer produces the roll angle and roll rate you've desired (there are three settings; in competition mode it's virtually solid, for instance).
The system is constantly adjusting things. A glance at the rear suspension appears to actually reveal an rear anti-roll bar, but it isn't. It's what's called a Z bar in operation, it has no effect on roll, but instead resists heaving or squatting, so the rear wheel's actual coil springs can be softer, again, for a better ride.
Amazing!
This may be a re-post, but it's a good short summary of all the McLaren MP4-12C technologies.
- Messages
- 13,235
impressive laptime
the point is: compared with others laptimes, this MP4 seems another car!
Probably cause the car was developed on the Top gear track. Which leads me to believe this car is very setup dependent.
Fast time for sure, but I'm not so sure it's impressive. The car has been tuned on it for around 4 years now, so of course with the best-in-class specs and perfect setup it should be blinding. In the intro to one of the recent TG mags, it said McLaren were doing setup work in preparation for this test so it's not a level representation for how other cars would perform IMO. This would be a different Stig too, I think. In any case, the lap time would not be a decider of which car I'd choose. The McLaren seems relatively deficient in areas that matter most to me.
