Comparison tests Porsche 918 vs McLaren P1 vs LaFerrari

[Emu]

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]

1) Because it's virtually impossible to use and the rear wing was too high.

Actually it's out by 4mph, the speed reaches 211mph but then a high wind knocks it down to a steady 209mph.

We already know which is faster, that Veyron looked like it was gaining on the LaFerrari at the top end whereas a P1 is a whole second faster than a Veyron has ever recorded to 200mph even in bad conditions. It also makes an accurate 205mph in 60% of the distance in the same conditions.

Isn't it amazing how the LaFerrari has never seemed to show itself as faster in unscientific conditions or otherwise. They're full of unfounded claims, their weights are always out and their downforce figures have been proved inaccurate in previous Sport Auto supertests - I'm sure someone like Soup could fill you in on that.

2) You're asking me to believe an awful lot here and I don't, plus a few tenths on a different day is neither here nor there, and the LaFerrari uses slightly different variants of the PZCS up front (AR Alfa Romeo as opposed to Asimmetrico 2). If the guy is so open how come he can't even say if the time was better than the PZCS time or the Trofeo R time, or indicate a time or provide proof?

3) Not really. Porsche have nothing to prove and still happily provide their cars to the motoring press. McLaren have the same racing acumen as Ferrari and British constructors have won F1 far more than Italians or anyone else. Even most of the 'non-British teams' that win are British, e.g. Red Bull - ex-Jaguar F1 team with different colours. The McLaren F1 GTR was also one of the most successful GT cars made. So how Ferrari have nothing to prove and McLaren and Porsche have everything to prove is beyond me.

5) The same driving style that was riddled with mistakes despite the 1:11 lap. Mikel Miller did 5 flying laps, albeit for traffic and noise restrictions the corners were still taken as hard, and Ben managed another 20 on the same tyres only a couple of seconds off his pace and the tyres aren't gone yet. That doesn't stack up Bovingdon's claims who seemed overly keen to portray some kind of non-existent tyre advantage, which is disputed by the Sachsenring data.

Sorry dude, please don't present internet hearsay as 'evidence to the contrary'. You can compare Huracan and 458S times and see there is nothing like a 2s difference unless you think a 458S is >2s faster than a Huracan and the 100-0kph warm braking gs at Sachsenring prove otherwise too.

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ferrari_458_speciale-vs-lamborghini_huracan_lp_610-4.html

The only difference is longevity. And the real problem is that your two claims are conflicting. If they're as short-lived as you claim, the Scuderia owner would not have had enough laps to verify the difference and usually trackdays have traffic, another element that makes his opinion/lie unscientific.

As I said the LaFerrari uses different variants of the PZCS up front (AR Alfa Romeo as opposed to Asimmetrico 2). It also has an MPSS option according to tirerack.

Mark ANTAR has posted a link elsewhere showing that they didn't tweak the P1 at Anglesey, whether that refers to suspension geometry or tyre pressure is up for question I guess. The main point is that the time was set pre-pressure tweaks.

As usual you're just prevaricating.

1) Your analysis is full of so many errors and dubious assumptions that I don't even know where to begin. We'll just wait for some head to head races at V max 200 next year I think.

2) As I say, it doesn't matter to me what you believe, I'm not asking you to believe anything. I've posted the source and the guys credentials, everyone is free to accept them or reject them. If you think it's no mean achievement for a customer Laferrari on worn corsa tyres on a cold track to be quicker than a factory P1 on a warm summers day then that's fine. But there are plenty of other people who would find such information surprising.

3) Porsche have only just sold out the 918. The P1 was sold out but McLaren are still establishing themselves as a brand and have various issues which you can read all about on McLaren life. Ferrari is the worlds most powerful brand, this may change in the future but at the moment they are untouchable. That's my point.

5) The example of the scud owner is not internet hearsay, it is anecdotal evidence, as is your Huracan/Speciale data. Both are weak forms of evidence but at least the scud owner is comparing the tyres in question on the same car! If you have any randomized controlled trial data on the tyres in question than please share it with us. And please don't misrepresent my views, I said I don't know whether the Trofeo's are consistently quicker than MPSC2s. What I do know is that new Trofeos are demonstrab

My point about the Trofeos is that there is an initial drop off in performance as demonstrated in Evo's lap times. It doesn't mean that they become unusable thereafter and therefore Ben's data does nothing to contradict Evo's findings. He never posted what the initial lap times were, just that the tyres provided consistent performance thereafter. Interestingly Ben estimated that even if the traffic and the noise restrictions were removed they would have still struggled to beat the 918's (non WP) time. Hence he is going to have to adjust tyre pressures etc. Like I say I think they can do it, but might need need some fresh Trofeo's for the job. Very glad to hear that the Laferrari has cup 2s available though, gives Ben another option if he fails to beat the 918 time at Laguna Seca with his P1..

Antar's post was also from Jethro's twitter feed. All I said in my initial post was that the tyre pressures were changed after lap 4 but this did not alleviate the drop off from initial performance. This is factually correct yet you still accused me of talking crap. So you still owe me an apology.

 

[ajjers]

Just a quick edit the third last paragraph above should end 'new Trofeos are demonstrably faster than old ones'

 

[Emu]

1) Just pointing out the weight of evidence. This is the denial phase that many C7 Z06 owners are currently going through wrt the Viper.

2) Sometimes people have a sense of humour and release these rumours just to wind people up and you fell for it. How do you know the track was cold? You don't even definitely know it happened. You make too many assumptions. There are good reasons why people find it 'surprising' or more accurately 'unbelievable'.

3) Not really. Porsche sell more cars and...

http://www.mclarenlife.com/forums/mclaren-650s/21881-aventador-vs-650s-4.html#post493034

650S is the best money can buy right now..

No questions my Speciale is half as fun as my 12C and the 650S I test drove is a level or two above my 12C.

The Speciale will go and will be replaced with a Mclaren after Geneva.

Mbn

Ferrari do have badge loyalty and image, which is why they try to preserve it by fitting semi-slicks as standard on the 458S and refuse to release the LaFerrari for testing.

5) Nope, my Huracan and Speciale data was independently acquired by professionals and reported officially. On the internet anyone can say anything they like. Someone on fatchat saying that Trofeo Rs are 2s faster than MPSC2 has about as much credibility as someone claiming the Queen is a reptilian on IckeForums. 2s faster on a 1 minute lap is simply a ridiculous agenda-driven claim and not worthy of any consideration. After all that would make it ~6s faster than the MPSC+ on a 2 minute lap of Jerez and they weren't known for longevity either. Does that even sound remotely plausible? It's effectively like claiming that an LFA NRE with Trofeo Rs could lap the Nordschleife faster than a Weissach 918. If Trofeo Rs give 2s a minute over MPSC2, what do they give over Bridgestone RE070?

Old Trofeos? Trofeos replaced Corsas, there is no old Trofeo. Furthermore Sport Auto tested the P1 on Trofeos at Hockenheim and said it felt faster than the 918 on the same day but never really mentioned extreme wear rates.

Drop-off could be down to tyre temperature as opposed to wear, which will occur as a result of clumsy driving and traction losses.

Ben estimated no such thing. He actually predicted 1:29 with noise restrictions and traffic gone on McLarenLife.

http://www.mclarenlife.com/forums/m...s-laguna-seca-mazda-raceway-2.html#post473777

Heh. Three quick notes on the video:
(1) the P1 was on Trofeo R's but we're still working out tire pressures. It was a bit tail-happy as you can see on the video;
(2) with the 90dB restrictions at Laguna that day, a truly fast lap was not in the cards because we had to tiptoe in 5th gear @ maintenance throttle from the exit of 5 to the entrance to 6 or get black-flagged;
(3) I handed my P1 over to one of the pro's on hand for one of the two lapping sessions to see if he could get a clean lap, in which case he would have gone for it. It never happened, but after 5 laps he got this one, which I think shows the P1's going to get into the 1:29s

So now I just need to get back for a track day with more liberal noise restrictions, and spend a couple sessions establishing tire pressures. And that should be that.

(PS: I'll post my own lap as well shortly)

The LaFerrari doesn't have MPSC2s available, I said 'MPSS'. I wonder why that was introduced when they already had PZCS? An indication of PZCS performance?

His LaFerrari will give him another option... he can start a rumour about a faster time and just leave it hanging. That seems to be LaFerrari protocol.

I thought you were saying they adjusted it for the 1:11 lap. Clearly looks like they set the 1:11 on the 2nd lap. So beating the 918 time was fairly easy. Just went out and ran it straight off the cuff.

 

[boyko23]

You are so biased, it is useless to reply.
Why don't you say something about 918 time?
Tyres?
Wrong tyre pressure?
Roof?
One lap?
Autocar masacre?

 

[Emu]

They should have fitted the roof but on a low speed track it probably wouldn't make much difference and definitely not 1.2s. You can understand why some companies send mechanics. If Porsche had sent some the 918 might have had a roof.

Autocar massacre? The one where the P1 ran on a different day in the damp on PZCS and was a second off but beat the 918's time on the Wet Handling Track despite being RWD vs AWD?

Not biased, just looking at things objectively. He should have fitted the roof, take it up with him.

The Tyres? Trofeo R vs MPSC2 is a lot fairer than PZCS vs MPSC2, especially when it's AWD vs RWD. Wasn't aware of any wrong tyre pressures.

On a side note, which is an easier car to get to grips with in a short time? An AWD 875hp car with 530hp/ton and semi-slicks or a RWD 903hp car with 600+hp/ton and non-semi-slick tyres with less grip?

As an exaggeration of this principle refer to issue 150 of Evo. In a F2 car, Roger Green was >4s off Jolyon Palmer on the same track on the same day and that was with full racing slicks, which make a car far more controllable, and lap data analysis to break down and study. So basically when dealing with something like a P1 in a short space of time these guys don't really achieve anywhere near what's possible. It's just a talking point to sell magazines.

 

[ajjers]

1) Just pointing out the weight of evidence. This is the denial phase that many C7 Z06 owners are currently going through wrt the Viper.

2) Sometimes people have a sense of humour and release these rumours just to wind people up and you fell for it. How do you know the track was cold? You don't even definitely know it happened. You make too many assumptions. There are good reasons why people find it 'surprising' or more accurately 'unbelievable'.

3) Not really. Porsche sell more cars and...

1) Denial, something you're no doubt familiar with. Like you when pretend that the P1 did 0-200mph in 20.x seconds when the published figure is 23.3s!

2) I'm not making any assumptions. Matt said his Laf was tested by Evo at Anglesey, it was quicker than than the P1 and the 918, the test was done on a cold evening (which you keep forgetting to take into account when you bring up your Saschen ring data) and it was wearing standard corsa tyres. If you want to call him a liar then so be it, I believe him. Just like we both believe that MBN owns a Speciale and that he prefers the 650s! Interestingly non of the owners on Mclarenlife called Matt out as BSing, they we surprised for sure but some people warrant respect and Matt is one of those guys. Now when people say the Laferrari was faster at Monza we are rightly a bit more sceptical about those claims because the sources are less reliable. This is despite the fact that if most people were going to pick a track for the Laferrari to be quicker than the P1 they would pick Monza.

3) Selling more cars is not what is meant by the strength of a brand. By that rationale Hyundai would be a more powerful brand than both Ferrari and Porsche.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/motoring/25063/ferrari-powers-on-as-worlds-most-powerful-brand.html

4) "Your" data is looking at the performance of different cars on different days in different weather. Perhaps if we knew what both cars were capable of using the same tyres as a baseline then perhaps we could say something meaningful. But we don't, so we can't, despite your attempts to pull the wool over people's eyes.
An owner testing both tyres in the same car on the same track over a period of time is more reliable, though it is just one data point. Other people in different cars on different tracks may have different experiences so I remain open minded on the subject. I do ask however that the data provided at least use the same car!

When I said old vs new Trofeo's I meant fresh vs used. Please provide some data where the trofeo's are as fast on the 10th lap as they are on the 2nd. In the mean I shall repeat what we do know

Lap 2 - 1.11.2
Lap 3 - 1.11.6
Lap 4 - slower
In for tyres pressure adjustment
Lap 5 - 1.11.6
Lap 6 - slower

This is data. All you have is ad hoc rationalization I'm afraid.

Ben did mention 1.29 initially but he then went on to say this,

"That was the driver's intent on the 1:33 lap (to ignore the sound restrictions), but he ran into traffic. That said, I calculate that he was only on track to run a 1:31.8 without the traffic -- too much sliding around, and as it turned out too much rear tire pressure."

But again we're speculating which is something I personally wish to stay clear of.

If Ben says that the P1 was quicker than the Laferrari I'll believe him. If he says the Laferrari was quicker than the P1 I'll believe him. Some people have earned that kind of respect.

 

[boyko23]

You reply only on points, which favor your oppinion? What about the others?

And one last word-stock vs stock? Enough really.

 

[Emu]

1) Now I don't know what you're talking about, although I believe it did do 0-200mph around about that time according to Autocar. Note also the question raised in the inset.

2) Forgetting to take what into account? It never happened. All internet sources without hard evidence are unreliable and should be ignored.

3) Pffft. Yeah, I don't agree with the whole Ferrari have nothing to prove. Their antics and false claims are well documented, and as such they actually have a lot to prove.

4) No one is pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. People have said Sachsenring favours AWD, the Huracan is AWD, it ran in 12deg C warmer conditions (15 vs 27), it went a tenth slower and recorded lower braking g 100-0kph. All this when Trofeo R is supposed to be 2s faster than MPSC2 on a 1 minute lap. Is the Huracan really so crap that in a same day, same temperature test it would lose by 3s to a 458S given your internet-based assertions? The assertions are simply a joke manufactured by some guy on a forum.

Heat causes tyre pressures to rise which causes the contact patch to reduce along with grip. This is not the same as wear. I have an owner having done 20 laps with 5 by his instructor who didn't mentioned any signs of huge performance degradation and between them they were putting in 1:33-1:35 laps on Laguna Seca, whilst slowing down for noise restrictions. So the rest of the lap was probably 1:30-1:32 pace.

Yes he was heading for around the same time as a 918 on that run probably having measured the first and last parts wrt a 918. But he is no Randy Pobst and had very few laps. 1:29 is still predicted with no traffic and no noise restrictions.

a Few P1's at Laguna Seca Mazda Raceway

I have a plan A and a plan B for breaking that record in my P1. Just need to find a track day with higher sound limits.

Ben will post evidence, that's why I trust him.

 

[Emu]

You reply only on points, which favor your oppinion? What about the others?

And one last word-stock vs stock? Enough really.

The P1 was stock. Trofeo Rs are an option tyre.

 

[ajjers]

1) Now I don't know what you're talking about, although I believe it did do 0-200mph around about that time according to Autocar. Note also the question raised in the inset.

Matt posts evidence all the time, we've seen his videos on his Youtube channel. Obviously there's no point stealing Evo's thunder should they be given permission to go ahead.

Ben may not post a Laferrari video. Will you believe him if he just posts the time? I suspect you will. Unless it is quicker than the P1 in which case you won't.

As per usual you're misrepresenting my position. I've not said that the Trofeo's are definitively quicker than the MPSC2s, just posted one data point that suggests that they might be. What the data does show is that the P1 got slower lap by lap early on. All Ben's info show's is that it would subsequently stabilize which is what I'd expect. Just like the old Formula 1 qualifying tyres.

I'll let you have the final word as I don't think there's anything else to say.

Cheers.

 

[Bucketslash11]

1) Now I don't know what you're talking about, although I believe it did do 0-200mph around about that time according to Autocar. Note also the question raised in the inset.

3) McLaren claimed it would be the fastest track car ever (untouchable) yet it's matched and beat by the 918

4) different cars, different chassis, different suspension, different result

Too many variables

 

[Emu]

Matt posts evidence all the time, we've seen his videos on his Youtube channel. Obviously there's no point stealing Evo's thunder should they be given permission to go ahead.

Ben may not post a Laferrari video. Will you believe him if he just posts the time? I suspect you will. Unless it is quicker than the P1 in which case you won't.

As per usual you're misrepresenting my position. I've not said that the Trofeo's are definitively quicker than the MPSC2s, just posted one data point that suggests that they might be. What the data does show is that the P1 got slower lap by lap early on. All Ben's info show's is that it would subsequently stabilize which is what I'd expect. Just like the old Formula 1 qualifying tyres.

I'll let you have the final word as I don't think there's anything else to say.

Cheers.

Well we'll wait for this 'proof' then, even though he's already stolen their thunder by mentioning it. And at the end of the day it's still a different day test, so the difference would have to be large to mean anything.

I only believe what I see.

It's not a data point wrt Trofeo Rs, it's some random loon of questionable background on an internet forum with a completely unsubstantiated claim that sounds completely implausible.

What? Old F1 qualifying tyres would stabilise only after they turned to clumps of rubber. It may just have been that the day was getting colder, hell it's not like there aren't lots of other variables at play here besides the tyres.

 

[Emu]

3) McLaren claimed it would be the fastest track car ever (untouchable) yet it's matched and beat by the 918

4) different cars, different chassis, different suspension, different result

Too many variables

Errr, if you call matched and beat 1.2s slower on equal tyres then yeah. We also know that Sport Auto said the P1 was faster on Trofeo Rs in a same day test but were too shy to publish times. These are also short tracks, on a proper GP track where the advantage of AWD is neutralised and downforce plays a larger part I suspect the P1 will walk the 918.

4) Gives a ball-park indication sufficient to dismiss a claim that Trofeo Rs are 2s faster than MPSC2s unless you really believe a 458S is 3s faster than a Huracan. From an unbiased perspective it would take something like a 918 to be 3s faster than a Huracan. In fact the 918 was only 2s faster than it on Vairano.

 

[ajjers]

Okay Emu, we've stated our positions and everyone else can make up their own minds.

Assuming that Ben runs his Laferrari (corsas) and P1 (trofeo's) at Laguna Seca on the same day with no sound restrictions and a pro driver. What do you think the gap will be?

 

[Emu]

Probably a second or more given the tyres. Laguna probably won't favour the LaFerrari because it's at altitude IIRC.

Here's something to bear in mind about Ben's car though. It's one of the heavier ones, will full options spec and clearbra.

http://www.mclarenlife.com/forums/mclaren-p1-f1/21521-topgearuk-laferrari-vs-mclaren-p1-vs-porsche-918-a-6.html#post466929

 

[ajjers]

Probably a second or more given the tyres. Laguna probably won't favour the LaFerrari because it's at altitude IIRC.

Surely it should be more than a second? The Trofeo's were worth 1.4s over the P1's Corsa's at Anglesey. Should be worth nearer 2s at LS. Having said that Ben still has his original set of Corsa's so he might put them back on the P1 if he does a direct head to head with the Laferrari.

Good point about the weight of his P1, I had thought the 3411lbs figure was with him on board but actually it is not. Can't imagine many P1s will be driven harder though. Curious to see what his Laferrari weighs in at.

Going back briefly to the subject of the Trofeo's and the MPSC2s. I see the Huracan was faster than the Speciale at Vairano by 0.7s. If they were on the same tyres which car do you think would have been faster?

Also I read a bit more about the guy claiming the Trofeo's were 1.5-2.0s faster on his Scud. Turns out he's a really good driver with lots of onboard videos on YouTube with full telemetry. If he says the Trofeo's were quicker for him then I see no reason to doubt him. I'm not saying that everyone else would get the same results however.

F430 Anyone tried Michelin Pilot Sport Cup2 yet? - Ferrari Life

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

 

[Emu]

There's nothing to say that LaFerrari PZCS is the same as P1 PZCS. They were both developed separately and the LaFerrari uses a different variant up front. You can't simply do linear extrapolations with tyres.

The weight of the LaF has already been mentioned. 1675kg with driver and half tank.

Huracan would probably be faster anyway on Vairano because it's more stable and faster flat out.

How does he telemeter the affect of the lap traffic at 1:00 and the end? You also have to be very careful of agendas and bias. There's no way he could have tested extensively enough to determine that figure and the time difference he's claiming is wholly ridiculous. If you remember when Evo tested the 12C at Bedford Autdrome, the old PZero Corsa semi-slicks only gave 1.0s over ordinary PZeros and reviews I've read suggest the Trofeo only gives a marginal advantage over the old PZero Corsa despite wearing out quicker. So what this guy's claim is actually trying to say is that MPSC2s give less grip than ordinary PZeros, hence why it can't be anything but completely false. I mean, seriously, can the Trofeo really give twice the time advantage of the old PZero Corsa semi-slick vs a PZero relative to MPSC2 semi-slicks? It's just not a reasonable claim.

Old PZero Corsa semi-slick:

Here we have an independent test by a professional tyre reviewer saying that MPSC2 is 2.4s faster than MPSC+ on a 2 minute track. So on Anglesey Coastal I guess that might be 1.5s, so how can Trofeo Rs seriously be 3-3.5s faster than MPSC+? Does that sound reasonable?

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/Michelin-Pilot-Sport-Cup-2-Launched.htm

 

[F355]

Just a remark about the wind tunnel tests by German Sport Auto in Stuttgart.
The differences to the real situation on the road are enormous:
1. The wind tunnel hasn't got a moving floor! So an artificial boundary layer on the ground is introduced which partly stalls the flow under the car.
2. Cars with active suspensions are not at the correct (high speed) ride height.
3. Active aerodynamic elements are typically not in their correct position corresponding to the speed.
4. The wheels don't rotate.

 

[Emu]

1. Road cars aren't really using ground-effect. Probably not too significant.
2. Did the Scuderia have active suspension?
3. Did the Scuderia have active aero?
4. Fair comment and to make them rotate you'd need a rolling road but that introduces another problem in itself.