Comparison tests Porsche 918 vs McLaren P1 vs LaFerrari

[Emu]

The Weissach Pack is not weight only, it has completely different aero at the back and therefore more downforce. It would have been quicker still than the non WP car MotorTrend used at LS

Nope aero parts are lighter but don't actually produce more downforce, not that it would have made much difference at Laguna Seca. At Anglesey it would have, but the P1 won there anyway. Even though the tyres were over-inflated which, as you admit, can cost a second or more, as well as causing increased degradation.

The 918's engine is taken from the Porsche RS Spyder racecar. Here, educate yourself

Different capacity, so not entirely the same as regards bore and stroke or heads and valvetrain. The engine and the chassis in the P1 and all McLarens are race proven, botton end, conrods, pistons, and valvetrain.

And of course the Speciale was 4s quicker than the gt3 at Portimau. Unless you're now accusing Chris Harris of being Ferrari biased rather than Porsche biased? Does your tinfoil hat chafe against your ears?

No I'm saying the GT3 came with over-inflated Cup 2s, which is why the time was ~2s slower than it should have been. So the tyre test is invalid.

 

[Emu]

<< An der vorderachse liegen spur und sturz leicht außerhalb der vom hersteller angegebenen range. Dasselbe gilt fur die hinterachse. Die einstellungen sind sozusagen fahrdynamik optimiert >>

At the front axle are track and fall slightly outside the range specified by the manufacturer. The same is true for the rear axle. The settings were as it, are optimized for driving dynamics

Emu, Who's bicht ?

Can you prove they improve dynamics? As you can see Vorderachse Sturz is also "optimised for driving dynamics," on the 918. And Hinterachse Sturz just happens to be right on the limit of tolerance. Nachlauf "k.A" whatever that means, I assume out of tolerance too.

So to summarise, one value outside tolerance, 2 right on the limit and one not measured.

Why not reset before testing rather than Schimpfen und legen Sie sie in den Hintern.

 

[ajjers]

Nope aero parts are lighter but don't actually produce more downforce, not that it would have made much difference at Laguna Seca. At Anglesey it would have, but the P1 won there anyway. Even though the tyres were over-inflated which, as you admit, can cost a second or more, as well as causing increased degradation.


Different capacity, so not entirely the same as regards bore and stroke or heads and valvetrain. The engine and the chassis in the P1 and all McLarens are race proven, botton end, conrods, pistons, and valvetrain.


No I'm saying the GT3 came with over-inflated Cup 2s, which is why the time was ~2s slower than it should have been. So the tyre test is invalid.

WTF? The WP car has huge great bits of carbon fibre hanging off its rear which are not even present on the non WP car. How can they save weight? Are they made of anti gravity?

I posted the pictures so you could see the difference. Clearly the truth means nothing to you even when it is staring you in the face.

And Anglesey is now a high downforce track compared with Laguna Seca? Lol.

There is a big difference between taking a race proven engine and putting it into a road car then taking a road engine racing. By your rationale the 458 has a race proven engine as well.

Your last point about the GT3 tyres being over inflated is baseless speculation being passed off as fact. Just like almost everything else you say.

 

[Emu]

WTF? The WP car has huge great bits of carbon fibre hanging off its rear which are not even present on the non WP car. How can they save weight? Are they made of anti gravity?

Find me the bit on the official site that says anything about extra downforce. Not that that would make any difference on a slow track like Laguna Seca anyway. I think there's actually more of a difference to be had by going for the lighter weight options in the already lighter P1.

I posted the pictures so you could see the difference. Clearly the truth means nothing to you even when it is staring you in the face.

Find me the bit on the official site. Porsche didn't see any increase in downforce worth noting, yet went to great details to note the trivial weight reduction on a pig heavy car. According to this the 918 already has 298kg of downforce at 186mph:

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/143772788-post16406.html

So a small difference on top of that on a car that heavy and a track that slow is entirely inconsequential. Look at the amount of extra aero parts on the FXXK and P1 GTR for fairly small increases in downforce. As I said, the Weissach Pack is a bigger waste of money than Greece.

And Anglesey is now a high downforce track compared with Laguna Seca? Lol.

Hell yes, compared to Laguna Seca it is anyway. Holy shit dude, take your head out of your butt. See Turn 1, Church and the turn going down to Rocket?

Watch the lap at 12:27 (coming out of Turn 1 in 4th - circa 80+mph), 12:46 (Another 80+mph corner in 4th - Church, note also the cock-up), 12:56 (Another entry into a right hander at 130mph).

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

There is a big difference between taking a race proven engine and putting it into a road car then taking a road engine racing. By your rationale the 458 has a race proven engine as well.

What the hell are you talking about? The Mclaren 3.8 V8TT (M838T) engine has been in 24 hour endurance events. The 4.6V8 in the 918 is only race proven in a destroked 3.4L form. It's really like comparing a road going RB26DETT to the Nismo 2.8L lump in the RWD endurance racers of past. And that's another problem, it hasn't been race proven in AWD format either, nor has the chassis. With all the McLarens you get a race proven engine and chassis.

Your last point about the GT3 tyres being over inflated is baseless speculation being passed off as fact. Just like almost everything else you say.

The evidence is the slow lap. When I see a test with Michelin fitting the Cup 2s and Pirelli fitting the Trofeo Rs on the same day, with unedited laps, then I'll believe it. Otherwise there isn't even actually any evidence for me to be countering as I see it, because there is no evidence.

 

[Emu]

Anyway here is a customer casually and unofficially breaking the Top Gear lap record (set by a Huayra on cut slicks) with a passenger next to him, first attempt, presumably PZCS tyres. About 3.2s quicker than a 12C, 2up, customer driving. But of course McLaren chickened out because Jeremy "the truthful one" Clarkson says so.

First lap with passenger. 1:17-2:30

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

 

[klier]

4.6 litre, race proven, naturally aspirated v8 producing 608bhp and weighing just 135kg. An outstanding piece of engineering.

I think it's probably the best production engine ever to come out of Germany. And all around it's probably the best engine too. Would be epic to see this in a non electric Porsche above the 911 to combat the 488 et all.

 

[Emu]

I think it's probably the best production engine ever to come out of Germany. And all around it's probably the best engine too. Would be epic to see this in a non electric Porsche above the 911 to combat the 488 et all.

Didn't Ruf already do that?

 

[Bucketslash11]

Can you prove they improve dynamics? As you can see Vorderachse Sturz is also "optimised for driving dynamics," on the 918. And Hinterachse Sturz just happens to be right on the limit of tolerance. Nachlauf "k.A" whatever that means, I assume out of tolerance too.

So to summarise, one value outside tolerance, 2 right on the limit and one not measured.

Why not reset before testing rather than Schimpfen und legen Sie sie in den Hintern.

the 12c in the supertest had WAY MORE than 4 minutes difference

the 4 minutes could've been created by the slalom, acceleration, braking and laptetsts (if they checked the alignement after the tests)

 

[Emu]

the 12c in the supertest had WAY MORE than 4 minutes difference

the 4 minutes could've been created by the slalom, acceleration, braking and laptetsts (if they checked the alignement after the tests)

And still well less than a degree of difference. Do they measure the suspension geometry before of after they hit a ton of kerbs at high speed? There's every chance that you could measure a customer 12C now and it be out. Sport Auto are just bitches. They should check geometry before the test and reset as appropriate rather than bitching.

12Cs are just exceptionally fast when well driven:

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/ID/3742/PageID/8666/DRIVEN-2012-McLaren-MP4-12C.aspx

Our showroom stock McLaren MP4-12C posted a time of 1:50.180 on its factory Pirelli PZero Corsa tires. The fastest production car lap time that we are aware of.

Pos Make / Model Time Year Power (hp) / Weight (kg) Driven by
1. McLaren MP4-12C 1:50.18 '12 625 / 1434 Billy Johnson
2. Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR 1:55.70 '08 608 / 1536
3. Nissan GT-R 1:56.90 '08 480 / 1740 Steve Millen

 

[ajjers]

Find me the bit on the official site that says anything about extra downforce. Not that that would make any difference on a slow track like Laguna Seca anyway. I think there's actually more of a difference to be had by going for the lighter weight options in the already lighter P1.

Here you go


I would advise you to get your head out of your a** but we know that's not going to happen. I'm just glad you've gone from denying that the wp car has any additional aero parts to pretending that they don't work. That is progress. Well done.

As for the rest of your post, it's too stupid to reply to. Have a good evening making up more BS.

 

[Emu]

Here you go

Video not working. Waste of time anyway because LS is very low downforce, most corners 60mph and below, fastest 77mph for 918. When compared to the weight of a 918, the increase in downforce would have to be very significant to be effective, you won't get that from those few bits. You're really overstating this 'wasn't a WP car' issue. It wasn't the lightest possible P1 either. His car is 9kg heavier than another customer, who still doesn't have the lightest options. Overall I'd say disadvantage P1 on the options stakes.

 

[ajjers]

Video not working. Waste of time anyway because LS is very low downforce, most corners 60mph and below, fastest 77mph for 918. When compared to the weight of a 918, the increase in downforce would have to be very significant to be effective, you won't get that from those few bits. You're really overstating this 'wasn't a WP car' issue. It wasn't the lightest possible P1 either. His car is 9kg heavier than another customer, who still doesn't have the lightest options. Overall I'd say disadvantage P1 on the options stakes.

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

Extra downforce is extra downforce. I think it would have made about a 20 second difference at Laguna Seca. See I can make up BS speculation as well!

 

[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

Extra downforce is extra downforce. I think it would have made about a 20 second difference at Laguna Seca. See I can make up BS speculation as well!

Divide that figure by 100 and it's probably still an overestimate.

Oh yeah, the last 918 that ran, did so in the peak of summer on a warmer track and was still 1s slower on the N0s!

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

 

[Bucketslash11]

And still well less than a degree of difference. Do they measure the suspension geometry before of after they hit a ton of kerbs at high speed? There's every chance that you could measure a customer 12C now and it be out. Sport Auto are just bitches. They should check geometry before the test and reset as appropriate rather than bitching.

22 minutes off on each axle is more than 5 times of what the 918 were quoted at, in other words: more noticable on the steering and handling effect

 

[Emu]

22 minutes off on each axle is more than 5 times of what the 918 were quoted at, in other words: more noticable on the steering and handling effect

Out of tolerance is still out of tolerance, and one of the figures on the 918 wasn't event stated. Like I said, measure the geometry before the test not after, fix if necessary and stop bitching.

 

[Bucketslash11]

Out of tolerance is still out of tolerance, and one of the figures on the 918 wasn't event stated. Like I said, measure the geometry before the test not after, fix if necessary and stop bitching.

there's a difference between being 5 miutes late for work and 20 minutes late for work

we don't know when they do the geometry tests (unless they mention it in one of their supertest)

anyway here's a video explaining the driving modes for you:

 

[Emu]

there's a difference between being 5 miutes late for work and 20 minutes late for work

Not if you're a bomb disposal expert.

we don't know when they do the geometry tests (unless they mention it in one of their supertest)

Either way it's dumb. They should measure the geometry first so that they know the test hasn't altered it. If it's out, they should right it, rather than bitching at the end.

anyway here's a video explaining the driving modes for you:

At 26.57 it mentions something about 180kW peak output for the e-motor and 135kW nominal. I wonder is that an IPAS thing.

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]

Someone mentioned about race-proven engine history. Found out a little something about the origins of the M838T.

"McLaren bought the rights to the Tom Walkinshaw Racing-developed version of the Nissan VRH35 racing engine, as used in Le Mans in 1998. However, other than the 93 mm bore, little of that engine remains in the M838T. Developed with help from Ricardo with technology acquired from Menard Competition Technologies, it is McLaren's first engine."

The VRH30-35-related series was used in everything from the IMSA R88C-R92CPs to Le Mans R390 GT1 to the GT500 racers.

 

[kingjr9000]

A member posted this on fchat and I don't know how true this is, but we'll see...

News from Top Gear: The P1 vs. 918 vs. LaFerrari test will take place after all.
Ferrari still won't let them use customer cars, but McLaren has now agreed to a test with factory cars. Porsche currently doesn't have a factory car available, so the test will take place as soon as they do (which shouldn't take too long). They haven't decided on a track, but the manufacturers agree that it should be on 'neutral ground'. That would disqualify their individual test tracks, I reckon.

 

[330CIZHP]

A member posted this on fchat and I don't know how true this is, but we'll see...

News from Top Gear: The P1 vs. 918 vs. LaFerrari test will take place after all.
Ferrari still won't let them use customer cars, but McLaren has now agreed to a test with factory cars. Porsche currently doesn't have a factory car available, so the test will take place as soon as they do (which shouldn't take too long). They haven't decided on a track, but the manufacturers agree that it should be on 'neutral ground'. That would disqualify their individual test tracks, I reckon.

Nice to see after McLaren and Ferrari playing hard ball/chicken, they have finally capitulated to the extraordinary pressures and scrutiny of the media/enthusiasts. I am sure Porsche is ready and waiting in the wings.