Ultimatecarpage.com
> Cars by brand
> Great Britain
> McLaren
> MP4-12C Prototype
 Comments
|
| McLaren MP4-12C Prototype |
| Article | Image gallery (36) | Chassis (3) | Specifications | User Comments (9) |
|
|
Add your comments on the McLaren MP4-12C Prototype
| Only negative I can see |
| danrieke 06-03-2010 |
Looking at various videos online, the only negative I could venture -- and I believe it is a serious negative for a car intended for public roads -- is the hideous blind spot created for the driver by the front left pillar. I expect you'll see more than a few incidents because of that. IMO. Doesn't mean it isn't delicious... 'cuz it IS! But watching the vids, the blind spot was... um... alarming... when imagining the car in real-world traffic. |
| REALLY ? |
| MyButtUrFace 04-13-2010 |
No one can be serious complaining about the weight and/or potential performance of the MP4-12C. Ferrari is going to have to step up it's game. Ferrari & Lamborghini should consider themselves lucky that McLaren didn't undercut the 458s price by $50k or more.... At the same price my money is going to McLaren. At a lower price it just make Lamborghini & Ferrari look ridiculous |
| Too many safety requirements |
| Aaron Rozzi 09-16-2009 |
bruxell Your right, it has more safety and emissions technology it has to carry than the F1 did. It also has traction control, ABS, and a dual-clutch transmission which the F1 did not have. It's too bad it weighs what it does. I think this is an indication of the current state of production automobiles; heavy with technology. When a McLaren using state of the art materials and design philosophy to make as light a car as possible still weighs in at 2866 lbs, we should be so happy to see any powerful car weighing in less than 3500 lbs. It seems that the only truly light-weight cars (weight < 2600lbs) coming out anymore either have tiny engines and no interior amenities (ie. Lotus Elise/Exige), or they have no safety equipment or traction control or ABS (SSC Ultimate Aero). W.R. I think this comment also pertains to your's about the design blending "boringly into the small-supercar crowd." The standards of performance expected now command similarity between competitors because anything in the design that deviates too much from the common formula will probably reduce performance. It's as if every new super-car is just a redesign of the last. They have to perform better and be safer; two major design limitations. |
| Heavier than the F1 for a reason, still amazing. |
| bruxell 09-15-2009 |
The car is heavier than the F1 because it needs to meet current safety requirements for a variety of different markets. It certainly breaks new ground in efficiency with its low CO2 output. It also looks like a much more usable car than the F1. Given those parameters, it's amazing that the car comes in under 3000lbs. |
| Third Millenium Design |
| Kiwieb 09-13-2009 |
this is the type of car PORSCHE should be building. |
| Styling method? |
| W.R. 09-12-2009 |
I can't help feeling as if it was styled by running a bar of soap under a hot tap for a few minutes, then stabbing some air vents in with a scalpel. At least the F1 (not a comparison) looked different and stood out, this just blends boringly into the small-supercar crowd. |
| Faster than the 458 Italia |
| Aaron Rozzi 09-11-2009 |
I think it will definitely accelerate faster than the Ferrari 458 Italia based on the much higher power to weight ratio and torque to weight ratio, and the fact that both are using a dual clutch transmission. You're right that this car is not supposed to be the successor to the F1. Too bad though. There is probably not enough money or customer demand in this economy to pay for the development of a successor to the F1. |
| Wow... |
| PRC777 09-09-2009 |
Try reading the press release info about this car. It is not meant to be compared to the F1. With that said, this is a great car, but I wonder how well this car is going to compete with the 458 Italia? |
| Not great enough? |
| Aaron Rozzi 09-09-2009 |
It's an amazing car, and it will probably have performance and driving pleasure unmatched for the cost. However I am disappointed. It's not nearly as ground breaking as the Mclaren F1. Why is it heavier than the Mclaren F1? Why does the engine not use direct fuel injection? Why does it not use variable gas flow geometry turbo chargers? Again, the car is amazing, but is it amazing enough to be called a Mclaren? |
| Article | Image gallery (36) | Chassis (3) | Specifications | User Comments (9) |
| All Cars - Contact us - Privacy Statement - Top | © 1998 - 2024 Ultimatecarpage.com |