Mclaren vs F50

[pimrusis]

Originally Posted by Matty i cant read that either the mclaren is faster but the f50 has more prestige

No it doesn't.

[Sydbom]

i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure!
one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car!
and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of)
its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with?
see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own!

With regards
Sydbom


hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD......

[Leo_M3]

I reckon the F50 sounds better, but its no where near as powerful.

F50 has better cornering ability but is rather scary since theres no rubber components in the suspension. Jezza Clarkson said that it scared the shit outa him.

Mclaren F1 is a much better engineering feat and is alot easier to use everyday

[astonmartinandy]

The F50 is a great car, but in the presence of the "ever-dominating" F1, it really does get shown up. The McLaren is just the real deal supercar. Ten years on, just look at it's performance and it's enough to upstage most of today's "hypercars" including enzo etc..

[HoboPie]

That is the whole point what is this performance domination? Performance is a pretty broad spectrum, but one large part is track performance, perhaps even THE modern measure of performance.

In that case the F50 already is the winner. Hell even the F40 wins there. Now I am not going to argue that is the only important thing, but I don't know what you mean by upstage.

It is pretty much identical to the Enzo to 150mph and the Enzo is actuall a 10th or so quicker to the standing km.

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by Sydbom i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure! one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car! and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of) its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with? see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own! With regards Sydbom hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD......

Its so good that it isn't being made anymore and wont be replaced with anything similar....the reason why ??? Mclaren considered it a financial flop.

Perhaps if they want to try again they could ask Ferrari to build them an engine this time ?


Long Live FERRARI and may you crush Mclaren yet again this year in Formula 1

[sentra_dude]

Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by Sydbom i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure! one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car! and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of) its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with? see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own! With regards Sydbom hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD...... Its so good that it isn't being made anymore and wont be replaced with anything similar....the reason why ??? Mclaren considered it a financial flop. Perhaps if they want to try again they could ask Ferrari to build them an engine this time ? Long Live FERRARI and may you crush Mclaren yet again this year in Formula 1

If I may, I will disagree with you Jabba...

Yes, McLaren considered it a financial flop, but do you think that had anything to do with the car...? Were there any other supercars that managed to succeed when the F1 came out, certainly not the XJ220 or EB110, both are also considered financial flops but they are both great cars IMO. How do you think the F1 would have done if it was released 5 or 7 years later, I think more people would have bought it. I'm sure you know better than me about the state of the supercar business in the early 90s...from what I understand there was barely even a market. Basically what I'm saying is the F1 was a financial flop because of timing, not greatness of the car.

Now onto this engine business...I am a huge fan of Ferrari engines, their sound, power, engineering; but I think the F1 has by far the better engine than the F50 (this coming from someone who's never driven either or anything close, ). The F1 has a big 6.1 liter engine with tons of torque, great tractability, wonderful wonderful sound, lots of revs, and a hell of a lot of power everywhere in the rev range. In contrast the F50s engine is too small (IMO), lacks torque and power below a lofty 5000rpm and doesn't sound quite as good as that monster in the F1.

“No question its sling-shot getaway is ferocious and that brutal bunch of pulverizing power is mindblowing. But the car’s breathtaking acceleration is upstaged by the Bavarian-built V12’s magnificent torque. From mellow, docile amble to a mighty, relentless charge, it delivers amazingly tractable yet such potent power.”

[Fluxlo]

Originally Posted by Jabba don't forget the F50 features Alain Prosts 1990 "de-tuned" Ferrari Formula One V12 masterpiece...and the Mclaren has something made by BMW.

I think that comment is a little harsh. Alain Prost's F1 Car didn't have its rev limited to 8500 nor did it displace 4700cc's. It was a 700 horsepower 3.5 Litre V12. The engine's only loosely based off of that f1's engine. The the Big Mac's engine helped make it legendary. 627 horsepower, near 480lb/ft of torque from 4000rpm right upto 7000!!! that's a huge huge HUGE powerband. I still think the Mac has the best supercar engine ever. Even better than the Enzo or the CGT.

[HoboPie]

It is possible, but I was under the impression, the Enzo's engine was lighter, produced more power, more torque and for me produces a better sound.

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by Fluxlo Originally Posted by Jabba don't forget the F50 features Alain Prosts 1990 "de-tuned" Ferrari Formula One V12 masterpiece...and the Mclaren has something made by BMW. I think that comment is a little harsh. Alain Prost's F1 Car didn't have its rev limited to 8500 nor did it displace 4700cc's. It was a 700 horsepower 3.5 Litre V12.

hmmm I wonder what I could have possibly meant by saying "de-tuned" ?

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by sentra_dude Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by Sydbom i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure! one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car! and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of) its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with? see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own! With regards Sydbom hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD...... Its so good that it isn't being made anymore and wont be replaced with anything similar....the reason why ??? Mclaren considered it a financial flop. Perhaps if they want to try again they could ask Ferrari to build them an engine this time ? Long Live FERRARI and may you crush Mclaren yet again this year in Formula 1 If I may, I will disagree with you Jabba... Yes, McLaren considered it a financial flop, but do you think that had anything to do with the car...? Were there any other supercars that managed to succeed when the F1 came out, certainly not the XJ220 or EB110, both are also considered financial flops but they are both great cars IMO. How do you think the F1 would have done if it was released 5 or 7 years later, I think more people would have bought it. I'm sure you know better than me about the state of the supercar business in the early 90s...from what I understand there was barely even a market. Basically what I'm saying is the F1 was a financial flop because of timing, not greatness of the car. Now onto this engine business...I am a huge fan of Ferrari engines, their sound, power, engineering; but I think the F1 has by far the better engine than the F50 (this coming from someone who's never driven either or anything close, ). The F1 has a big 6.1 liter engine with tons of torque, great tractability, wonderful wonderful sound, lots of revs, and a hell of a lot of power everywhere in the rev range. In contrast the F50s engine is too small (IMO), lacks torque and power below a lofty 5000rpm and doesn't sound quite as good as that monster in the F1. “No question its sling-shot getaway is ferocious and that brutal bunch of pulverizing power is mindblowing. But the car’s breathtaking acceleration is upstaged by the Bavarian-built V12’s magnificent torque. From mellow, docile amble to a mighty, relentless charge, it delivers amazingly tractable yet such potent power.”

The Mclaren is like having sex with a prostitute cold and clinical it may have great stats but you don't get any of the love, warmth, charm, character and pure passion that only a Ferrari can give you.

The Mclaren was born in the wind tunnel to be the "perfect" supercar and just like most "super models" (Naomi Campbell being a good example) the one thing they never have is any "personality" and for me that is the main problem with the Mclaren "zero personality"

The Mclaren is an Apple Mac "a trouble free supercar" "a get in and go supercar" "a supercar with a golden tool box" and it even has a modem !! (I wonder if that still connects to anything these days)

I like the three seat setup but the rest you can keep.

[Fluxlo]

Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by Fluxlo Originally Posted by Jabba don't forget the F50 features Alain Prosts 1990 "de-tuned" Ferrari Formula One V12 masterpiece...and the Mclaren has something made by BMW. I think that comment is a little harsh. Alain Prost's F1 Car didn't have its rev limited to 8500 nor did it displace 4700cc's. It was a 700 horsepower 3.5 Litre V12. hmmm I wonder what I could have possibly meant by saying "de-tuned" ?

That aside, you made the BMW engine sound really generic, which is what made me post in the first place.

[Fluxlo]

Whoops. double post ops:

[sentra_dude]

Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by sentra_dude Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by Sydbom i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure! one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car! and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of) its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with? see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own! With regards Sydbom hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD...... Its so good that it isn't being made anymore and wont be replaced with anything similar....the reason why ??? Mclaren considered it a financial flop. Perhaps if they want to try again they could ask Ferrari to build them an engine this time ? Long Live FERRARI and may you crush Mclaren yet again this year in Formula 1 If I may, I will disagree with you Jabba... Yes, McLaren considered it a financial flop, but do you think that had anything to do with the car...? Were there any other supercars that managed to succeed when the F1 came out, certainly not the XJ220 or EB110, both are also considered financial flops but they are both great cars IMO. How do you think the F1 would have done if it was released 5 or 7 years later, I think more people would have bought it. I'm sure you know better than me about the state of the supercar business in the early 90s...from what I understand there was barely even a market. Basically what I'm saying is the F1 was a financial flop because of timing, not greatness of the car. Now onto this engine business...I am a huge fan of Ferrari engines, their sound, power, engineering; but I think the F1 has by far the better engine than the F50 (this coming from someone who's never driven either or anything close, ). The F1 has a big 6.1 liter engine with tons of torque, great tractability, wonderful wonderful sound, lots of revs, and a hell of a lot of power everywhere in the rev range. In contrast the F50s engine is too small (IMO), lacks torque and power below a lofty 5000rpm and doesn't sound quite as good as that monster in the F1. “No question its sling-shot getaway is ferocious and that brutal bunch of pulverizing power is mindblowing. But the car’s breathtaking acceleration is upstaged by the Bavarian-built V12’s magnificent torque. From mellow, docile amble to a mighty, relentless charge, it delivers amazingly tractable yet such potent power.” The Mclaren is like having sex with a prostitute cold and clinical it may have great stats but you don't get any of the love, warmth, charm, character and pure passion that only a Ferrari can give you. The Mclaren was born in the wind tunnel to be the "perfect" supercar and just like most "super models" (Naomi Campbell being a good example) the one thing they never have is any "personality" and for me that is the main problem with the Mclaren "zero personality" The Mclaren is an Apple Mac "a trouble free supercar" "a get in and go supercar" "a supercar with a golden tool box" and it even has a modem !! (I wonder if that still connects to anything these days) I like the three seat setup but the rest you can keep.

Wow...that's harsh, lol...I've never heard anyone compare driving the F1 to having sex with a whore Hmm...Gordon Murray claims his aim was to build the ultimate 'drivers' car, and I think he succeeded. I think the F1 has tons of personality...great looks, wonderful sound, and great racing heritage.

"a get in and go supercar"
Hmmm, errr...I wouldn't exactly call a 627hp, RWD, manual transmission, no ABS, no power steering, no servo brakes, and no traction control supercar easy to get a hold of, but that's just me...


However, I haven't driven any Ferrari (yet ) or a F1, so whatever.

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by sentra_dude Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by sentra_dude Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by Sydbom i have too say that the F50 no matter how good it is wouldnt be in my garage before an Mac! thats for sure! one of the BMW bosses is said too have crashed a McLaren in over 200km/h on the autobahn with his wife and another passenger in the car and they all walked away from it! THAT says something about a car! and i love the fact that it has 3 seats! and luggage space! and 600hp/ton! (sort of) its not a track car and shouldnt actually be compared too one either but then again what could you compare it with? see, it is still outstanding! and in a class of its own! With regards Sydbom hmm seems i gotta buy that martin brundle DVD...... Its so good that it isn't being made anymore and wont be replaced with anything similar....the reason why ??? Mclaren considered it a financial flop. Perhaps if they want to try again they could ask Ferrari to build them an engine this time ? Long Live FERRARI and may you crush Mclaren yet again this year in Formula 1 If I may, I will disagree with you Jabba... Yes, McLaren considered it a financial flop, but do you think that had anything to do with the car...? Were there any other supercars that managed to succeed when the F1 came out, certainly not the XJ220 or EB110, both are also considered financial flops but they are both great cars IMO. How do you think the F1 would have done if it was released 5 or 7 years later, I think more people would have bought it. I'm sure you know better than me about the state of the supercar business in the early 90s...from what I understand there was barely even a market. Basically what I'm saying is the F1 was a financial flop because of timing, not greatness of the car. Now onto this engine business...I am a huge fan of Ferrari engines, their sound, power, engineering; but I think the F1 has by far the better engine than the F50 (this coming from someone who's never driven either or anything close, ). The F1 has a big 6.1 liter engine with tons of torque, great tractability, wonderful wonderful sound, lots of revs, and a hell of a lot of power everywhere in the rev range. In contrast the F50s engine is too small (IMO), lacks torque and power below a lofty 5000rpm and doesn't sound quite as good as that monster in the F1. “No question its sling-shot getaway is ferocious and that brutal bunch of pulverizing power is mindblowing. But the car’s breathtaking acceleration is upstaged by the Bavarian-built V12’s magnificent torque. From mellow, docile amble to a mighty, relentless charge, it delivers amazingly tractable yet such potent power.” The Mclaren is like having sex with a prostitute cold and clinical it may have great stats but you don't get any of the love, warmth, charm, character and pure passion that only a Ferrari can give you. The Mclaren was born in the wind tunnel to be the "perfect" supercar and just like most "super models" (Naomi Campbell being a good example) the one thing they never have is any "personality" and for me that is the main problem with the Mclaren "zero personality" The Mclaren is an Apple Mac "a trouble free supercar" "a get in and go supercar" "a supercar with a golden tool box" and it even has a modem !! (I wonder if that still connects to anything these days) I like the three seat setup but the rest you can keep. Wow...that's harsh, lol...I've never heard anyone compare driving the F1 to having sex with a whore Hmm...Gordon Murray claims his aim was to build the ultimate 'drivers' car, and I think he succeeded. I think the F1 has tons of personality...great looks, wonderful sound, and great racing heritage. "a get in and go supercar" Hmmm, errr...I wouldn't exactly call a 627hp, RWD, manual transmission, no ABS, no power steering, no servo brakes, and no traction control supercar easy to get a hold of, but that's just me...

Meaning that you can get in it, goto the shops, park it and put youre shopping in it....as demontrated by Tiff Needell...something I don't think you would / should'nt be able to do in an F50.