The McLaren epitomized what it is to be and intense and involving driver's car. And I have no idea how anybody can knock the noises it makes. It's raucous, like a race car, the way a performance car should sound. You can hear all the systems, the engine, the turbos, the brakes, the motors, and you know that you're driving a machine that didn't come to play school. That's a little joke for you college football fans. The P1 came to win nattys, just like the F1, and the rest of them are soft.
So, basically, all three cars are so evenly matched that they're always within a second of each other, whatever the conditions or track?
I'm still firmly in the P1 camp. I trust in its power and aerodynamics and I think don't think any track test has been conducted at a track which would favor the P1, unlike several of these tests which favor the 918. The 918 is AWD so we already know it's going to accelerate the quickest and be dominant on smaller tracks with tight corners, as it was in all the 1/4 mile tests, the Laguna Seca test and that
obnoxious Hyper 5 test. It's a million-dollar GT-R, it's not hard to see. Silverstone is about an average an F1 track as you can get and the cars all performed on par...how about that, huh. But what happens when you use a track that relies on speed and downforce? Spa? Monza? Melbourne? Maybe even Suzuka, there are only three corners there where AWD would be advantageous.
Unfortunately I don't think the Ferrari would be able to eke out a win anywhere because it just doesn't have any standout features that give it an advantage.