- 9,055
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
I think what really separated the F1 from the rest was that middle seat configuration.
It really blew the minds of the motoring world.
It really blew the minds of the motoring world.
The McLaren F1... erh... P1 Thread
- Thread starter deba94
- 719 comments
- 76,963 views
I originally wrote 240 mph but then I checked to make sure and I found 231. I wrote 231 just because I felt it was a number that everyone would agree with. You are right though, it actually went faster than 231 mph but both are slower than 404.6 km/h the Dauer Le Mans went. But I do agree the 243 mph is a better number to go with.
I was originally going to also include the 917 Strasse in my post but I didn't because it was basically just a race car that had a few things done to it in order to be driven legally on the street. It wasn't really designed with street driving in mind, it was just bought from Porsche and the owners decided to use them on the street. Is that the same for the F1 GTR Longtail?
It seems like the normal GTR was originally meant for the street (as a normal McLaren F1), then converted to race (because no one wanted the to buy the F1), then converted back for the street? I do agree this would be a more fair comparison and makes more sense but I originally used the street legal standard F1 because that is what was being discussed.
I haven't really been able to find any information on the street legal GTR Longtail but it appears only one exists (or they are all orange). I can't really find anything else.
As for the GTR, I have been able to find some information but it seems to differ everywhere I read about it. The weight it somewhere between 940kg to 1120kg. I'll go with 940kg so that gives it around 3.34 lbs/hp or 599 hp/ton. The Dauer Le Mans seems to weigh 1030-1080kg which, using 1080kg, gives it 3.26 lbs/hp or 613 hp/ton. Koenig C 62 weighs 1100 kg and has 3.03 lbs/hp or 660 hp/ton. First, I hope my math is correct and second, some of the numbers might be PS but I'll just assume all of them are PS (and they likely are).
I am unable to find any numbers about the amount of down force the McLaren F1 GTR has but it seems the Joest Racing 962C has 5281 pounds of down force with 1200 pounds of drag at 200 mph, Lift to drag ratio: 4.4:1. The Dauer has 40% the amount of down force as the racing version giving it 2112 pounds of downforce (seems high to me). The Longtail McLaren F1 (racing version) has 2193 pounds of downforce at 200 mph with 997 pounds of drag, lift to drag ratio: 2.2:1. The standard GTR has less downforce than the Longtail version but I'm not sure how much less.
It is amazing that McLaren was able to win Le Mans. 1995 Le Mans was kind of a mess with all the rain and wasn't exactly the strongest year for Le Mans. Porsche didn't enter any factory cars, likely because they were transitioning to the 993 GT1, Toyota was basically gone after getting second place in 1994 (to a Dauer 962), and Peugeot left after destroying the competition in 1993. I don't mean to take anything away from McLaren because a win is a win but 1995 wasn't exactly the strongest year for Le Mans. In 1996 when Porsche came back in full force they took the top 3 spots and it wasn't even close. McLaren did put up a good fight in the next two years but Porsche still narrowly beat them. However you look at it though, McLaren's 1995 victory does prove how good of a car it was (and is). Just the fact that it is still relevant today really says how great it is.
Sorry for being so off-topic, I don't mean to ruin the discussion of the the P1.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,528
- Texas
No. The F1 was introduced in 1992 in Monaco. In 1995 was when the GTR made its debut, so your assertion doesn't really make sense about no one wanting to buy the F1.
There was never a GTR intended to be built at all by McLaren because Murray did not want to take the car racing. It wasn't until demand from racing teams who saw potential in the F1 that McLaren built a GTR. And when the 5 cars did so well at Le Mans in 1995, was when they commissioned 5 road legal models to be built as LMs; '95 GTRs without the engine restrictions & required street legal mods.
Because there are none. The closest thing to a road legal F1 GTR '97 is the F1 GT & there's only 3 out there. Last one for sale was a few years ago & I believe they will easily fetch $2 million+.
Whatever the conditions where, the sole fact is that the F1 went up against purpose-built prototypes which were highly favored to win against a GT1 car that was still essentially built off a road car. It is still to this day the only manufacturer to win its first time out & still took half the Top 10 spots in 1996 & 2nd/3rd in 1997. Keep in mind the car that won '96 & '97 was a prototype-racer, so once again, the odds were in its favor from the start.
I heard that here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFLQAEiO7xo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:McLaren_F1_GTR.jpg
It seems that it was converted by the owner. Not sure what that means exactly but I wouldn't consider it a production car. Like I said I couldn't find any more information about it.
Of course. I didn't mean to take anything away from McLaren's victory I just wanted to add a little more detail to the events surrounding it. It's amazing what they accomplished but I think there is a little more to the story than they just simply won.
The LMP1 cars were favored (higher class cars generally are) but it was mainly just the Courage C34 that was expected to win and in the end only 3 of the 7 qualifying LMP1 cars finished the race out of 20 total cars that finished.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,528
- Texas
Slow sales because of the recession is not the same as "because no one wanted the to buy the F1".
Regardless, the GTR came about because of racing teams. As said, Murray had no intention of the F1 ever becoming a race car.
It's not converted. None of the '97 models are. It's back in this livery now; chassis #27R.
- 12,389
- Betelgeuse
- Beeblebrox_237
The end result is the same: people didn't buy it. There was not a lot of demand for the car at the time of its release.
More accurately I guess it would be people were unable or unwilling to pay for it but it doesn't make much of a difference for what we are discussing.
It's not converted. None of the '97 models are. It's back in this livery now; chassis #27R.
The caption on Wikipedia says:
"A McLaren F1 GTR '97 "Long Tail" which has been converted to a street-legal specification"
I thought it might be and you are probably right.
I was thinking it was probably a normal concept car and if they wanted to they could put in a fake interior. But it probably is clay.
Last edited:
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
McLaren
Premium
- 45,528
- Texas
You said people did not want to buy the car. That is not the same as the car being affected by the recession. There were plenty of people who most likely wanted to buy it, but did not because of they could not afford to do so at the time being.
It does when you are speaking in the wrong context. It also has nothing to do with why the F1 GTR was built, which is what you claimed was built because no one wanted to buy the street car. That is wrong.
It's wrong. There are no road-converted F1 GTR '97 models.
It doesn't change the fact that there was very little demand for it at the time. It also doesn't really make a difference overall, the result is still the same. People not wanting it means there is no demand. People not being able to buy it means there is no demand. People not being willing to buy it means there is no demand. Unless all three of those criteria are met, there is not any demand. It doesn't change the result only the cause, and I think only the result is what is important in this discussion.
I didn't really think it would be that big of a deal when I wrote people didn't want it. Maybe instead I should have said people weren't buying it, but it's really just saying the same thing in a different way. In the end McLaren wasn't selling cars.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I just haven't been able to find much else about the topic. I do believe you.
The car seems to be road registered?
And there is even a Facebook group with more pictures: http://www.facebook.com/McLarenF1GTRLongTailRoadCar.Varun.Coutinho0071
I don't mean to go against what you are saying, but it seems like there is a lot of information saying there was or is a Longtail road car.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,528
- Texas
It's wrong, that's all there is to it. The only reason that car was even orange is because the Veuve Clicquot livery was removed.
This is the same car last year.
The only reason people think it was road converted was because of the "CIA 4" plates. In reality, while those were real plates, the car itself was not road registered or converted. It only carried those plates because the owner had given it thought to go through the process, but never actually did it. The livery above was its original livery before being repainted into a LARK livery, then Veuve Clicquot, to the livery removed, & now back to Parabolica. There have been no successful GTR '97 models ever converted.
Last edited:
- 23,800
- Philippines
There's no demand?
McLaren never made as many as they could, and it's arguable they never recouped the cost of development, thanks to the recession, but that they sold over 100 cars means that the demand was there.
It is inaccurate to say that there was no demand. Just as it is inaccurate to say that there is no demand for these cars now. There is a huge demand for F1s, as evinced by the fact that they fetch more at auction and in sales than any other contemporary supercar, and that it is one of the vanishingly few modern supercars that actually appreciates in value.
Okay that makes sense. No wonder I couldn't find very much information and all the cars were Orange. (there was only one)
Thanks for clearing that up, especially the part about the plates.
So it was going to be made road legal at one point but then the owner decided not to do it or it was just not possible?
Thanks for clearing that up, especially the part about the plates.
So it was going to be made road legal at one point but then the owner decided not to do it or it was just not possible?
McLaren
Premium
- 45,528
- Texas
The owner toyed with the idea, but never went through with it.
It's possible, but after 16 years, I doubt anyone will. The conversion process for the 1997 cars is obviously much more than just removing the engine restrictions & installing needed safety equipment to make it road legal. And I can only guess the the car's design & extensive engine modification plays a large role. That and only 10 of these cars exist & retail for more than $10 million today, so no one may want to risk cutting into the car's value (despite it all being done by McLaren).
I wasn't saying there was no demand for the F1, I was saying that in order for there to be demand for anything those criteria must be met. Sorry if it sounded like I was talking specifically about the F1 because that's not what I was going for.
There was demand for the F1 but when it was released in the 90s, at least according to that video, there was not a lot of demand, or as much as McLaren was hoping for. In order for there to be demand people must want something, be able to buy it, and be willing to buy it. If someone does not meet that criteria then they are not adding to the demand for something.
In the case of the McLaren F1 during the time of its release (a lot of) people likely wanted it, some were able to buy it, but even those who were able to were probably not willing to because of the poor economy. There was demand but not as much as there would have been if they released the car in 1998 or 1999 during the peak of the internet boom. Of course there was demand, otherwise it would not have sold at all upon release, but just not as much as McLaren was hoping for, at least that is what the video I posted makes it seem like.
I agree 100%, there is a huge amount of demand for the F1 today. More so than just about any other car from that era.
Yeah I can only imagine. 1997 would have been the time to do it, not today.
RocZX
Premium
- 8,849
- New York
Keef
Premium
- 25,104
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
Probably is. Look at the patent drawings above it. The spoiler in your shot would be in a high downforce/airbrake position. The cool thing is that it's double-layered so it's not simply a high drag spoiler like the MP4 but an actual flap that's creating a bit less drag but tons of downforce. A much more efficient design.
RocZX
Premium
- 8,849
- New York
Last edited:
- 11,853
- Marin County
UGH Why can't it have a n/a engine? I mean I appreciate turbo cars, but this would be so fantastic with an n/a engine. Something in the 650-700hp range. I suspect this car will be closer to 800...
- 23,800
- Philippines
Because regulations. Stricter EUROV standards will make it even harder to meet economy and emissions targets with a pure NA engine while meeting performance goals.
Either way, once you've got throttle response covered (and emissions makes a hash out of throttle response on most naturally aspirated cars nowadays, anyway, thanks to e-throttles), there's no difference between a high-revving NA engine and a high-revving turbo engine... except the latter typically makes more power.
Either way, once you've got throttle response covered (and emissions makes a hash out of throttle response on most naturally aspirated cars nowadays, anyway, thanks to e-throttles), there's no difference between a high-revving NA engine and a high-revving turbo engine... except the latter typically makes more power.
- 3,221
- Maldives
- zedextreme8177
With regards to the engine sound itself, I'd prefer a supercharged engine. But those seem to be quite uncommon these days.
A supercharged engine + KERS =
A supercharged engine + KERS =
