LOG IN

Share

McLaren P1 officially revealed, full details inside - photos

Priced from 866,000 GBP

Related Articles

Add comment

subscribe to comments
comment rules Add comment

Comments (27)

Scuderia-Paul
In styling terms I am not a fan of this P1. I think the front is awful and looks like McLaren were trying to hard to make it look edgy and contemporary. The rear is not bad but as a styling package I am disappointed by this. The cabin is a little dull and could do with a slight lift. Dynamically we all know it will be astonishing. Review comparisons with the F150 will probably write themselves and will say the P1 is too clinical compared to the Ferrari. If I was to find myself in the position of being able to purchase one I cannot imagine picking this over the admittedly unseen F150. McLaren as a company does not appeal to me because of it's cold sterile personality. Let the hypercar wars begin! Ferrari v Porsche v McLaren.
Feb 27, 2013 7:35 pm
1 0
LWE7
Love the color ! Much better than the orange one.
Feb 27, 2013 10:31 am
0 0
TomitaBogdan
the exterior is outstanding...the interior is carbon-fiber overkill. really, it looks bad all that texture. If they could tone it down a bit, mask it somehow, and only accents of it to be shown...this screams "I am a very high performance hypercar" Where the Bugatti has royal blood, and shows it when and how it's needed (interior wise)
Feb 27, 2013 6:39 am
0 0
PaganiC9_pl0x
The top speed somewhat distresses the petrolhead kid inside me. That being said. I am in no doubt that this will be a phenomenal machine. Extreme downforce comes with a price. The GT2 class cars with which it shares its downforce figures don't share the above 200mph top speed. The 'megga mac' in this sense has done well. And lets not forget, the F1's only real shining figure was its top speed. Dynamically, the rest of it was a bit of a pig. Ferrari should be worried. And this without doubt looks better than what the EnzoII will look like. 458 on roids anyone?
Feb 26, 2013 11:03 am
1 2
Wickedated
Pump your brakes guy, how can you compare this to the Enzo II its a car nobody has seen yet and know nothing about. Wait till the unveil at the Geneva show to make such comparison.
Feb 26, 2013 8:21 pm
0 1
Aesthetics
i was tired of manufacturers talking about nurburgring lap time targets...while others says cars from nurburgring test have too much compression damping to be comfortable on the road...but with this car, even though mclaren has not even whisper nurburgring, i just cant wait to see it....600kg downforce, 900hp max with DNS on the straight..1400kg..i say below 7 minutes
Feb 26, 2013 10:24 am
0 0
trspeed600
Okay, I know I am going to get toasted on this, but I think it is an ugly car. The lines are not fluid, and that front end is just weird--like its smilimg at me. Technically, it is a marvel, but its no Ferarri in the looks department.
Feb 26, 2013 8:42 am
4 2
Wickedated
I'm going to have to agree with you there buddy, though I suspect if you're in the market for a million dollar car, you probably see this vehicle through different eyes. Mclaren just doesn't do it for me. Both this and the "baby mac" are ugly.
Feb 26, 2013 9:02 am
4 2
4g63
i thk the test car looks cool
Feb 26, 2013 9:26 am
1 0
RobERob
Ferrari is no longer 'Ferrari' in the "looks department". IMHO, if anything, current Ferrari models are more striking than beautiful; with the exception of the F12 berlinetta. As for the "lines not being fluid", I couldn't disagree with you more. The way i see it, it defines fluid although I think Mclaren did a horrible job displaying it with these "official" shots. And ...euhh ...not another "smiling" reference. All the mote reason not to like it, right? Hey, since you see this and I don't, perhaps it likes you? Question: did it wink at you, too? Lucky bastard!
Feb 26, 2013 11:22 am
2 2
DBaskov
I agree, it looks pretty ugly compared to original F1. The front looks awkward, the back looks too vague. The interior and overall body shape look descent, but not the whole car. I just wish this car would have got a proper design treatment that it deserves, McLaren F1 wasn't entirely known for it's performance alone (at least not to the public), it definably wasn't ugly.
Feb 26, 2013 2:28 pm
1 1
RobERob
Hopefully, this sort of backwards thinking stays here and is not contagious. I say this with a smile (some of you may not like that).
Feb 26, 2013 3:34 pm
0 0
hunker7
it is stunning, no doubt. But sad that at 375 units it is going to be collectable, only couple will be used from day to day basis. I don't understand, why they limit to speed? - will it take off if going faster?
Feb 26, 2013 7:59 am
0 0
Garais877
no they will take limiter off for money later...
Feb 26, 2013 2:35 pm
0 0
BradfordBerry
drag coefficient is only .02 better than the Audi TT from 1999. Great looking car and I'm sure it will perform well, but that figure sounds disappointing to me. What am I missing?
Feb 26, 2013 5:57 am
1 1
infond
Your comment made me laugh. What are you missing? Basic stuff. This car wants to be the fastest car, especially on track, so it needs (and produces) extreme amounts of downforce. It's not a regular car you see on the road every day.
Feb 26, 2013 6:10 am
2 1
BradfordBerry
I get that bit. But I would have thought the figure would be taken from its "go fast" mode, that why I asked the question. Don't get me wrong, I love what Mclaren are doing and these guys know their stuff. The figure from the TT stick in my head and 13 years later in a car of such epic performance as the Mclaren, it just didn't seem to be much of a reduction. Do the take the figure when it's trimmed out for speed or grip? I thought the drag coefficient was about how efficient the shape was, rather than downforce relating to grip.
Feb 26, 2013 6:56 am
1 1
edd_lg
@ BradfordBerry, look at F1 cars. Take away their wings, you get a very aerodynamic body, very fast in a straight line and you'll crash at the first corner. Put the wings back, top speed is reduced, but you take corners with breakneck (literally) speeds. Downforce increases drag and pushed the car down for more stability. Of course, you can create downforce with diffusers, but that's not enough. Now look at commuter cars, their aerodynamics is better than those of sportscars, because they need to be efficient, not take corners fast.
Feb 26, 2013 1:29 pm
1 0
inlinesix
An Audi C3 100 from 30 years ago has a drag co. of 0.30. An F1 car of today is anywhere between 0.7 - 1.1. You figure out what you are missing.
Feb 26, 2013 6:25 am
2 0
kimbo
He is missing his brain :D
Feb 26, 2013 12:02 pm
1 3
Bozzor
One of the biggest factors besides the downforce is cooling: 700+ hp from 3.8 litres means the two turbos are working like crazy, gulping down needed air and generating huge amounts of waste heat that needs cooling and removal. That requirement trumps an ultra low Cd value.
Feb 26, 2013 7:49 am
0 0
ricer8
Well for 1, drag coefficient is only part of the equation when you are using air to generate down force and cool components of the car. It's safe to say the Audi TT is doing neither.
Feb 26, 2013 11:11 am
0 0
Madness
Can't wait to see what Clarkson has to say about this on Top Gear!
Feb 26, 2013 5:28 am
1 1
Prestige15
I want James May to test this
Feb 26, 2013 8:59 am
2 0
edd_lg
Clarkson will say it is a technical marvel, but cold compared to the Ferrari F70. May will complain about the suspensions being to hard and that the car is not practical at all. Hammond will still chose a Pagani over this.
Feb 26, 2013 1:35 pm
2 0
Prestige15
Oh yes no doubt. I would love to see them taking a car adventure with the F70, P1 and that Huyaya (if i spelt that right)
Mar 1, 2013 7:09 am
0 0
infond
HHHHHHHNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Feb 26, 2013 5:21 am
0 0
http://content.worldcarfans.co/templates/0/18