McLaren Life banner

21 - 40 of 968 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,009 Posts
I like the Aston Martin brand and think that their design language is gorgeous. I hope they can figure it out and make it work. I'll be very interested to see how this all works out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Simply because they are banned in Motorsport competition/f1.

Many many aerodynamic concepts that simply are not allowed to be used in F1.

There are road based time attack cars with more than double the downforce of f1 cars. They still meet your visibility requirement.

Tires are easy, select mpsc2 for road and something really sticky for the track.

Ride height can be adjusted with active aero/magnetic or hydraulic suspension. Also easy.
Not so easy - or it would have been done already. Lets put things in perspective by using Laferrari (Ferrari's ultimate hypercar with plenty of F1 engineering in the background) as an example.

LaFerrari holds the Fiorano test track for production road cars with a time of 1.19.70 minutes. The F1 car record set by Michael Schumacher is approx 56 seconds. That is well over 20 seconds faster IN ONE LAP. Within 6 laps, the F1 car would be lapping LaFerrari.

The P1, 918 and LaFerrari would likely be very similar in lap times based on existing tests. So we can say that the collective engineering brilliance (and financial might) of Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren can produce road cars that can get to a barely sub 1.20 time.

Now we are being told that Aston Martin, with limited financial resources, is going to build a hypercar that will absolutely obliterate the existing three hypercars with a sub one minute lap time capability at Fiorona.

So there are two possibilities:
1. Someone at Aston Martin is, to put it mildly, exaggerating the performance potential of this car, or
2. Aston Martin has the capability of building such a car, in which case the entire engineering depts of Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren should be summarily fired for incompetence given the much larger budgets they were provided to design such (comparatively) slow cars.

I know which one of these possibilities I believe.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,551 Posts
Not so easy - or it would have been done already. Lets put things in perspective by using Laferrari (Ferrari's ultimate hypercar with plenty of F1 engineering in the background) as an example.

LaFerrari holds the Fiorano test track for production road cars with a time of 1.19.70 minutes. The F1 car record set by Michael Schumacher is approx 56 seconds. That is well over 20 seconds faster IN ONE LAP. Within 6 laps, the F1 car would be lapping LaFerrari.

The P1, 918 and LaFerrari would likely be very similar in lap times based on existing tests. So we can say that the collective engineering brilliance (and financial might) of Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren can produce road cars that can get to a barely sub 1.20 time.

Now we are being told that Aston Martin, with limited financial resources, is going to build a hypercar that will absolutely obliterate the existing three hypercars with a sub one minute lap time capability at Fiorona.

So there are two possibilities:
1. Someone at Aston Martin is, to put it mildly, exaggerating the performance potential of this car, or
2. Aston Martin has the capability of building such a car, in which case the entire engineering depts of Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren should be summarily fired for incompetence given the much larger budgets they were provided to design such (comparatively) slow cars.

I know which one of these possibilities I believe.
Also, the mooted production run for the Aston will be 100 cars. If we say that the runs for the 3 cars you mention were on average 600 cars, that means that Aston/Red Bull would be able to pay for its car's design and development expense over only 1/6th as many units.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,023 Posts
difficult to believe that they would design and build a car with F1 performance and the benefits of a road car for a tiny fraction of the cost of the F1 car..

development costs would be substantial..... the sound from the stereo in an F1 car is freakin' terrible and the cupholders next to non existant... these are serious problems that need to be overcome in a high performance road car..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
The main issues are power, weight, tyres and aero. I don't think anyone would doubt any of these companies could configure a chassis with the necessary handling requirements to do a super (I.e race car) quick lap.

Power, not too difficult to achieve enough of that but the problem becomes weight. However, with turbos that might allow a small block, high power unit - lower weight. The carbon tub, as we know, has good weight properties. Then it's just a matter of how far towards 'stripped out' they want to go. Low volume does hamper development ability but high price helps in terms of expensive (and potentially lightweight) materials. So, I could believe the lightweight box could be ticked.

Tyres, well, slap on a set of slicks and I don't think anyone would really complain - for any sensible professional to claim you can match race car pace without race car rubber is obviously nonsense. So, if the Aston hyper car used slicks and matched LMP pace, that would still be seriously impressive in my book. Let's face it, any owner could do the same thing for track use.

That leaves what I reckon is the hard bit. Aero. The problem is providing enough aero while keeping the good looks that would surely be a requirement for an Aston hyper car. Take a bow Mr. Newey. Perhaps he is the ace up the sleeve and I could imagine him relishing just such a challenge, where there is very little restriction on the technology behind a solution, as was his issue with F1.

Can they do it? Yes, I reckon, but the cost will be high and to fully achieve that target they might discover that the concessions to comfort might be too much for the kind of people that buy these things.

Best guess? If a hypothetical LMP lap time was 1m 30s, they might get to 1m 35s with the final product. So, pretty close but the cigar stays in the pocket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,023 Posts
The main issues are power, weight, tyres and aero. I don't think anyone would doubt any of these companies could configure a chassis with the necessary handling requirements to do a super (I.e race car) quick lap.

Power, not too difficult to achieve enough of that but the problem becomes weight. However, with turbos that might allow a small block, high power unit - lower weight. The carbon tub, as we know, has good weight properties. Then it's just a matter of how far towards 'stripped out' they want to go. Low volume does hamper development ability but high price helps in terms of expensive (and potentially lightweight) materials. So, I could believe the lightweight box could be ticked.

Tyres, well, slap on a set of slicks and I don't think anyone would really complain - for any sensible professional to claim you can match race car pace without race car rubber is obviously nonsense. So, if the Aston hyper car used slicks and matched LMP pace, that would still be seriously impressive in my book. Let's face it, any owner could do the same thing for track use.

That leaves what I reckon is the hard bit. Aero. The problem is providing enough aero while keeping the good looks that would surely be a requirement for an Aston hyper car. Take a bow Mr. Newey. Perhaps he is the ace up the sleeve and I could imagine him relishing just such a challenge, where there is very little restriction on the technology behind a solution, as was his issue with F1.

Can they do it? Yes, I reckon, but the cost will be high and to fully achieve that target they might discover that the concessions to comfort might be too much for the kind of people that buy these things.

Best guess? If a hypothetical LMP lap time was 1m 30s, they might get to 1m 35s with the final product. So, pretty close but the cigar stays in the pocket.
errm
it won't happen lukey.. they would do well to even get close to GT3 pace.. I would say 5 seconds off gt3 pace is doable, which is considerably quicker than the current trinity.. and roughly 35 seconds slower than f1 around for example spa

afterall, lmp and f1 cars are single seat.. one assumes this road car will be two seat.. that in the first instance is a huge hindrance ..

the claim is just not credible but fun marketing and at least provides an interesting debate.

having said that if it even remotely resembled the sketch that has been put out, which the well informed suggest is an exisiting aston project, I would try and get one in a heart beat.. !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
I cant help but think of the X2010 fan car that Newey designed for GT game series when I read about this upcoming effort with Aston Martin. That was his take on an F1 car without the rules. Obviously it was ridiculously faster than an F1 car in the game but he did say at the time he would like to do something like that in real life. If this is it and he is partnering with AM to design and execute something as radical as the X2010, X2011 & X2014 then I can see it being as fast or faster than an F1 car on track but not sold on any car being that fast being a road car.

But since I'm reading that he wants it to be a road car, with road car compromises etc there is no way I can see that kind of car being anywhere near as fast as an F1 car. The proposed car will have to be supremely featherweight compared to the average hyper car, probably have fans for suction a la X2010 etc cars he designed in game and have an extremely non conventional super/hypercar body etc. But Im no engineer. If he can pull those huge claims off without the car looking like an open wheeler etc (Caparo T1 comes to mind) then he will be immortalized.

Here is a non-working real life mock up of the fan car X2010 that he built in game with ideas of building a real life functioning model. The G's alone a car like this would pull would mean the driver would have to don a G-suit and train like a fighter pilot. I don't think we have the technology to achieve a car like the X2010 in real life yet.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
It is very possible to have a road car configuration with over 3 times the downforce of something like a 650S GT3 race car. Like I said before, there are modified tin tops that are making even more than that. And they obviously have the ability to put in another seat for a passenger.

Newey is one of the few I would trust to be able to really use underbody aero to its maximum potential. Andrew Brilliant would be another.

Right off the bat, a flat underbody is already deficient to an optimum configuration.

I would fully expect the Aston hypercar to be bigger than the 650S GT3, solely to obtain even more underbody surface area to play with.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,551 Posts
I would fully expect the Aston hypercar to be bigger than the 650S GT3, solely to obtain even more underbody surface area to play with.
Fair enough, but a car that is 2 metres wide, which includes modern McLarens, Ferraris, Veyron, 918, K'egg and the rest, is already at the limit of what is tolerable for driving on the public roads.

So unless the idea is to make 100 garage queens....oh, wait....
 

·
Recent Convert
Joined
·
844 Posts
The idea would be to make 100 track queens that happen to be road legal, imo
They've just done that twice in the last year with the Vulcan and GT12
I'd hope they would make more of Adrain Newey's input
I'm expecting a hybrid 177 replacement ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
How is the Vulcan by the way since it was mentioned. I've seen a few in videos but no comparisons to other track only cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,703 Posts
If you can put license plates on a Radical RXC coupe, then why are we holding Aston and Newey to a higher standard of road car usability? Is it because they said the word 'beautiful'? Granted, the Radical coupe is about the ugliest thing you'd ever want to see cruising down your residential street.

Big power, optional slicks for the track, sucker fan, patent from No Lotus for his retractable side skirts, job done. Who needs cup holders? Seriously.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,551 Posts
If you can put license plates on a Radical RXC coupe, then why are we holding Aston and Newey to a higher standard of road car usability? Is it because they said the word 'beautiful'? Granted, the Radical coupe is about the ugliest thing you'd ever want to see cruising down your residential street.

Big power, optional slicks for the track, sucker fan, patent from No Lotus for his retractable side skirts, job done. Who needs cup holders? Seriously.
I think there are a few issues entailed in holding AM/Newey to the higher standard of which you speak.

If all Newey did was to design an LMP1 car without the restrictions of real LMP1 - weight, movable aero, engine size, fuel economy, whatever - then we would expect it as a matter of course to be faster than real LMP1. To take that vehicle, to add a horn and indicator lights and thus to contrive in some jurisdictions for it to be road-legal, would be no big deal.

To a lower spec and at lower ultimate pace, that is what the Radical is, which is why nobody is hugely impressed with it. Yes it is fast, but no it is not anything special. It did not move the game forward an inch.

ISTM that the crucial distinction is between a road car that is very fast on track and a very fast track car that on the rare occasion might be driven on the road. The former is a massive challenge, the latter just a matter of a few modifications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,703 Posts
I think there are a few issues entailed in holding AM/Newey to the higher standard of which you speak.

If all Newey did was to design an LMP1 car without the restrictions of real LMP1 - weight, movable aero, engine size, fuel economy, whatever - then we would expect it as a matter of course to be faster than real LMP1. To take that vehicle, to add a horn and indicator lights and thus to contrive in some jurisdictions for it to be road-legal, would be no big deal.

To a lower spec and at lower ultimate pace, that is what the Radical is, which is why nobody is hugely impressed with it. Yes it is fast, but no it is not anything special. It did not move the game forward an inch.

ISTM that the crucial distinction is between a road car that is very fast on track and a very fast track car that on the rare occasion might be driven on the road. The former is a massive challenge, the latter just a matter of a few modifications.
I

I suppose I disagree somewhat. The reason nobody cares about the Radical is because it has a Radical logo on it, and to a lesser extent, because it is a pretty basic architecture, tech-wise.

A car with Aston and Newey pedigree (although the former is in perhaps in doubt!) with very extreme and advanced tech based around a CF structure, would be much more news-worth indeed. Not to mention, it would undoubtedly look amazing, like a modern LMP, and not just awkward, like a Radical.

p.s. how can you say that an LMP1 with active aero could in any way be construed as "no big deal"? I can't think of a more tantalizing vision to see that UFO pulverizing a racetrack, wings moving, ride height adjusting and probably even ballast shifting, corner to corner...
If this was proposed McLaren project instead of AM/Newey, we'd be losing our ---- right now. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
I would love to hear Mr Glinkenhaus' opinion on this topic, he would be one of the most qualified members on this board to give an expert opinion. So I will ask him.

Jim,
Do you think it is currently possible to develop a road going hypercar that can lap a track as quickly as an F1 car? What are the biggest challenges?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,551 Posts
I

I suppose I disagree somewhat. The reason nobody cares about the Radical is because it has a Radical logo on it, and to a lesser extent, because it is a pretty basic architecture, tech-wise.

A car with Aston and Newey pedigree (although the former is in perhaps in doubt!) with very extreme and advanced tech based around a CF structure, would be much more news-worth indeed. Not to mention, it would undoubtedly look amazing, like a modern LMP, and not just awkward, like a Radical.

p.s. how can you say that an LMP1 with active aero could in any way be construed as "no big deal"? I can't think of a more tantalizing vision to see that UFO pulverizing a racetrack, wings moving, ride height adjusting and probably even ballast shifting, corner to corner...
If this was proposed McLaren project instead of AM/Newey, we'd be losing our ---- right now. :)
When I said that it would be "no big deal", what I meant was that at least most of the big potential opportunities to make such a car faster than a current LMP1 or F1 racing car are known in principle and at various times have already been used in racing:

- active aero
- ground effect
- active suspension
- no restriction on engine size
- no restriction on fuel flow
- no restriction on electrical energy recovery
- traction control/stability management

We have been aware of the potentialities of the above for at least 25 and in some cases 50 years. They have been largely and in some cases entirely banned from use in LMP and F1 racing, which is why there is scope for a truly unrestricted car designed on a (relatively) limited budget to be faster around a circuit than the latest and greatest from Mercedes and Porsche are.

IINM, during the Australian GP the other day it was mentioned that, despite the immense sophistication of the Mercedes F1 W07, the course record is still held by Schumacher's Ferrari in 2004, and the '04 Ferrari was far from being unrestricted in design.

I'm not saying that any of the areas that I listed could not be exploited to much greater effect than they were when they were permitted for racing use. No doubt they could be.

Rather, my point was that, by exploiting those areas for which the technology is not artificially limited by regulatory fiat, it should be "no big deal" for a qualified engineering team to come up with a faster racing car than the current best of either F1 or LMP1. The question is whether such a car could also be a reasonably practicable, decent road car in the sense that the LaF, 918, P1, Huayra and K'egg are, and the Radical is not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
You can essentially make a significantly modernized/updated car in the light of a 962 Schuppan. Wide and long, but not much (if at all) bigger than a current Koenigsegg. Full underbody tunnels, active aero, active suspension, big power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
If you can put license plates on a Radical RXC coupe, then why are we holding Aston and Newey to a higher standard of road car usability? Is it because they said the word 'beautiful'? Granted, the Radical coupe is about the ugliest thing you'd ever want to see cruising down your residential street.

Big power, optional slicks for the track, sucker fan, patent from No Lotus for his retractable side skirts, job done. Who needs cup holders? Seriously.
Agreed. But they said street car so Id imagine they will want some semblance of creature comfort Aston Martin One77 style and not so much Radical style?

I agree on the big power bit etc. 1800+hp, fan car, trick AWD to harness the power, DCT, sub 2800lb with fluids and Aston Martin type of interior etc (option of spartan interior for lowest weight) would be the most ridiculous street car ever.

I kind of doubt they will go the fan car route though...Its obviously a car for the wealthy but can you imagine the R&D and maintenance on something like that?
 
21 - 40 of 968 Posts
Top