Im not making trouble here , its a genuine question .
The Mclaren gets beaten by slower , technologically inferior cars . The reasons are not speed , comfort etc but the x factor .
I seem to be the only one that wishes my 12c was a little bit MORE .
These things , lets call them " intangible reasons " ( thank you 6th ) do you all really not understand them ? Are they really unimportant to you all ?
The things i bore you all with , you know connection , feel , communication and dammit even the e word ; are these really unimportant to you all ?
I am not sure wether you guys dont care , dont care much or just say that because our mclarens do lack those things .
What is it ?
I drove both. Most of the intangibles are very tangible, just lazy press wont bother to think, or has ferrari do it's thinking for it.
For example, wrt "connection to the road," what does that mean? Steering feel? Having an intuition for how the car will behave under varied circumstances? So steering feel goes to Mac. Even by crazy top gear's/clarkson's evaluation. So on to feel for how the car reacts under different circumstances. The fact is, if you do a mph to mph comparison, you know how the mac will behave WAY better than the 458. They even said so in the turns, that the Mac just sliced through the turns with no drama and Hamster was feeling uncertain trying to keep up in the 458.
Here' is another supposed intangible. Shifting feel. Shifting is a big thing, and there is something valid there. But it's hardly intangible. How fast, smooth, well does a car shift after you slap the gear? If you like going slow, the 458 always gives you the gear you ask for, no matter where you are in the rev band. The Mac wont. For example, if you are going under 2000RPM on the mac in 1st, it refuses to give you 2nd gear, even though it can. So that sense of immediacy at slow speed is lost on the driver compared to the 458 that always gives you what you ask. Very fair point. (Of course at higher speeds, I think the Mac shifts about as fast, sometimes faster, always way smoother--but point taken, at slower speeds, the 458 spanks the Mac on giving the driver what they want).
Another fair, but very tangible point, is when you turn the nannies off, without the diff, kicking the ass out on the 458 is easier to control and expect what will happen. True. And since every wonk "journalist" likes to kick the tail out for photo ops, I can see this being in the 458's column. When you write it out, to me, its a stupid factor. If you like to drift, there are way better choices than a 458 or a Mac.
That said, from a SUPER CAR stand point, it's all wacky nonsense. I disagree with the top gear clan that the Mac is the best car, but the 458 is the best supercar. Super cars go fast. The mac does fast better. The 458 does slow, arguably, better per the immediacy of shifting at slow speeds, and drift control above.
Now some legitimate intangibles are aesthetics. I do very much think the 458 is a handsome car. Beautiful. I've come around to liking the Mac more, but that is an intangible, and subjective thing, and a fair point to those that like the 458's looks better. Though the number of photos of the Mac v. the 458 seem to provide empirical evidence that the Mac is where it's at wrt to aesthetics.
So I don' think the factors are genuinely intangible here. I think it's way better for people to call them intangible, because when you voice what they are, you sound like an idiot. Yes, the ferrari feels better drifting, and shifting at low speed; these are qualities I would look for in a nissan or buick. Some like the engine note of the 458 better, and think it looks better. It's worse in every other way. Yet, it wins!
So in that, what we believe makes a super car great is giving someone slow speed shifts immediately, good drift control, good noise, pretty looks, and it can suck by all other performance metrics and be a Super Car.