That's not my understanding of how the automotive supplier tiers work, having worked for DuPont, which operated as a Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 supplier. The tier ranking has to do with the supply chain, not quality. Tier 1 suppliers work directly with OEMs, often providing subassemblies. Tier 2 suppliers provide Tier 1 suppliers. Tier 3 suppliers supply Tier 2 suppliers, often with raw materials. Let's say the subassembly is a power window mechanism. The Tier 2 supplier might provide the brackets, motor or electronic control module. The Tier 3 supplier might be the company supplying the chips for the electronics, or steel for the brackets. In the case of DuPont, as a paint supplier selling directly to OEMs, it was Tier 1. It also sold coatings and polymers to Tier 1 companies, making it a Tier 2 supplier, and a lot of polymers were also sold to Tier 2 suppliers, making it a Tier 3 supplier.
Ronnie - appreciate the comment. I have heard the same as you in the past, and in my excitement to confirm hypotheses and learn a few bits off the record intel, I failed to clarify / ask further. I should’ve done so, and I’m red-faced about potentially leaving stones unturned in a ~7,600 word article.
My understanding is from my time at JLR is that Tier 1 is your big ticket systems (think Bosch, Siemens, Johnson Controls, Lear). Tier 2 is the smaller stuff (Borbet, Hella). And so on. My experience with this is somewhat limited though.
On the direct OEM business, Ronnie's position is the "correct" one. Tiers are related to their position in the supply chain, and definitely not on size, capability or quality. For example, BASF (world's largest chemical company) might be a tier3 to someone that buys raw materials from them to supply components to Bosch who then sells it to the OEM. Also, the idea of a supplier to OEM in this day and age not being able to handle UV lights degrading plastics is completely unheard of, as both the OEM, the supplier and the raw material supplier know which materials are able to handle what. If the decision was made to protect the headlight under the shadows for cost savings in the usage of a lower spec of materials, that decision was deliberate and any tier1 or 2 supplier worth its salt would expressly deny any liability for warranty on it due to the poor material choice. So I would take this comment with a grain of salt. But I've seen weirder things in the industry.
It’s been a very long time since I read such a comprehensive review on a new car. Harkens back perhaps to Car of the 70s. Though they would likely have been more complimentary due to the McLarens Englishness. Great work.
Thank you! I appreciate the favorable comparison to what was - at the time - THE greatest car magazine in the world, full stop. JB will suggest C&D, of course.
Car and Driver of the 70s and 80s is my all time favourite car mag. Car and Driver had a bit more of a counter culture vibe to it then did Car, of course. I mean this in no way negatively, but your writing was a bit more straight laced then what Car and Driver would have produced, while not as stiff as Autocar or Motor. Which is why I thought you’d fit in great at Car back then.
You have no idea how much I’ve missed reviews that aren’t saddled with the need to conform to a preset length. William Jeanes shortened the road tests to their current length, when he took over Car and Driver, and it stuck. Something special was lost with that.
Given you interest in Car magazine from its halcyon days, I recommend a subscription to www.the-intercooler.com; Mel Nichols is a contributor, and the other writers are top notch. Obviously you are willing to pay for top automotive writing.
The Intercooler, which is online / app only and carries a modest monthly subscription price. Andrew Frankel and Dan Prosser are the co-founders, and many of the contributors are big names (e.g., Ian Callum writing about car design; Karun Chandhok writing about F1). The co-founders host a weekly Podcast, as well.
The Road Rat, which is print only, and isn’t sold on newsstands. You have to order from their website, but you can subscribe or order individual issues. Emphasis on long form articles, design features, beautiful photography / layouts, etc. Financial backing from Guy Berryman of Coldplay.
000 is available for Porsche nerds, and it’s of outrageous quality. It’s expensive ($250 or more a year for 4 issues) and only covers one marque, but it’s an impressive thing.
I tried it out and enjoyed Mel as well as many of the other contributors, but Dan Prosser’s writing is worse than useless in my opinion - he’s either parroting widely accepted views or spewing baseless nonsense, so I can’t give him any credit for any journalistic value.
Hmm … I don’t have a strong opinion on him. Andrew Frankel is the top conventional autowriter in my opinion, but not everyone agrees with me. I put JB in a different category altogether, obviously.
Yeah, Andrew usually has some pretty good takes for a UK journalist. I only add that qualifier because they always seem to have preferential perspectives on UK manufacturers with Andrew's unabashed love for the current Land Rover Defender being a prime example.
From my perspective William Jeanes was the worst thing to happen to Car and Driver in the 80’s - the only thing I can *maybe* give him props for is some of the writers he brought on board. The articles he wrote read like something from today’s most ass-kissing influencers and his columns were usually placating drivel. It was much better when Csaba took the helm.
Car was at it’s greatest for me from the late eighties until probably the mid nineties (whenever they lost Bulgin and then merged with Performance Car). When I first attended evil car design school (Coventry Uni) they had a complete back issue collection in the library. I didn’t leave that place for my first year (I had just moved up from London and was having trouble adjusting; reading those was my happy place).
It is my hazy recollection (it was a long time ago and I was a child) that Performance Car essentially became Evo Magazine; was that not the case? I happen to have the final issue of Performance Car and the inaugural issue of Evo, coincidentally.
There was also a brief re-launch of Performance Car during the late noughties, and among its young team of contributors (not much older than me) was Dan Prosser, who later wrote for Evo and is now Andrew Frankel’s co-founder at The Intercooler.
At the time the production quality of the magazine - the quality of the photography, the length of the feature articles, the detail related to assessment of performance attributes, etc. - were unavailable elsewhere (at least for me).
The Road Rat (print only) has an emphasis on design, designers, etc. that I enjoy. Suspect it’s on your radar, but give it a try if you haven’t already.
Yeah it is although I haven’t actually picked up a copy yet. This is partly because of my pre-conceptions and inbuilt bias towards anything too ‘curated’ and an ‘experience’. It feels a bit wanky. But I will give it a try (I suspect I’ll be able to pick a copy up from Bicester Heritage).
As it happens, for most of the 1970s I lived in Ann Arbor, where C&D's offices were located on Hogback Rd just east of US-23, and while I subscribed to C&D, I made it a point to buy CAR every month at the bookstore on the corner of South U and Forest. Both magazines were at the top of their games then. C&D respected CAR enough to hire Setright.
Like all McLaren's it lacks the je ne sais quoi that the italians have. It is too sterile lab designed and tries to get everything right. Flaws are OK and V6's suck.
Try as they might, this car has a number of flaws, so it should be teeming with character, right?
I’m not a fan of V-6s either, but I was deeply impressed by the Artura’s engine and motor aka Power Unit. I had high expectations and it surpassed them all; it genuinely sounded good from the cabin, if a bit limp from the outside.
I'm perplexed at the engine choice as well. Aren't 90 degree sixes inherently unbalanced (vs 60 or inline)? Are 300K exotic car buyers really interested in hybrids, at least until they are mandated? It isn't MPG, they are too mainstream to get a gee-whiz rating and I don't expect the target market to need to virtue signal. Back when, paying the guzzler tax was part of the bragging rights.
Flaws in all the wrong spots, like I said though, there's a je ne sais quoi with exotics (though not really exotic) cars. Part of this is the engine and partly looks. If the new Corvette had a V8, oh man. You were impressed by the engine, but you don't seem to be charmed. Great write up though, but curious to do a side by side with an Italian, then maybe you can see the difference? Though I think Ferrari's have lost some of their edge....
My preference among the supercar companies is probably Ferrari. I have driven a number of them over the years, but not the latest stuff. Love the F8 - I think it’s one of the best looking mid-engine cars made in this century, and the best looking such offering from Maranello since the 355.
I recall two specific things about the 458 Italia:
Shortly after I bought my 991 GT3 in 2015, I met up with a friend of mine who inherited some SERIOUS cars (e.g., 50s Ferrari that finished second overall at Le Mans, a 275 GTB/4, D Type, etc.) but managed to remain humble, reflective, and far from jaded. He had recently considered a 458 Italia, and had driven several. He drove my GT3 and made it abundantly clear that the GT3 was superior, in his view. I didn’t want to believe him.
Then I drove a 458 Italia on a friend’s bachelor party (Xtreme Xperience facility in NOLA). Everyone who drove it had also driven my car, and we all felt like the Ferrari’s front end gave zero driver feedback. I am told the newer Ferraris are better. I should find out!
On the Lambo front, while I admire their charismatic NA engines, I’m not a fan personally. I rode in another friend’s Huracan Performante a few years ago, but I don’t think it’s the brand for me. I’d probably prefer an Audi R8 instead of a Huracan.
My plan had been to purchase an Elise with my first bonus, right out of college.
I went to the dealer to test drive an Elise and an E92 M3. Get in the Elise with the salesman, which took a little while with the top on - not the work of a moment. Dead battery. No problem, he’ll go swap the keys for another one sitting next to the one we were sitting in. Another dead battery. It was at this juncture that I realized that depending on a Lotus Elise to get me to work every day was probably a bad idea.
I loved the M3 and probably would’ve bought it except it was at the top of my budget, and it sold out from under me later the same day, anyway. My third choice was a 993 911. I drove a black one locally in Atlanta with the intention of potentially purchasing a Guards Red example in Dallas. I loved it and bought the black one on a handshake as another potential buyer arrived for his test drive.
SM- you and I are of an age, and based on previous conversations, similar background and worldview. Although perhaps you have made a few better choices (don't drop out of college three hours shy of a degree. (Also don't choose a degree that pays less than retail.)) End double parenthetical. At any rate, all this to say I greatly appreciate the guest appearance, and moreso would love to see you continue writing, it's a far more valuable perspective for me than most of the fakers on the web.
Great article, really enjoyed reading this. One thing I'm confused about, you say the hybrid element is "dilutive" but based on the calculations presented, inclusion of the hybrid element appears to improve the power-to-weight ratio, i.e., fewer pounds per horsepower. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the word "dilutive" in this context.
0. (That's where we start lists around here, right?) An excellent and particularly detailed write-up, McCoy! As a fellow review junkie, I loved the addition of the bona fides and biases section and now I'm forced to agree that a similar system needs see widespread adoption.
1. I'm nowhere near playing in this league of vehicles, but, the biggest problem I see with this new breed comes if I imagine suddenly being able to drop $300k on a toy. I just don't see any scenario where I'd give a second thought to any of the three cars heavily featured here. As long as a manual GT3 and an LT6 Z06 are on the market, not to mention used V10 Lambos and the V8 predecessors of this car and the 296, I don't think I could ever go for a boosted V6 hybrid.
I always thought it would be fair to include “credentials,” especially in a test with numerous reviewers. You want to know who has owned 14 Porsches, who has a BMW roundel tattooed on their shoulderblade, who is setting timed laps that are slow or fast or somewhere in between. You want to know who lives and dies for a clutch pedal, who prioritizes straight line, who always loves the new stuff, etc.
You know this if you’ve been reading established names for a long time, but nobody knew my biases; that’s why I shared them.
There are a lot of compromises in that ~$250K+ market - there’s no Goldilocks car. Do you prioritize steering, transmission, NA (or forced induction), cylinder count, sound, weight, construction (CF vs aluminum), badge appeal, dealer network, perceived reliability / depreciation? There’s no obvious winner.
I suppose it depends on what your goal was should you have that kind of money to drop on a toy. It looks fine, but the mid-engine supercar profile has become like an upscale CUV in that they all look similar and you would have to be a bit of a nerd to tell them apart. It's performance is competitive but that hardly matters, nor, assuming you can drop ~$300k on a toy, does the viability of the company. If (the hypothetical) you are trying to flex on your rich neighbors it probably won't get you kicked out of the gated community. All that being said it I would say it is not interesting enough. Exact same car with a straight or flat 8 and no hybrid bullshit would be compelling, not that they care what I think. I'd rather have a convertible of almost any kind or an old Caddy for cruising, and a race car if that's what I wanted to do. I don't understand what the purpose of these cars is (this is also a reply to the last paragraph of the author's reply to you).
Edit-Last sentence was not a critique of the author, just the car. Long form, insanely detailed essays is exactly why I put down real American money to be here.
There are multiple reasons that the junior mid-engine supercars look so similar: aerodynamics in the context of regulations (passenger and otherwise), packaging (that tier of car needs to be daily driver practicable and have some luggage space), etc.
There is more variability at the 7 figure level (Senna, Speedtail, Ferrari SP3 Daytona, Lambo Sian, Bugatti Chiron, AM Valkyrie, GMA T50, etc.)
Fantastic review. Wish I could get an invite to events like this but will settle for a description this vivid and complete. Hope this isn’t your last guest post.
I’d be delighted to write again (and on other topics) as long as I have something meaningful to share and can create something I’m proud of.
As for the event, I have suspicions about how I ended up on McLaren’s list, but it’s a black box. I genuinely appreciated it, and I would be far more predisposed to patronize the brand after the experience … which is why it’s worthwhile for them to host such events.
Interestingly, it was a very relaxed, low-key arrangement. I was in the car less than 5 minutes after arrival, and my passenger was refreshingly candid; it helped that we have a few mutual friends. For context, I have done Porsche events that were far more pretentious regarding a comparatively prosaic car.
I have never driven anything of the caliber of the trio this article is focused on, so I'm wondering – is it even still possible to really test this stuff on public roads? And is there any point of even using them there?
Of the fast cars I've driven in the past 12 months or so (LC500 Bespoke Build, RS3 sedan, RS6, Continental GTC V8, M440i, Macan S and both slow and fast Taycans, with honorable mention to 911 Turbo S that I've only driven with an "instructor" in front of me), the M440i, Macan S, the slowest Taycan and maybe the RS3 seemed to be probably the threshold of what a sane person is able to really use on the road.
Much like Jack years ago, I grew up believing in truthfulness of what motoring journos write and tried quite hard to emulate it (like many of my countrymen – it seems that us in the CEE region are a bit crazier than the Western guys), so I consider it my duty to try and drive the cars really fast.
Even the M440i, driven at 8 or 9/10ths is probably too fast for you to admit what you've been doing publicly. It WILL get you into the triple digits, and way above, on the backroads. It will mean that you are going probably triple the speed an ordinary driver is going on said backroad, even in turns.
The RS6? Did two runs of the backroads with it. The first one recorded more than 1.0 g in every direction, including 1.33 g for the right-hand turn. The second one was in what I considered a more leisurely pace, but the numbers were not that different.
And that's a fucking family wagon, which weighs about the same as mid-70s Cadillac Talisman, is only slightly narrower and has "only" 600 hp. That car is absolutely too fast in almost any moment and environment, bar maybe acceleration on the highway from more than 120 mph.
In real life, the RS3 is of course much faster on the backroads, because the RS6 doesn't really fit. Yet, with its 400 or so hp, probably 1.7 tonnes and four wheel drive, it's also scarily fast. Maybe TOO fast.
That car is fast to the point that on a twisty road, I can't imagine the Ferrari 296 or Artura or the MC20 or probably ANYTHING getting away from me – and I'm not that skilled, nor the most courageous. But the courage, or lack of self-preservation, is only thing that can make you faster at this point.
Hell, it's hard to imagine that said Ferrari will really get that far away from a well-driven Hyundai i30N Performance, or something of that caliber.
And in all cases, we're talking about driving style that would get you in jail in the US, result in your car being impounded in France and would cost me my license immediately in Czech (luckily, there are no speed traps and no police on the backroads).
Driven at any socially acceptable pace, the most interesting experience most of these cars can offer you is the (more or less artificial) sound, the ambience of the interior and maybe the looks of the bystanders. Also, you can't really hear that sound, because keeping your foot down for long enough for something interesting to start happening is putting you WAY above legal limit.
I'm not saying everyone should drive a Miata because all that "slow car fast" thing, but, well, the gas cars I've driven are overkill, not to mention the Taycan Turbo S, which is probably somewhere on par with 911 Turbo S pace-wise, and it's just... out of this world. From what I've experience, the 911 Turbo S is similar in the way that you can't even really tell it's rear-engined anymore, because you WILL NOT get anywhere near enough to its limits.
I see the point of an Evora, or Alpine A110, or even of the GT3, if you track it. But what's the point of road-driven, even "junior" supercars? So you can go fast as a maniac with less effort?
Genuine question. Press Ferraris and McLarens, even fast 911s, are almost non-existent here, so it's hard for me to tell what leads people to drop insane amount of cash on them.
I see the point of GTs like the LC500 (which is, by the way, gloriously good) or even of the Conti GTC, which is, in many ways, quite shit, but it's HUGE and ostentatious and, frankly, more fun to drive slow than fast.
But what's the point of driving Ferrari or a McLaren anything other than as fast as you can?
Lots to unpack here (and I won’t be able to respond to all of the excellent questions you pose).
Why do people buy these cars? Personal image enhancement, self-actualization, the fulfillment of childhood dreams, etc. There’s also the allure of trying something new, something “better.” Why do people wear ridiculously expensive watches that tell time worse than an iPhone? Why do people eat Michelin starred cuisine? There are numerous examples along this line of rhetorical questioning.
Are such cars fun to drive at sedate speeds? No, not really. But there are opportunities to exercise them, albeit briefly, where I live (I am back and forth a lot between Atlanta and my rural hometown in the mountains). I do prize feedback highly, and that’s because I want a car that’s fun and engaging even at sane speeds.
Can you get to the limit on a public road? Probably only if you transgress the limit by a significant margin, so that would be a brief experience.
Can you drop a well-driven performance car of more modest ability on a backroad? In my experience, yes absolutely. I have done a lot of back road drives with friends in cars of similar ability (and some far slower). I don’t do it as often now, but when it happens I am usually the “rabbit” in front of the pack because I tend to drive quickly (nowhere near as fast as JB, however), I usually know the roads / devise the route (I know every road of note in North Georgia and most in nearby portions of Tennessee and North Carolina well), and I don’t particularly want to deal with rocks hitting the front of my GT3 at high speed if someone else drops a wheel. When we were more serious about it we used radios because I would frequently put a substantial gap on the others.
I wasn't actually asking why people buy these car, because I know it and it's for exactly the reasons you state. Especially with Ferrari, I'm quite sure that most of the owners don't have either the skills or ambition to drive them anywhere NEAR their limits.
As for the rest, I'm not sure whether we understood each other. What I was talking about was real road-testing of a sports, which means being almost constantly at least near the limit.
When you say that you could drop others easily, you also mention that you "tend to drive fast", while being nowhere near Jack in that respect. That seems to suggest that you dropped them just because you're a faster driver.
But let's say that I have the current Audi RS3 and I will as fast as possible, or, more likely, as fast as I dare (and as fast as possible in order not to feel like a total psycho). That means there will be triple-digit moments even on really tight and twisty B-roads, and that the G-meter will go over 1 in every direction it measures. Tighter turns will probably near-enough limit that even the RS3 will start to go sideways a tiny bit, switchbacks might be noticeably sideways.
Is here a way that an Artura with similarly capable and dedicated driver will get away from me? If so, how? Faster out of turns? Faster acceleration on straights? Able to keep more speed into the corners where you can see far enough that you are not limited by visibility even with the RS3? Later braking points?
My feeling is even with a car vastly more capable than the RS3 which I'm using as an example, you are still limited by the same things, which is, mostly, how far ahead you can see and how fast are you willing to go on the public road. Sure, there will be points where you could go around the corner at 130mph with the Artura and at 110 with the RS3. But in reality, you will probably go 80 in both cases, because you don't see far ahead enough.
Even my brief experience with 911 Turbo S and a bit longer with Taycan Turbo suggests that those cars are too out of the realm of real-world possibilities to be a bit pointless.
I wasn’t sure if your question about owner motivations was rhetorical or not; we are in agreement.
One thing I implied but failed to clarify fully about my back road pace is familiarity with the road. I can’t speak for experiences with strangers, but while driving with friends, we are usually on routes that I select (and have been driving since I was a teenager). Obviously this confers an enormous advantage with respect to potential pace. It’s also helpful given I know where the “problem” turns, trail crossings (the Appalachian trail crosses most of the top shelf driving roads in North Georgia), and cop hideouts are.
Jack is probably in the 99%+ percentile of back road drivers in terms of pace.
I have great admiration for Ron Dennis’s achievements, and I love reading about his peculiarities: Washing the gravel on his driveway, no partial tiles at the MTC, etc.
Provided I purchased a McLaren, the vanity plate (7 characters in GA) would probably be: “RON SPK”
That's not my understanding of how the automotive supplier tiers work, having worked for DuPont, which operated as a Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 supplier. The tier ranking has to do with the supply chain, not quality. Tier 1 suppliers work directly with OEMs, often providing subassemblies. Tier 2 suppliers provide Tier 1 suppliers. Tier 3 suppliers supply Tier 2 suppliers, often with raw materials. Let's say the subassembly is a power window mechanism. The Tier 2 supplier might provide the brackets, motor or electronic control module. The Tier 3 supplier might be the company supplying the chips for the electronics, or steel for the brackets. In the case of DuPont, as a paint supplier selling directly to OEMs, it was Tier 1. It also sold coatings and polymers to Tier 1 companies, making it a Tier 2 supplier, and a lot of polymers were also sold to Tier 2 suppliers, making it a Tier 3 supplier.
Ronnie - appreciate the comment. I have heard the same as you in the past, and in my excitement to confirm hypotheses and learn a few bits off the record intel, I failed to clarify / ask further. I should’ve done so, and I’m red-faced about potentially leaving stones unturned in a ~7,600 word article.
My understanding is from my time at JLR is that Tier 1 is your big ticket systems (think Bosch, Siemens, Johnson Controls, Lear). Tier 2 is the smaller stuff (Borbet, Hella). And so on. My experience with this is somewhat limited though.
That's how Honda thinks of it BUT I have also heard the phrase use with regards to firms like DEPO and whatnot so I let it stand for publication.
On the direct OEM business, Ronnie's position is the "correct" one. Tiers are related to their position in the supply chain, and definitely not on size, capability or quality. For example, BASF (world's largest chemical company) might be a tier3 to someone that buys raw materials from them to supply components to Bosch who then sells it to the OEM. Also, the idea of a supplier to OEM in this day and age not being able to handle UV lights degrading plastics is completely unheard of, as both the OEM, the supplier and the raw material supplier know which materials are able to handle what. If the decision was made to protect the headlight under the shadows for cost savings in the usage of a lower spec of materials, that decision was deliberate and any tier1 or 2 supplier worth its salt would expressly deny any liability for warranty on it due to the poor material choice. So I would take this comment with a grain of salt. But I've seen weirder things in the industry.
It’s been a very long time since I read such a comprehensive review on a new car. Harkens back perhaps to Car of the 70s. Though they would likely have been more complimentary due to the McLarens Englishness. Great work.
Thank you! I appreciate the favorable comparison to what was - at the time - THE greatest car magazine in the world, full stop. JB will suggest C&D, of course.
Car and Driver of the 70s and 80s is my all time favourite car mag. Car and Driver had a bit more of a counter culture vibe to it then did Car, of course. I mean this in no way negatively, but your writing was a bit more straight laced then what Car and Driver would have produced, while not as stiff as Autocar or Motor. Which is why I thought you’d fit in great at Car back then.
You have no idea how much I’ve missed reviews that aren’t saddled with the need to conform to a preset length. William Jeanes shortened the road tests to their current length, when he took over Car and Driver, and it stuck. Something special was lost with that.
Keep at it! I hope to read many more.
Given you interest in Car magazine from its halcyon days, I recommend a subscription to www.the-intercooler.com; Mel Nichols is a contributor, and the other writers are top notch. Obviously you are willing to pay for top automotive writing.
Thanks, Sherman.
Great find. I’d almost given up any hope of finding another good car magazine.
To reiterate, I recommend:
The Intercooler, which is online / app only and carries a modest monthly subscription price. Andrew Frankel and Dan Prosser are the co-founders, and many of the contributors are big names (e.g., Ian Callum writing about car design; Karun Chandhok writing about F1). The co-founders host a weekly Podcast, as well.
The Road Rat, which is print only, and isn’t sold on newsstands. You have to order from their website, but you can subscribe or order individual issues. Emphasis on long form articles, design features, beautiful photography / layouts, etc. Financial backing from Guy Berryman of Coldplay.
000 is available for Porsche nerds, and it’s of outrageous quality. It’s expensive ($250 or more a year for 4 issues) and only covers one marque, but it’s an impressive thing.
I tried it out and enjoyed Mel as well as many of the other contributors, but Dan Prosser’s writing is worse than useless in my opinion - he’s either parroting widely accepted views or spewing baseless nonsense, so I can’t give him any credit for any journalistic value.
Hmm … I don’t have a strong opinion on him. Andrew Frankel is the top conventional autowriter in my opinion, but not everyone agrees with me. I put JB in a different category altogether, obviously.
Yeah, Andrew usually has some pretty good takes for a UK journalist. I only add that qualifier because they always seem to have preferential perspectives on UK manufacturers with Andrew's unabashed love for the current Land Rover Defender being a prime example.
I like the longer form stuff too, obviously.
From my perspective William Jeanes was the worst thing to happen to Car and Driver in the 80’s - the only thing I can *maybe* give him props for is some of the writers he brought on board. The articles he wrote read like something from today’s most ass-kissing influencers and his columns were usually placating drivel. It was much better when Csaba took the helm.
Before my time so I can’t opine on Jeanes.
Car was at it’s greatest for me from the late eighties until probably the mid nineties (whenever they lost Bulgin and then merged with Performance Car). When I first attended evil car design school (Coventry Uni) they had a complete back issue collection in the library. I didn’t leave that place for my first year (I had just moved up from London and was having trouble adjusting; reading those was my happy place).
Adrian,
It is my hazy recollection (it was a long time ago and I was a child) that Performance Car essentially became Evo Magazine; was that not the case? I happen to have the final issue of Performance Car and the inaugural issue of Evo, coincidentally.
There was also a brief re-launch of Performance Car during the late noughties, and among its young team of contributors (not much older than me) was Dan Prosser, who later wrote for Evo and is now Andrew Frankel’s co-founder at The Intercooler.
I don’t know, possibly. I never really got into Evo (can’t really remember why, I think it was too performance orientated for my simple tastes).
At the time the production quality of the magazine - the quality of the photography, the length of the feature articles, the detail related to assessment of performance attributes, etc. - were unavailable elsewhere (at least for me).
The Road Rat (print only) has an emphasis on design, designers, etc. that I enjoy. Suspect it’s on your radar, but give it a try if you haven’t already.
Yeah it is although I haven’t actually picked up a copy yet. This is partly because of my pre-conceptions and inbuilt bias towards anything too ‘curated’ and an ‘experience’. It feels a bit wanky. But I will give it a try (I suspect I’ll be able to pick a copy up from Bicester Heritage).
As it happens, for most of the 1970s I lived in Ann Arbor, where C&D's offices were located on Hogback Rd just east of US-23, and while I subscribed to C&D, I made it a point to buy CAR every month at the bookstore on the corner of South U and Forest. Both magazines were at the top of their games then. C&D respected CAR enough to hire Setright.
I started reading Car (and Evo) in 1998; they were both ~$10 / issue then.
Like all McLaren's it lacks the je ne sais quoi that the italians have. It is too sterile lab designed and tries to get everything right. Flaws are OK and V6's suck.
I’m gonna turn it around on you!
Try as they might, this car has a number of flaws, so it should be teeming with character, right?
I’m not a fan of V-6s either, but I was deeply impressed by the Artura’s engine and motor aka Power Unit. I had high expectations and it surpassed them all; it genuinely sounded good from the cabin, if a bit limp from the outside.
I'm perplexed at the engine choice as well. Aren't 90 degree sixes inherently unbalanced (vs 60 or inline)? Are 300K exotic car buyers really interested in hybrids, at least until they are mandated? It isn't MPG, they are too mainstream to get a gee-whiz rating and I don't expect the target market to need to virtue signal. Back when, paying the guzzler tax was part of the bragging rights.
“thermal event”. Lol.
It’s a 120 degree V-6 in the McLaren (and the Ferrari); 90 degree V-6 in the MC20. Ferrari claims the 120 degree architecture inherently sounds good.
Flaws in all the wrong spots, like I said though, there's a je ne sais quoi with exotics (though not really exotic) cars. Part of this is the engine and partly looks. If the new Corvette had a V8, oh man. You were impressed by the engine, but you don't seem to be charmed. Great write up though, but curious to do a side by side with an Italian, then maybe you can see the difference? Though I think Ferrari's have lost some of their edge....
My preference among the supercar companies is probably Ferrari. I have driven a number of them over the years, but not the latest stuff. Love the F8 - I think it’s one of the best looking mid-engine cars made in this century, and the best looking such offering from Maranello since the 355.
I recall two specific things about the 458 Italia:
Shortly after I bought my 991 GT3 in 2015, I met up with a friend of mine who inherited some SERIOUS cars (e.g., 50s Ferrari that finished second overall at Le Mans, a 275 GTB/4, D Type, etc.) but managed to remain humble, reflective, and far from jaded. He had recently considered a 458 Italia, and had driven several. He drove my GT3 and made it abundantly clear that the GT3 was superior, in his view. I didn’t want to believe him.
Then I drove a 458 Italia on a friend’s bachelor party (Xtreme Xperience facility in NOLA). Everyone who drove it had also driven my car, and we all felt like the Ferrari’s front end gave zero driver feedback. I am told the newer Ferraris are better. I should find out!
On the Lambo front, while I admire their charismatic NA engines, I’m not a fan personally. I rode in another friend’s Huracan Performante a few years ago, but I don’t think it’s the brand for me. I’d probably prefer an Audi R8 instead of a Huracan.
I'm the weird dude who'd get the Lotus over all those tbh, but I recognize my weirdness. Or the Ford GT
My plan had been to purchase an Elise with my first bonus, right out of college.
I went to the dealer to test drive an Elise and an E92 M3. Get in the Elise with the salesman, which took a little while with the top on - not the work of a moment. Dead battery. No problem, he’ll go swap the keys for another one sitting next to the one we were sitting in. Another dead battery. It was at this juncture that I realized that depending on a Lotus Elise to get me to work every day was probably a bad idea.
I loved the M3 and probably would’ve bought it except it was at the top of my budget, and it sold out from under me later the same day, anyway. My third choice was a 993 911. I drove a black one locally in Atlanta with the intention of potentially purchasing a Guards Red example in Dallas. I loved it and bought the black one on a handshake as another potential buyer arrived for his test drive.
A black car in Hotlanta? You is talking loco and I like it.
Amazing effort put into this review. Much enjoyed and appreciated!
+1. This was a fun review, thank you "Sherman."
Thank you! Appreciate you taking time to read it.
SM- you and I are of an age, and based on previous conversations, similar background and worldview. Although perhaps you have made a few better choices (don't drop out of college three hours shy of a degree. (Also don't choose a degree that pays less than retail.)) End double parenthetical. At any rate, all this to say I greatly appreciate the guest appearance, and moreso would love to see you continue writing, it's a far more valuable perspective for me than most of the fakers on the web.
Much appreciated; provided there’s something about which to write, I’ll be happy to contribute assuming Jack’s customers are interested.
Keep something else in mind: I make mistakes every day, and I studied Classics in college.
Really interesting and very detailed review!
Wow, I’d love the incredible depth and detail of this review!
Great article, really enjoyed reading this. One thing I'm confused about, you say the hybrid element is "dilutive" but based on the calculations presented, inclusion of the hybrid element appears to improve the power-to-weight ratio, i.e., fewer pounds per horsepower. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the word "dilutive" in this context.
Now rectified; I appreciate the heads up!
It’s easy to answer you! I made an embarrassing mistake and will fix it.
Exceptional review, I don't think I've seen a more detailed one in a long time!
Save for the Limo... Syme would have a field day with us.
What an excellent and thorough review. Great piece of writing and editing Sherman. Can't wait until the next one.
Thank you! I enjoyed writing it and sharing my observations.
0. (That's where we start lists around here, right?) An excellent and particularly detailed write-up, McCoy! As a fellow review junkie, I loved the addition of the bona fides and biases section and now I'm forced to agree that a similar system needs see widespread adoption.
1. I'm nowhere near playing in this league of vehicles, but, the biggest problem I see with this new breed comes if I imagine suddenly being able to drop $300k on a toy. I just don't see any scenario where I'd give a second thought to any of the three cars heavily featured here. As long as a manual GT3 and an LT6 Z06 are on the market, not to mention used V10 Lambos and the V8 predecessors of this car and the 296, I don't think I could ever go for a boosted V6 hybrid.
I always thought it would be fair to include “credentials,” especially in a test with numerous reviewers. You want to know who has owned 14 Porsches, who has a BMW roundel tattooed on their shoulderblade, who is setting timed laps that are slow or fast or somewhere in between. You want to know who lives and dies for a clutch pedal, who prioritizes straight line, who always loves the new stuff, etc.
You know this if you’ve been reading established names for a long time, but nobody knew my biases; that’s why I shared them.
There are a lot of compromises in that ~$250K+ market - there’s no Goldilocks car. Do you prioritize steering, transmission, NA (or forced induction), cylinder count, sound, weight, construction (CF vs aluminum), badge appeal, dealer network, perceived reliability / depreciation? There’s no obvious winner.
I suppose it depends on what your goal was should you have that kind of money to drop on a toy. It looks fine, but the mid-engine supercar profile has become like an upscale CUV in that they all look similar and you would have to be a bit of a nerd to tell them apart. It's performance is competitive but that hardly matters, nor, assuming you can drop ~$300k on a toy, does the viability of the company. If (the hypothetical) you are trying to flex on your rich neighbors it probably won't get you kicked out of the gated community. All that being said it I would say it is not interesting enough. Exact same car with a straight or flat 8 and no hybrid bullshit would be compelling, not that they care what I think. I'd rather have a convertible of almost any kind or an old Caddy for cruising, and a race car if that's what I wanted to do. I don't understand what the purpose of these cars is (this is also a reply to the last paragraph of the author's reply to you).
Edit-Last sentence was not a critique of the author, just the car. Long form, insanely detailed essays is exactly why I put down real American money to be here.
Glad you enjoyed it!
There are multiple reasons that the junior mid-engine supercars look so similar: aerodynamics in the context of regulations (passenger and otherwise), packaging (that tier of car needs to be daily driver practicable and have some luggage space), etc.
There is more variability at the 7 figure level (Senna, Speedtail, Ferrari SP3 Daytona, Lambo Sian, Bugatti Chiron, AM Valkyrie, GMA T50, etc.)
Fantastic review. Wish I could get an invite to events like this but will settle for a description this vivid and complete. Hope this isn’t your last guest post.
I’d be delighted to write again (and on other topics) as long as I have something meaningful to share and can create something I’m proud of.
As for the event, I have suspicions about how I ended up on McLaren’s list, but it’s a black box. I genuinely appreciated it, and I would be far more predisposed to patronize the brand after the experience … which is why it’s worthwhile for them to host such events.
Interestingly, it was a very relaxed, low-key arrangement. I was in the car less than 5 minutes after arrival, and my passenger was refreshingly candid; it helped that we have a few mutual friends. For context, I have done Porsche events that were far more pretentious regarding a comparatively prosaic car.
33 huh? It is the magic number.
I'm always down for a De La Soul reference.
I’d love to go in reverse.
I have never driven anything of the caliber of the trio this article is focused on, so I'm wondering – is it even still possible to really test this stuff on public roads? And is there any point of even using them there?
Of the fast cars I've driven in the past 12 months or so (LC500 Bespoke Build, RS3 sedan, RS6, Continental GTC V8, M440i, Macan S and both slow and fast Taycans, with honorable mention to 911 Turbo S that I've only driven with an "instructor" in front of me), the M440i, Macan S, the slowest Taycan and maybe the RS3 seemed to be probably the threshold of what a sane person is able to really use on the road.
Much like Jack years ago, I grew up believing in truthfulness of what motoring journos write and tried quite hard to emulate it (like many of my countrymen – it seems that us in the CEE region are a bit crazier than the Western guys), so I consider it my duty to try and drive the cars really fast.
Even the M440i, driven at 8 or 9/10ths is probably too fast for you to admit what you've been doing publicly. It WILL get you into the triple digits, and way above, on the backroads. It will mean that you are going probably triple the speed an ordinary driver is going on said backroad, even in turns.
The RS6? Did two runs of the backroads with it. The first one recorded more than 1.0 g in every direction, including 1.33 g for the right-hand turn. The second one was in what I considered a more leisurely pace, but the numbers were not that different.
And that's a fucking family wagon, which weighs about the same as mid-70s Cadillac Talisman, is only slightly narrower and has "only" 600 hp. That car is absolutely too fast in almost any moment and environment, bar maybe acceleration on the highway from more than 120 mph.
In real life, the RS3 is of course much faster on the backroads, because the RS6 doesn't really fit. Yet, with its 400 or so hp, probably 1.7 tonnes and four wheel drive, it's also scarily fast. Maybe TOO fast.
That car is fast to the point that on a twisty road, I can't imagine the Ferrari 296 or Artura or the MC20 or probably ANYTHING getting away from me – and I'm not that skilled, nor the most courageous. But the courage, or lack of self-preservation, is only thing that can make you faster at this point.
Hell, it's hard to imagine that said Ferrari will really get that far away from a well-driven Hyundai i30N Performance, or something of that caliber.
And in all cases, we're talking about driving style that would get you in jail in the US, result in your car being impounded in France and would cost me my license immediately in Czech (luckily, there are no speed traps and no police on the backroads).
Driven at any socially acceptable pace, the most interesting experience most of these cars can offer you is the (more or less artificial) sound, the ambience of the interior and maybe the looks of the bystanders. Also, you can't really hear that sound, because keeping your foot down for long enough for something interesting to start happening is putting you WAY above legal limit.
I'm not saying everyone should drive a Miata because all that "slow car fast" thing, but, well, the gas cars I've driven are overkill, not to mention the Taycan Turbo S, which is probably somewhere on par with 911 Turbo S pace-wise, and it's just... out of this world. From what I've experience, the 911 Turbo S is similar in the way that you can't even really tell it's rear-engined anymore, because you WILL NOT get anywhere near enough to its limits.
I see the point of an Evora, or Alpine A110, or even of the GT3, if you track it. But what's the point of road-driven, even "junior" supercars? So you can go fast as a maniac with less effort?
Genuine question. Press Ferraris and McLarens, even fast 911s, are almost non-existent here, so it's hard for me to tell what leads people to drop insane amount of cash on them.
I see the point of GTs like the LC500 (which is, by the way, gloriously good) or even of the Conti GTC, which is, in many ways, quite shit, but it's HUGE and ostentatious and, frankly, more fun to drive slow than fast.
But what's the point of driving Ferrari or a McLaren anything other than as fast as you can?
Lots to unpack here (and I won’t be able to respond to all of the excellent questions you pose).
Why do people buy these cars? Personal image enhancement, self-actualization, the fulfillment of childhood dreams, etc. There’s also the allure of trying something new, something “better.” Why do people wear ridiculously expensive watches that tell time worse than an iPhone? Why do people eat Michelin starred cuisine? There are numerous examples along this line of rhetorical questioning.
Are such cars fun to drive at sedate speeds? No, not really. But there are opportunities to exercise them, albeit briefly, where I live (I am back and forth a lot between Atlanta and my rural hometown in the mountains). I do prize feedback highly, and that’s because I want a car that’s fun and engaging even at sane speeds.
Can you get to the limit on a public road? Probably only if you transgress the limit by a significant margin, so that would be a brief experience.
Can you drop a well-driven performance car of more modest ability on a backroad? In my experience, yes absolutely. I have done a lot of back road drives with friends in cars of similar ability (and some far slower). I don’t do it as often now, but when it happens I am usually the “rabbit” in front of the pack because I tend to drive quickly (nowhere near as fast as JB, however), I usually know the roads / devise the route (I know every road of note in North Georgia and most in nearby portions of Tennessee and North Carolina well), and I don’t particularly want to deal with rocks hitting the front of my GT3 at high speed if someone else drops a wheel. When we were more serious about it we used radios because I would frequently put a substantial gap on the others.
I wasn't actually asking why people buy these car, because I know it and it's for exactly the reasons you state. Especially with Ferrari, I'm quite sure that most of the owners don't have either the skills or ambition to drive them anywhere NEAR their limits.
As for the rest, I'm not sure whether we understood each other. What I was talking about was real road-testing of a sports, which means being almost constantly at least near the limit.
When you say that you could drop others easily, you also mention that you "tend to drive fast", while being nowhere near Jack in that respect. That seems to suggest that you dropped them just because you're a faster driver.
But let's say that I have the current Audi RS3 and I will as fast as possible, or, more likely, as fast as I dare (and as fast as possible in order not to feel like a total psycho). That means there will be triple-digit moments even on really tight and twisty B-roads, and that the G-meter will go over 1 in every direction it measures. Tighter turns will probably near-enough limit that even the RS3 will start to go sideways a tiny bit, switchbacks might be noticeably sideways.
Is here a way that an Artura with similarly capable and dedicated driver will get away from me? If so, how? Faster out of turns? Faster acceleration on straights? Able to keep more speed into the corners where you can see far enough that you are not limited by visibility even with the RS3? Later braking points?
My feeling is even with a car vastly more capable than the RS3 which I'm using as an example, you are still limited by the same things, which is, mostly, how far ahead you can see and how fast are you willing to go on the public road. Sure, there will be points where you could go around the corner at 130mph with the Artura and at 110 with the RS3. But in reality, you will probably go 80 in both cases, because you don't see far ahead enough.
Even my brief experience with 911 Turbo S and a bit longer with Taycan Turbo suggests that those cars are too out of the realm of real-world possibilities to be a bit pointless.
I wasn’t sure if your question about owner motivations was rhetorical or not; we are in agreement.
One thing I implied but failed to clarify fully about my back road pace is familiarity with the road. I can’t speak for experiences with strangers, but while driving with friends, we are usually on routes that I select (and have been driving since I was a teenager). Obviously this confers an enormous advantage with respect to potential pace. It’s also helpful given I know where the “problem” turns, trail crossings (the Appalachian trail crosses most of the top shelf driving roads in North Georgia), and cop hideouts are.
Jack is probably in the 99%+ percentile of back road drivers in terms of pace.
I will happily read any car review you choose to write. I enjoyed this thoroughly.
I also would like an English to Ronspeak dictionary so I can make my emails even more inscrutable.
Thank you for reading.
I have great admiration for Ron Dennis’s achievements, and I love reading about his peculiarities: Washing the gravel on his driveway, no partial tiles at the MTC, etc.
Provided I purchased a McLaren, the vanity plate (7 characters in GA) would probably be: “RON SPK”