McLaren set to unveil a successor to the "F1" in 2012

McLaren will launch a follow-up to its iconic F1 hypercar in 2012, more than two years earlier than originally planned.

http://cdn.images.autocar.co.uk/612x408FFFFFF/Car/McLaren/McLaren-77101012288691600x1060.jpg

A successor to the F1 had been expected later in the decade as McLaren instead focused its efforts on setting up a new car company from scratch, developing and marketing the MP4-12C and establishing a dealer network to sell its models through.

McLaren insiders have told Autocar, however, the firm is working flat-out on a new F1, a car described as a “revolutionary” hypercar and one which will be instantly recognisable as such. This is in contrast to the MP4-12C, which has been criticised for its unadventurous styling.

The new F1 is the subject of an intensive development programme said to be among the speediest the industry has yet seen.

The new F1 will be mid-engined and will feature a carbonfibre monocoque similar in concept to the MP4-12C’s. Despite its creators’ radical approach, it will still bear some similarities to the original F1. These, however, are largely coincidental and it is not yet clear whether the car will feature the same central driving seat as its predecessor.

As with the MP4-12C and the original 1992 F1, major emphasis has been placed on saving weight; the new F1 is expected to pioneer many new solutions in this field.

It will also feature novel wheel and lighting designs, both contributing much to its distinctive look. There’s no word yet on the car’s powertrain, but it is expected to break new ground, possibly with some low emission solutions. Standard-setting suspension is also a certainty.

The F1 successor will be the second of McLaren’s trio of new models – the third is thought to slot beneath the £150,000 MP4 12C. The planned price of the F1 successor is unknown, but it’s likely to be substantially more than the 12C. But rather than a limited edition, as the F1 was, it is expected be a regular series model.

New McLaren F1 in 2012 - Autocar.co.uk (http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/251063/)



Let's hope they work on that design - A LOT! :uhoh:

>8^)
ER

^^^^ That looks just horrendous! Like a SAAB, Citroen and a Koenigsegg mixed and put together with cheap glue. Not a true successor to the classy and timeless F1. :shakehead

^^^^ That looks just horrendous! Like a SAAB, Citroen and a Koenigsegg mixed and put together with cheap glue. Not a true successor to the classy and timeless F1. :shakehead I think I've seen that picture before and it's just an artist rendetion done by a magazine. A "guess" as to what it may look like. I don't believe it's in any way official.

Let's hope they work on that design - A LOT! :uhoh:

>8^)
ER

Don't worry, the car will have better look. That's the same situation as with the F1. MP4-12C plays a cash "collector", but the big one will be really good.

As someone else once said - That gives us a pretty good idea what it won't look like then.

rest assured the true form of the F1 replacement will be closely guarded until very near the release date unless they need to drum up customer interest.

It's very exciting to think that Mclaren would have a successor to the F1 but good heavens, if it looks like that picture, I don't think I can grasp where Mclaren is heading and if they do not incorporate a central driving position, then forget it. I LOVE the central position. I remember JJ Lehto talking about how the F1 GTR was as close to a true F1 track car because of its central seating position, but with a body around it. Also, I would not focus on these these top speed wars like this silly Bugatti and Ultimate Aero. Neither are anything like what the Mclaren was intended to be. Honestly, I don't believe Mclaren can top the original car, not to mention the incredible success of the 1995 Le mans race. The whole story and history of the original car hasn't even been touched or topped by any car company IMO. I don't want to sound harsh, but also with regard to the new MP4, it's so big and wide looking and reminds me of a Mazda or something. The original car is like magic. Gordon and his team did the most amazing job on the original car. Of all the cars on the planet, the LM, GTR, and F1 roadcar are simply intoxicating to look at. Tiff Needell said that the LM was the most exciting supercar in the world ever. Steve Sutcliffe from autocar said the exact same thing. He stated that not even the Veyron was anything like the F1 experience, Nothing! How can they top that? Also, I really think it's a huge mistake to make a large number of cars. If a new car is to succeed, it should be a very limited number like the original F1. Thank you for sharing Peloton.

Analyze the budget of VW an McLaren. VW is an elefant, McLaren is a fly. What will happen if the fly kick the elefant - nothing. Veyron is the most avanced automotive product today, F1 is a simple bench made of expensive "wood". The only reason why F1 has such collectors value is a number of units available. 962 will put down any F1 to suck the dust behind. Ultimate Aero is american truck with huge blower and soap box body. Have you ever seen anything interesting coming from that side of the "ball"?

Peterst,
Would you consider the 962 a practical roadcar with enough clearance to be practical on the road? Also I think you are leaving out the fact that the 962 was designed as a track car, where the F1 was not, yet Mclaren still won at Lemans. Mclaren had a bigger mountain to tackle using a road car and what about the fact that the F1 is normally aspirated? With regard to the Ultimate Aero, I think it's an ugly, wide nightmare, with turbos attached for high speed and no heart and I don't like American cars even though I'm an American. Isn't the 962 a turbo charged racecar?

There were road 962s. Of course, the story of conversion went quite opposite to F1s. You're absolutely right, they were twin-turbos. The overall practicality of all sports cars is relative. It always look like to put pants through a head. It's only a matter if you're ready to do it everyday or not.

What about this? The article is here: http://www.carsuk.net/new-mclaren-f1-rendered/

I read Gordon Murray's comments in the latest EVO edition and he was quite adamant that the new F1 will have a central seating position. I'm no expert on cars but if it were me, I would not at all be concerned about these silly top speed wars, but more so a great package of a car that is small, extremely light weight with excellent handling and make sure it's hella quick. A true one of a kind and I would follow the past and limit the production to only 100 cars or so just like the F1 before it.

Gordon's F1 successor and McLaren's F1 successor are not one in the same.

Gordon left McLaren Automotive in the beginning of 2005 when development of the SLR was complete. Since then he has started his own design firm working on projects like his T25 city car and a yet to be revealed supercar that was mentioned in EVO. It's a very safe bet that he won't be involved with any of McLaren's future projects - a shame for both parties I think.

>8^)
ER

I read Gordon Murray's comments in the latest EVO edition and he was quite adamant that the new F1 will have a central seating position. I'm no expert on cars but if it were me, I would not at all be concerned about these silly top speed wars, but more so a great package of a car that is small, extremely light weight with excellent handling and make sure it's hella quick. A true one of a kind and I would follow the past and limit the production to only 100 cars or so just like the F1 before it.

Sorry, mate, I don't know if you're in the industry or not. 100 units production will crash down any manufacturer, unless you simply want to throw the cash away. It happend to F1 accidentally and caused by the recession. Of course, they wanted to sell as many F1s as possible (350 planned:))). Recall the situation when McLarens invited Derek Waeland to low the product cost by USD140,000.00 and to avoid mass cash losses on 100 units production.

Understood sir but wouldn't the profits from the other two cars make up for losses of only 100 cars being made in your opinion? I guess 350 isn't so bad. There's the MP4, the new F1 and one other that will be last in the batch.

We haven't seen any sales yet. There are almost 1500 people who are interested in 12C. It doesn't mean all of them will buy it. It's absolutely new company, based on the new people and principles. For those who buy brand name it doesn't matter, for me it really does. We will see if the Phoenix will revive from ashes.

Sorry, mate, I don't know if you're in the industry or not. 100 units production will crash down any manufacturer, unless you simply want to throw the cash away. It happend to F1 accidentally and caused by the recession. Of course, they wanted to sell as many F1s as possible (350 planned:))). Recall the situation when McLarens invited Derek Waeland to low the product cost by USD140,000.00 and to avoid mass cash losses on 100 units production.
Carrying on Dr.D's point, there are going to be many elements to the calculation of whether a production run of 100 cars is "worth it".
Dennis has always claimed that, even with only 100 cars made, and fewer than that sold, the project "washed its own face". One presumes that he is throwing into his conclusion the intangible value to the McLaren Group of a Le Mans win, holding the title of "world's fastest road car" for longer than anyone else has done, and the halo effect of having made an icon, plus the fillip to the new McLaren Automotive endeavour. The old car will help sell the new cars.
Obviously, another critical part of that calculation would be the selling price of the 100 cars. Then we have the question of how much additional fixed cost would be required to build the 100-unit model? How much of what would be developed for the 100-unit model could subsequently be used in a 20,000-unit model?

It's all academic, in that, at the price that's been mooted (a bit less than Veyron money), there is no way that they would be looking to sell only 100 cars.

Well, Aston Martin is trying to do the mathematics with only 77 cars! ;)

Well, Aston Martin is trying to do the mathematics with only 77 cars! ;)
That's a good example.
That car has the same underlying engine as the DB9, and the same gearbox.
At that, they're priced at roughly 50% above projected P12 money.

Aston was never profitable:)))

Carrying on Dr.D's point, there are going to be many elements to the calculation of whether a production run of 100 cars is "worth it".
Dennis has always claimed that, even with only 100 cars made, and fewer than that sold, the project "washed its own face". One presumes that he is throwing into his conclusion the intangible value to the McLaren Group of a Le Mans win, holding the title of "world's fastest road car" for longer than anyone else has done, and the halo effect of having made an icon, plus the fillip to the new McLaren Automotive endeavour. The old car will help sell the new cars.
Obviously, another critical part of that calculation would be the selling price of the 100 cars. Then we have the question of how much additional fixed cost would be required to build the 100-unit model? How much of what would be developed for the 100-unit model could subsequently be used in a 20,000-unit model?

It's all academic, in that, at the price that's been mooted (a bit less than Veyron money), there is no way that they would be looking to sell only 100 cars.

Dennis knows only where to pick up his salary. He didn't know that million bucks car had borrowed Bova coach tail lamps, Lotus indicators....:)))

Dennis knows only where to pick up his salary. He didn't know that million bucks car had borrowed Bova coach tail lamps, Lotus indicators....:)))
I think you will find that Ron Dennis has an immense amount of technical knowledge about cars and racing. His career started as an 18 year-old mechanic on Jochen Rindt's Cooper, in 1966, and he has been at the sharp end ever since.

There are many talented mechanics, but very few really talented car designers. Dennis knows where the spark goes to, and how to tighten the nuts. All mechanics start their carrers early - right after school. Almost everybody could be mechanic and driver. But it doesn't mean that everybody will design engine, chassis, gearbox from the scratch. That's exactly what he never did in his life.

There are many talented mechanics, but very few really talented car designers. Dennis knows where the spark goes to, and how to tighten the nuts. All mechanics start their carrers early - right after school. Almost everybody could be mechanic and driver. But it doesn't mean that everybody will design engine, chassis, gearbox from the scratch. That's exactly what he never did in his life.
Sorry, but I'm a bit lost here.
You had written that "Ron knows only where to pick up his salary".
It was not clear whether that comment came out of jealousy, bad taste or ignorance, but I tried simply to correct it.

You point is what: that Ron Dennis is not a car designer?

Some people are lucky in life, some are not.

Some people find their vocation in life, where others do not.

What Ron Dennis has managed to do in his career, from starting out as "just a mechanic" as our friend tortoise has pointed out. To the position he is in today, is immense. This monumental achivement cannot be taken away from him, only there has been a few black marks in recent years with his Formula One wrong doings. But hey, Ron is only human like the rest of us.

The one thing I admire him for most.(including the other shareholders) is allowing a very talented engineer, Gordon Murray to design and build the worlds finest motor car to date :- The McLaren F1 :)

Sorry, but I'm a bit lost here.
You had written that "Ron knows only where to pick up his salary".
It was not clear whether that comment came out of jealousy, bad taste or ignorance, but I tried simply to correct it.

You point is what: that Ron Dennis is not a car designer?

Mate, we all know who he is. It has nothing to do with jealousy:))) I meant that he himself would had never fixed that problems: nor technical, neither financial.

About bad taste and ignorance:))).....
Scandal hastens Ron Dennis's departure

Ron Dennis can deny it all he wants, but there is little doubt that his decisive split from Formula One now – a sport he has lived and breathed for over 40 years – is directly related to the scandal that erupted in the wake of last month's Australian Grand Prix.(Telegraph).
There's no smoke without fire:)))
Do you know that Bova coach tail lights of F1 hasn't been certified for sports cars? Who was resposible for the project? I'm leading you to the point: Are you ready to buy 250 mph car full of compromise. I'm not sure about your positive answer:))) F1 was full of compromise. Yes, it was interesting as everything sinful. Today, it wouldn't be possible to put on the market the same raw product. That's why don't expect wow effect of it's successor. We have Zonda, today, but do you really care about it? 12C doesn't look and go better than Ascari KZ1. Think of F1s successor as of something like Zonda. I would love to be mistaken:)))

Hope not like this:)))

By the way, original Veyron 16-4 SS has reached the average 431,072 kph officially. And that's only because of the tyres:))) Recall what happened to Tiff Needel in 1999 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcsiDrybTDA&feature=related

Mate, we all know who he is. It has nothing to do with jealousy:))) I meant that he himself would had never fixed that problems: nor technical, neither financial.

About bad taste and ignorance:))).....
Scandal hastens Ron Dennis's departure

Ron Dennis can deny it all he wants, but there is little doubt that his decisive split from Formula One now – a sport he has lived and breathed for over 40 years – is directly related to the scandal that erupted in the wake of last month's Australian Grand Prix.(Telegraph).
There's no smoke without fire:)))
Do you know that Bova coach tail lights of F1 hasn't been certified for sports cars? Who was resposible for the project? I'm leading you to the point: Are you ready to buy 250 mph car full of compromise. I'm not sure about your positive answer:))) F1 was full of compromise. Yes, it was interesting as everything sinful. Today, it wouldn't be possible to put on the market the same raw product. That's why don't expect wow effect of it's successor. We have Zonda, today, but do you really care about it? 12C doesn't look and go better than Ascari KZ1. Think of F1s successor as of something like Zonda. I would love to be mistaken:)))
I must confess that I am still struggling to see what your point is.

To say that Ron Dennis "would never have fixed a certain (unspecified) technical problem" might be correct, but neither would Gordon Murray, John Barnard, Adrian Newey, or Ross Brawn, for that matter. This is an age of specialisation, in which the top guy for crankshafts may not have met even the top guy for connecting rods, forget about anything to do with brakes or electronics.
As for the idea that he would never have fixed an unspecified financial problem, that may also be true, but because you've not described that supposed problem, it is difficult to know. There are some financial problems that Warren Buffett cannot "solve", although money-wise he seems to be doing okay for himself.
Suffice to say that Ron Dennis has been a fairly successful businessman, perhaps more successful than even yourself?

Wrt your allusion to a "scandal", feel free to trust the judgment and motives of Max Mosley if you like. I had thought that, by now, most people had seen through him.

Do you know that Bova coach tail lights of F1 hasn't been certified for sports cars?

I,m extremely intrigued by this statement,

Please enlighten me further with your knowledge about the above comment, Thankyou.

It was written in the article "We never told Ron about the indicators!":)))

I must confess that I am still struggling to see what your point is.

To say that Ron Dennis "would never have fixed a certain (unspecified) technical problem" might be correct, but neither would Gordon Murray, John Barnard, Adrian Newey, or Ross Brawn, for that matter. This is an age of specialisation, in which the top guy for crankshafts may not have met even the top guy for connecting rods, forget about anything to do with brakes or electronics.
As for the idea that he would never have fixed an unspecified financial problem, that may also be true, but because you've not described that supposed problem, it is difficult to know. There are some financial problems that Warren Buffett cannot "solve", although money-wise he seems to be doing okay for himself.
Suffice to say that Ron Dennis has been a fairly successful businessman, perhaps more successful than even yourself?

Wrt your allusion to a "scandal", feel free to trust the judgment and motives of Max Mosley if you like. I had thought that, by now, most people had seen through him.

Relax, mate, no need to struggle here:))) I feel you're web-lawer of Dennis:))) He should definitely pay for this. My point is quite simple - I have doubts about the success of New McLaren as a company, and as a product. Where is the british car industry today, who are its owners? Why everybody failed, and this one will be successful? And the market is done with other serious players. Just think of 10,000 Gallardo units already sold.
In other words: try to play football with Spain today if you're british or american(nothing personal). As a businessman I see this game as the new attempt to suck shareholders' money out, and to put it into some certain pocket no matter what result will be. And I really don't care about Dennis, Buffet, Mosley etc. For God's sake, we are doing well separately:)))That's my own opinion only.

It was written in the article "We never told Ron about the indicators!":)))

I think that you are at cross purposes here, the rear lights have "type approval certification" to be used on road vehicles ranging from tractors to sports cars. If you thnk they are not approved for sports cars :nono:, go tell Lamborghini that.

Peter Stevens states in his article, that they never told Ron that the front indicators are Lotus bits. There,s lots of bits on the F1 from other cars, but this does not detract from the vehicle as a whole.

I think that you are at cross purposes here, the rear lights have "type approval certification" to be used on road vehicles ranging from tractors to sports cars. If you thnk they are not approved for sports cars :nono:, go tell Lamborghini that.

Peter Stevens states in his article, that they never told Ron that the front indicators are Lotus bits. There,s lots of bits on the F1 from other cars, but this does not detract from the vehicle as a whole.

Imagine yourself in my shoes:)))

Imagine yourself in my shoes:)))

So you too, have a car made from bits from other models :), very nice.

That's what I say, mate. It suppose to be british, but global in reality. Even blower is japanese:))) And all "british" stuff I have is "made in Germany", or even India:)))

Relax, mate, no need to struggle here:))) I feel you're web-lawer of Dennis:))) He should definitely pay for this. My point is quite simple - I have doubts about the success of New McLaren as a company, and as a product. Where is the british car industry today, who are its owners? Why everybody failed, and this one will be successful? And the market is done with other serious players. Just think of 10,000 Gallardo units already sold.
In other words: try to play football with Spain today if you're british or american(nothing personal). As a businessman I see this game as the new attempt to suck shareholders' money out, and to put it into some certain pocket no matter what result will be. And I really don't care about Dennis, Buffet, Mosley etc. For God's sake, we are doing well separately:)))That's my own opinion only.
It's one thing to say that Spain today have the best soccer team in the world. It's another to say that they will always have the best team in the world. Didn't they used to say that about Brazil, or was it Germany? No, it must have been Italy.
About 1.5m cars are produced in the UK each year. How you would rate that does not matter. It clearly is a respectable level of production. It's a fact that there are no major global car-makers that are British. That was a consequence of 35 years of socialist governments after WW2, not because the British cannot figure out how to build a motor car.
At the same time, Britain is, and indeed has been continuously for the last 50 years, the dominant country in Formula One.
Therefore if the problem (in your mind) is that Britain does not produce enough Priuses and Passats, perhaps that can be compensated for by its production of MP4-25s, RB6s and FW32s?

It is very challenging for any new player to enter the road car business and succeed. It's also very challenging for any new player to enter Formula One and succeed. In the 30 years since Ron Dennis took control of McLaren, they have won 18 Formula One Championships - more than any other team. As a team principal he also has made more money for himself than anyone else has done.
With that kind of sporting and financial record, Ron Dennis is the last guy one ought to bet against.

Oh man, I'm tired of the internet.

OK as a design engineer and builder of cars here is the bottom lone any car no matter how purist the intention has compromises yes even the lotus 7 and arial atom, even GM's Rocket still has compromises. Most of them are born out of the need to meet roadworthiness requirements, the bigest compronmise is to accomodate a driver in the extreme case. The point is the best of them have fewer compromises than the majority or even the minority in the case of extreme back to basics cases.