Turbo Twin versus Mclaren Mp4-12c

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

That computer simulation and analysis has been used in modeling vehicle dynamics and strength and reliability for parts in the automotive industry for at least 35 years, and we're using material properties and methods that have existed for 70+ years.

Pointing to a single tool and saying 'that's the reason' is like saying the president is responsible for the laws that are passed. There are many more socioeconomic factors that have driven us to where we are today along with a multitude of technological advancements.

After all, as someone put it, we got a man on the moon with a slide rule and a casio calculator. The computer is not some super-tool that has elevated us beyond our forefathers, all it does is speed up the rate of trivial tasks, i.e. don't read this message for a week and I'll wait to read your response for a week.


You're not wrong, newer cars are built to tighter tolerances and slimmer margins because we can do so successfully. But if people didn't want cheaper cars, didn't want to treat their cars as disposable appliances to be traded in every 3-5 years we'd still be buying overbuilt cars like the 60's-80's Germans and 80's-90's Japanese and lusting over cars that stretched reliability to the limit like 60's-90's Ferrari's and Lamborghini's.

True, but don't act like computer power 35 years ago is even within the same solar system as my iPhone 6 today, lol. I didn't think I had to spell it out.

To your last point - most people I know prefer to hold onto their cars for a long time, and not trade-in/up every 3-5.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

True, but don't act like computer power 35 years ago is even within the same solar system as my iPhone 6 today, lol. I didn't think I had to spell it out.

To your last point - most people I know prefer to hold onto their cars for a long time, and not trade-in/up every 3-5.

Computer power has improved, the mathematical formulas used to calculate the results have not.

I know people who haven't had a car older than 3 years in decades. Anecdotal evidence ftw.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

To your last point - most people I know prefer to hold onto their cars for a long time, and not trade-in/up every 3-5.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I know people who haven't had a car older than 3 years in decades. Anecdotal evidence ftw.

"For the full year of 2013 the age of the average trade-in was 6.5 years, a 1.6-percent increase over 2012. In 2012, the increase was 3.2 percent. The implications for the U.S. auto industry are enormous if the trading cycle between new cars gets longer and stays longer" http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhenry...auto-industry/
The current average age of the total cars on the road is 12 years old.

Through the 50s right up to the mid 70s the average trade in age was fairly steady at 3.5 to 4 years and the average age of the total cars on the road was 7.5 years. The myth that the older cars were made better, lasted longer and people kept them for ages is just not accurate. Total redesigns at 2 or 3 year intervals were not unusual because they knew that people would actually be willing to trade up. Modern cars do last much longer and as a result both the trade in period and average age have climbed.

Personally, being one of the tag end of the Baby Boomers I am still firmly rooted in the whole trade in in 4 years mentality and probably will remain so.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Personally, being one of the tag end of the Baby Boomers am still firmly rooted in the whole trade in in 4 years mentality and probably will remain so.

My parents are late Boomers, I think the shortest they've had a car is 8 years to this day and they've only bought one used car in my lifetime.

That may change as my mother has bought a new Volvo and my father a new Mini, they may not have any choice but to sell within five.

Just so you know, last year of Baby Boomers is 1964, if I remember correctly you're not the tail end of that generation by a longshot.


Edit: To the point, look how many FR-S are for sale now already being dumped just three years into production. It's cool to know the average is increasing, we might see a shift back towards emphasizing longevity especially if auto manufacturers sincerely wish to target the young debt riddled generation who don't see the point in upgrading a car every two years like they do a cell phone but at 10x-20x the cost with little to no benefit.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

My parents are late Boomers, I think the shortest they've had a car is 8 years to this day and they've only bought one used car in my lifetime.

That may change as my mother has bought a new Volvo and my father a new Mini, they may not have any choice but to sell within five.

Just so you know, last year of Baby Boomers is 1964, if I remember correctly you're not the tail end of that generation by a longshot.

Yep that is why the numbers are an average. For everyone like your parents holding on for 8 years there are the ones that changed every 2 (or even 1 as my father in law did believe it or not).

Baby boomers are from 1946 to 1964 so being born in 59 puts me at the tail end.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

"For the full year of 2013 the age of the average trade-in was 6.5 years, a 1.6-percent increase over 2012. In 2012, the increase was 3.2 percent. The implications for the U.S. auto industry are enormous if the trading cycle between new cars gets longer and stays longer" http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhenry...auto-industry/
The current average age of the total cars on the road is 12 years old.

Through the 50s right up to the mid 70s the average trade in age was fairly steady at 3.5 to 4 years and the average age of the total cars on the road was 7.5 years. The myth that the older cars were made better, lasted longer and people kept them for ages is just not accurate. Total redesigns at 2 or 3 year intervals were not unusual because they knew that people would actually be willing to trade up. Modern cars do last much longer and as a result both the trade in period and average age have climbed.

Personally, being one of the tag end of the Baby Boomers I am still firmly rooted in the whole trade in in 4 years mentality and probably will remain so.

I wasn't talking about 60s or 70s. 80s and 90s. Its no myth. In many instances engines/transmissions were built to higher standards in the recent past. And one can argue those cars will be more trouble free longer, for the simple fact they are less complicated - less to go wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hanabie]

if I have the option, I'd pick McLaren anyday anytime. Even if the McLaren drives like a turtle.

[SamGam]

Originally Posted by Pkush

Not to hate on the twin but the guy driving the Twin is a pro - I don't think the reviewer has the same kind of skills.

I'd rather see the pro behind the wheel of mclaren in front and the reviewer in GT86 keeping up. If that happened - I'd be all over this vid.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by SamGam

Been discussed before, reviewer is ex pro, read up


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk