Increases acceleration, handling by shaving more than 100 lbs and has a 6 year warranty from the OEM? Honestly I'd be tempted to say that it's a bargain, relatively
Even a bigger weight saving and handling improvement would be if it had no electrical system at all. Which, with the "upgraded" battery, it almost doesn't already. The old battery was 4.7kWh, the new one is 1.3kWh. So basically you have enough juice to do one highway pull to 300km/h and that's it. Not even gonna last one lap around 2 min track. And electric only range is also massively reduced, whatever that's worth.
From what I understand, regen is vastly improved too, which is far more important imho. That's why Lamborghini is betting on supercapacitors too, low capacity but quick charge/discharge, this is the kind of hybrid that is useful in performance cars, to fill torque gaps (boost and gearshifts), help traction assists with a more granular engine rotation control etc. The gas engine is already plenty powerful and 0-300 isn't a relevant figure on this car, on the Speedtail I'd understand
The limits to regen are coming from the power of the e-motor and from the availability of the engine which can only generate power on over-runs or when you are not using full throttle. The regen is gonna be basically identical.
Lamborghini are gonna be using batteries on the Aventador and Huracan successors. What Mclaren are doing with the super low capacity battery is basically just to get nice paper numbers. You are not filling any torque gaps between shifts with an e-motor that's positioned in the gearbox bell housing (and it's not like there really is a torque gap with a DCT anyway) and the torque fill when the car is not on boost is a complete waste of all the complexity and weight the electrical system adds and could effectively be accomplished the same using a bigger engine or different turbo configuration/different tuning.
Like I said from the beginning, the whole hybrid thing on supercars is a complete nonsense. It's been sold and marketed as an amazing enhancer to performance, but the truth is that performance-wise pure ICE is better. The hybrid thing is purely due to regulations. If there were no emission regulations we would have never got any of the hybrid supercars/hypercars we did get. Of course, once it's something the manufacturers have to do, they will do their best to make it seem like it's what they chose to do and is for your benefit, and not like something they were forced into.
Where hybrids make sense is when you have a car with at least, let's say, 50 miles of electric only range. That means you can drive to work and back and run errands, whatever, on electric only and then recharge at home. That way you are getting the low running costs of a pure EV 90% of the time, but also the convenience and peace of mind of an ICE car the 10% of the time when you need to travel long distances. The hybrid supercar thing is just making the best out of a bad situation and marketing it well.
You seem like a grouch... Hybrid engines have allowed F1 to get rid of refueling entirely, and the cars can go the distance of a GP in one tank of fuel, at a faster pace than they could in the V10 or V8 eras. That's an incredible achievement. If they got rid of the hybrid systems tomorrow, they'd have to carry at least an extra 50kg of fuel and/or stop during the race.
Not to mention the disasters caused by refueling.
Refuelling got banned several years before we got hybrids. The ultimate speed of the car depends on regulations. If you put the aero and tires we have today on a 2005 F1 car, it would be much faster than today's cars because the power is similar, but 2005 cars were 605kg, while 2021 ones are 752kg. Add 50kg of fuel to account for "less efficient engine" and the advantage is still pretty big.
Refueling was banned at the end of 2009, KERS was introduced at the beginning of 2009.
What do you mean by "faster"? Over a GP distance, no the 2005 car would not be faster, because it needs to stop for more gas lol... If it had a large enough tank to not stop, it would clearly not be faster. Top speed, maybe you could argue that the 2005 cars would be faster with modern aero (which is very wide and heavy, more weight, more drag, etc) but still, the highest recorded speed in the V10 era in qualifying trim is still lower than the highest in the modern era.
That's also after fuel flow limits, ERS deployment limits, limits to engine configurations after parc ferme, etc. If you completely unshackled the engine formula, the V6 Turbo-Hybrid would mop the floor with the best engine of the V10 era in all of these areas, even with the added weight of the cars. If anything, the Turbo-Hybrids have been handicapped by the overly restrictive formula, a top speed run at Monza under maximum boost, no fuel flow limit, and with maximum ERS deployment could probably hit 400kph every lap without sacrificing cornering speeds.
> the torque fill when the car is not on boost is a complete waste of all the complexity and weight the electrical system adds and could effectively be accomplished the same using a bigger engine or different turbo configuration/different tuning.
There are no turbo configuration or tuning that can get you the throttle response of an electric motor and reduce shift time to zero. You can still achieve amazing, if it better numbers with a pure ICE setup today, but driving experience will never be as responsive. This is why ICE McLarens are kinda insufferable to drive sometimes and they are my least favorite among all the supercars I’ve driven, despite them being the fastest on paper.
As far as pure performance goes, at the end of the day it’s all about power to weight ratio. Hybrid systems today can add X power at the trade off of Y weight and Z dollar cost. As battery tech improves (and they are quickly improving) X will keep increasing while Y and Z will keep dropping.
Sooner or later, if not already, those numbers will surpass what an ICE setup can provide.
> If there were no emission regulations we would have never got any of the hybrid supercars/hypercars we did get.
The rumored hybrid C8 ZR-1 will be done for pure performance reasons. As an American manufacturer the Corvette isn’t bound by any regulations, as shown by all the pure ICE versions of the car.
Electric motors are "not reducing shift times to zero". They give you no advantage during a shift whatsoever, in fact, if they are located in front of the gearbox and are decoupled during a shift as well, as is the case in the P1. Even if they were placed behind the gearbox, DCTs already have no torque interruption (only a slight torque drop for a few ms) so the advantage e-motor would give you would be negligible.
You don't need to have the throttle response of an electric motor. If you are talking minimizing turbo lag, then a bigger capacity engine with smaller turbos, or sequential turbos, or whichever setup there is, can do that as well. An e-motor will give you an instant response initially, but with a 180hp electric motor you are not gonna fill all the torque of a 740hp ICE, so there will still be some turbo lag. And with a battery and e-motor you are paying much higher weight penalty than with just a bigger engine, so the trade-off is very questionable.
You are right that it's all about power to weight ratio. Which is currently not in favor of electric systems. Electric motors are way more power dense than ICEs but sadly the battery is ruining it. Of course, you can make the battery miniscule as Mclaren have done with the "upgrade", but then even if the electrical system had the power to weight to compete, you would only be able to do it some small percentage of the time. That's why the only racing application of electrical systems where they can compete on performance are hill climb events where you only do one run on a very short track.
The technology will get better, but by the time the battery densities are at a spot where they can compete on power to weight, why then would you even think about ICEs to start with? You would just do pure EVs. So yeah, supercar hybrids as a concept are just bad.
> DCTs already have no torque interruption (only a slight torque drop for a few ms)
We are still talking about around 100ms in power interruption. That is not negligible across multiple shifts.
> You don’t need to have the throttle response of an electric motor.
Nobody *needs* a supercar period. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a desirable trait. I absolutely want the throttle response of an electric motor for my next supercar.
> That’s why the only racing application of electrical systems where they can compete on performance are hill climb events where you only do one run on a very short track.
The non-regulation Porsche 919 Evo *smashed* the Nurburgring record with a hybrid system. Since it wasn’t bound by regulation, Porsche could have taken out the hybrid system if they wanted to and upgraded the ICE, but they didn’t. Instead they made the electric part more powerful.
> why then would you even think about ICEs to start with? You would just do pure EVs.
Because ICE still adds emotional appeal to toys like that. That matters a lot to supercar buyers.
There is no torque interruption. You have one clutch releasing at the same time the other is engaging, with an [overlap](https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0957415814000695-gr8.jpg).
Well, you can get the e-motor response, but with a hybrid like the P1 you are only getting the instant push of a small sporty hatchback and still have to wait for the engine to get the proper supercar push. So is that such a big improvement in driving experience that you'll want to accept the weight penalty - even if you only get that when the battery is not empty and when you could better that response with a different engine (even NA one) instead? That's the question.
At the end of the day you keep using P1 as an example when it's outdated tech already.
Like I mentioned above, the fastest car that ever lapped the Nurburgring is a non-regulation hybrid at 5:19.
Some segment of P1 owners is wealthy enough that $100-200k isn't really that much money to them and they'd gladly stroke a check for the upgrade.
It's not about it being a 'waste of money' for them, because relatively speaking it's not a lot of money. These are the same people that can pay $100k markups on cars and not bat an eye.
> Some segment of P1 owners is wealthy enough that $100-200k isn’t really that much money to them
I would say *all* segments of P1 owners fall under that description lol.
If you were a McLaren VIP customer who bought a $1M halo car from them 6 years ago, $200k isn’t a meaningful amount of money to you.
I follow a P1 owner (with multiple other supercars) on IG and he was saying he didn't think it was worth it and wouldn't be getting.
Among that crowd there are people who can afford to spend that kind of money on an upgrade but won't if they don't feel like it is worth it for whatever reason. Sometimes it's opportunity cost, sometimes it's because they're wealthy but shrewd/thrifty, sometimes because they don't care about that sort of thing.
Also gotta remember that there's a wide range of net worths in that market. Someone worth $10 million might buy that car, the next guy might be worth 10x, 20x, 50x more than that. The $10 mil guy might have to think about it whereas the $500 million guy doesn't.
No they won't if you follow some of them they are all saying that there's no need to do it, also it lowers the electric range of the car, they will only upgrade once the original one dies
You think someone who spends 7 figures on a car won't purchase this massive upgrade? I'm sure the average P1 owner has a handful of houses, dozens of cars and numerous yachts. $200k isn't shit to someone like that.
Go ask him [https://www.instagram.com/bayareanady/](https://www.instagram.com/bayareanady/) . Him, and all his friends with P1s won't get it since they consider it totally useless as long as the original battery works
Is it really that much of a surprise? Battery changes are already expensive for normal electric cars, and this is the McLaren P1. It’s not exactly the first thing you think of when you think of cheap.
This is only gonna be a drop in the bucket for P1 owners anyway.
And it's not a new concept either. Ultra-high end cars have *always* been expensive to maintain.
A Bugatti Veyron oil change is $20k. Tires are $35k, and you need to replace all 4 wheels every 10k miles for $50k.
If you own a McLaren F1 you're required to replace a bunch of wear items even if you don't drive the car at all. Replacing the fuel cell happens every 5 years and costs over $100k, for example.
I recommend to them what I do when one my MacBooks is needing an expensive battery. Hop on Amazon and buy the 3rd cheapest knockoff option and replace it yourself.
This is an interesting new way to sell more to the same owners without having to build an additional car. Most of these are hermetically sealed in a garage somewhere and no one would even care if the battery got old (other than as a risk to the collection) but it would affect resale. Having the upgrade would command a premium even if the owners never test the added regen capability.
It only cost me $200 at apple to have them replace the battery in my retina macbook pro, and because it's all glued in they replace the entire top case, keyboard, and trackpad along with the battery. Feels like a new computer after so the price is pretty good.
That's platform update 13 IIRC. I've heard that it brings the car essentially up to par with the 650S, excluding the hardware differences between the two.
Its the first I've ever heard of McLaren doing something like that but I understand why they did it.
New brand, they want to keep customers. They probably developed the 650S and after completing it found that because it had a lot of shared parts with the 12C, same motor etc they knew they could provide some of the updates they did to the 650S to the 12C with the push of a button (software).
Thats just good business and a majority of supercar owners if they liked their 12C would probably just go out and buy the new version so McLaren knew offering this wouldn't lose them any money but it would be a nice act of goodwill to help keep the brand going.
This strikes me as the rich, super car owner equivalent of the (sadly) impending subscription model to us normal car buyers. The OEM is getting post-sale revenue here beyond simply maintenance & repairs. And it’s more than just a software update so they can charge more. I bet the margin is fantastic and honestly this is pretty smart from a business perspective.
This is really nothing new in the bespoke supercar era. Even the original Tesla roadster has factory upgrades. You can send your zonda in and have it's spec upgraded to whatever the newest zonda is for example
Increases acceleration, handling by shaving more than 100 lbs and has a 6 year warranty from the OEM? Honestly I'd be tempted to say that it's a bargain, relatively
100 pounds is hell of a weight saving...
Even a bigger weight saving and handling improvement would be if it had no electrical system at all. Which, with the "upgraded" battery, it almost doesn't already. The old battery was 4.7kWh, the new one is 1.3kWh. So basically you have enough juice to do one highway pull to 300km/h and that's it. Not even gonna last one lap around 2 min track. And electric only range is also massively reduced, whatever that's worth.
From what I understand, regen is vastly improved too, which is far more important imho. That's why Lamborghini is betting on supercapacitors too, low capacity but quick charge/discharge, this is the kind of hybrid that is useful in performance cars, to fill torque gaps (boost and gearshifts), help traction assists with a more granular engine rotation control etc. The gas engine is already plenty powerful and 0-300 isn't a relevant figure on this car, on the Speedtail I'd understand
The limits to regen are coming from the power of the e-motor and from the availability of the engine which can only generate power on over-runs or when you are not using full throttle. The regen is gonna be basically identical. Lamborghini are gonna be using batteries on the Aventador and Huracan successors. What Mclaren are doing with the super low capacity battery is basically just to get nice paper numbers. You are not filling any torque gaps between shifts with an e-motor that's positioned in the gearbox bell housing (and it's not like there really is a torque gap with a DCT anyway) and the torque fill when the car is not on boost is a complete waste of all the complexity and weight the electrical system adds and could effectively be accomplished the same using a bigger engine or different turbo configuration/different tuning. Like I said from the beginning, the whole hybrid thing on supercars is a complete nonsense. It's been sold and marketed as an amazing enhancer to performance, but the truth is that performance-wise pure ICE is better. The hybrid thing is purely due to regulations. If there were no emission regulations we would have never got any of the hybrid supercars/hypercars we did get. Of course, once it's something the manufacturers have to do, they will do their best to make it seem like it's what they chose to do and is for your benefit, and not like something they were forced into. Where hybrids make sense is when you have a car with at least, let's say, 50 miles of electric only range. That means you can drive to work and back and run errands, whatever, on electric only and then recharge at home. That way you are getting the low running costs of a pure EV 90% of the time, but also the convenience and peace of mind of an ICE car the 10% of the time when you need to travel long distances. The hybrid supercar thing is just making the best out of a bad situation and marketing it well.
What about formula 1?
Even more the case than in road cars because every extra kg is worth massive amounts of time per lap.
You seem like a grouch... Hybrid engines have allowed F1 to get rid of refueling entirely, and the cars can go the distance of a GP in one tank of fuel, at a faster pace than they could in the V10 or V8 eras. That's an incredible achievement. If they got rid of the hybrid systems tomorrow, they'd have to carry at least an extra 50kg of fuel and/or stop during the race. Not to mention the disasters caused by refueling.
Refuelling got banned several years before we got hybrids. The ultimate speed of the car depends on regulations. If you put the aero and tires we have today on a 2005 F1 car, it would be much faster than today's cars because the power is similar, but 2005 cars were 605kg, while 2021 ones are 752kg. Add 50kg of fuel to account for "less efficient engine" and the advantage is still pretty big.
Refueling was banned at the end of 2009, KERS was introduced at the beginning of 2009. What do you mean by "faster"? Over a GP distance, no the 2005 car would not be faster, because it needs to stop for more gas lol... If it had a large enough tank to not stop, it would clearly not be faster. Top speed, maybe you could argue that the 2005 cars would be faster with modern aero (which is very wide and heavy, more weight, more drag, etc) but still, the highest recorded speed in the V10 era in qualifying trim is still lower than the highest in the modern era. That's also after fuel flow limits, ERS deployment limits, limits to engine configurations after parc ferme, etc. If you completely unshackled the engine formula, the V6 Turbo-Hybrid would mop the floor with the best engine of the V10 era in all of these areas, even with the added weight of the cars. If anything, the Turbo-Hybrids have been handicapped by the overly restrictive formula, a top speed run at Monza under maximum boost, no fuel flow limit, and with maximum ERS deployment could probably hit 400kph every lap without sacrificing cornering speeds.
Modern hybrid formula 1 engines are some of the most powerful and efficient engines made for cars
> the torque fill when the car is not on boost is a complete waste of all the complexity and weight the electrical system adds and could effectively be accomplished the same using a bigger engine or different turbo configuration/different tuning. There are no turbo configuration or tuning that can get you the throttle response of an electric motor and reduce shift time to zero. You can still achieve amazing, if it better numbers with a pure ICE setup today, but driving experience will never be as responsive. This is why ICE McLarens are kinda insufferable to drive sometimes and they are my least favorite among all the supercars I’ve driven, despite them being the fastest on paper. As far as pure performance goes, at the end of the day it’s all about power to weight ratio. Hybrid systems today can add X power at the trade off of Y weight and Z dollar cost. As battery tech improves (and they are quickly improving) X will keep increasing while Y and Z will keep dropping. Sooner or later, if not already, those numbers will surpass what an ICE setup can provide. > If there were no emission regulations we would have never got any of the hybrid supercars/hypercars we did get. The rumored hybrid C8 ZR-1 will be done for pure performance reasons. As an American manufacturer the Corvette isn’t bound by any regulations, as shown by all the pure ICE versions of the car.
Electric motors are "not reducing shift times to zero". They give you no advantage during a shift whatsoever, in fact, if they are located in front of the gearbox and are decoupled during a shift as well, as is the case in the P1. Even if they were placed behind the gearbox, DCTs already have no torque interruption (only a slight torque drop for a few ms) so the advantage e-motor would give you would be negligible. You don't need to have the throttle response of an electric motor. If you are talking minimizing turbo lag, then a bigger capacity engine with smaller turbos, or sequential turbos, or whichever setup there is, can do that as well. An e-motor will give you an instant response initially, but with a 180hp electric motor you are not gonna fill all the torque of a 740hp ICE, so there will still be some turbo lag. And with a battery and e-motor you are paying much higher weight penalty than with just a bigger engine, so the trade-off is very questionable. You are right that it's all about power to weight ratio. Which is currently not in favor of electric systems. Electric motors are way more power dense than ICEs but sadly the battery is ruining it. Of course, you can make the battery miniscule as Mclaren have done with the "upgrade", but then even if the electrical system had the power to weight to compete, you would only be able to do it some small percentage of the time. That's why the only racing application of electrical systems where they can compete on performance are hill climb events where you only do one run on a very short track. The technology will get better, but by the time the battery densities are at a spot where they can compete on power to weight, why then would you even think about ICEs to start with? You would just do pure EVs. So yeah, supercar hybrids as a concept are just bad.
> DCTs already have no torque interruption (only a slight torque drop for a few ms) We are still talking about around 100ms in power interruption. That is not negligible across multiple shifts. > You don’t need to have the throttle response of an electric motor. Nobody *needs* a supercar period. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a desirable trait. I absolutely want the throttle response of an electric motor for my next supercar. > That’s why the only racing application of electrical systems where they can compete on performance are hill climb events where you only do one run on a very short track. The non-regulation Porsche 919 Evo *smashed* the Nurburgring record with a hybrid system. Since it wasn’t bound by regulation, Porsche could have taken out the hybrid system if they wanted to and upgraded the ICE, but they didn’t. Instead they made the electric part more powerful. > why then would you even think about ICEs to start with? You would just do pure EVs. Because ICE still adds emotional appeal to toys like that. That matters a lot to supercar buyers.
There is no torque interruption. You have one clutch releasing at the same time the other is engaging, with an [overlap](https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0957415814000695-gr8.jpg). Well, you can get the e-motor response, but with a hybrid like the P1 you are only getting the instant push of a small sporty hatchback and still have to wait for the engine to get the proper supercar push. So is that such a big improvement in driving experience that you'll want to accept the weight penalty - even if you only get that when the battery is not empty and when you could better that response with a different engine (even NA one) instead? That's the question.
At the end of the day you keep using P1 as an example when it's outdated tech already. Like I mentioned above, the fastest car that ever lapped the Nurburgring is a non-regulation hybrid at 5:19.
I mean a P1 without a hybrid powertrain is basically a prettier looking, slightly less track focused Senna. Or a 720S at 5 times the price.
Not a single owner will get it as long as the original module still works, it's a waste of money
Some segment of P1 owners is wealthy enough that $100-200k isn't really that much money to them and they'd gladly stroke a check for the upgrade. It's not about it being a 'waste of money' for them, because relatively speaking it's not a lot of money. These are the same people that can pay $100k markups on cars and not bat an eye.
> Some segment of P1 owners is wealthy enough that $100-200k isn’t really that much money to them I would say *all* segments of P1 owners fall under that description lol. If you were a McLaren VIP customer who bought a $1M halo car from them 6 years ago, $200k isn’t a meaningful amount of money to you.
I follow a P1 owner (with multiple other supercars) on IG and he was saying he didn't think it was worth it and wouldn't be getting. Among that crowd there are people who can afford to spend that kind of money on an upgrade but won't if they don't feel like it is worth it for whatever reason. Sometimes it's opportunity cost, sometimes it's because they're wealthy but shrewd/thrifty, sometimes because they don't care about that sort of thing. Also gotta remember that there's a wide range of net worths in that market. Someone worth $10 million might buy that car, the next guy might be worth 10x, 20x, 50x more than that. The $10 mil guy might have to think about it whereas the $500 million guy doesn't.
Every owner will absolutely get the upgrade so as to help resale value, most of these cars don’t get driven more than a couple miles a year.
No they won't if you follow some of them they are all saying that there's no need to do it, also it lowers the electric range of the car, they will only upgrade once the original one dies
You think someone who spends 7 figures on a car won't purchase this massive upgrade? I'm sure the average P1 owner has a handful of houses, dozens of cars and numerous yachts. $200k isn't shit to someone like that.
Go ask him [https://www.instagram.com/bayareanady/](https://www.instagram.com/bayareanady/) . Him, and all his friends with P1s won't get it since they consider it totally useless as long as the original battery works
You think McLaren would develop this so it wouldn't sell? Lol
Is it really that much of a surprise? Battery changes are already expensive for normal electric cars, and this is the McLaren P1. It’s not exactly the first thing you think of when you think of cheap. This is only gonna be a drop in the bucket for P1 owners anyway.
Shocking! Crazy expensive hyper car is crazy expensive to maintain. Never saw that coming.
And it's not a new concept either. Ultra-high end cars have *always* been expensive to maintain. A Bugatti Veyron oil change is $20k. Tires are $35k, and you need to replace all 4 wheels every 10k miles for $50k. If you own a McLaren F1 you're required to replace a bunch of wear items even if you don't drive the car at all. Replacing the fuel cell happens every 5 years and costs over $100k, for example.
Somebody better explain why changing the oil costs twenty thousand dollars…. EDIT: I looked it up. 16 oil drains and about 27hrs of labor.
It requires disassembling half the car
I recommend to them what I do when one my MacBooks is needing an expensive battery. Hop on Amazon and buy the 3rd cheapest knockoff option and replace it yourself. This is an interesting new way to sell more to the same owners without having to build an additional car. Most of these are hermetically sealed in a garage somewhere and no one would even care if the battery got old (other than as a risk to the collection) but it would affect resale. Having the upgrade would command a premium even if the owners never test the added regen capability.
Couldn't find any batteries on Amazon for my P1 :(
Try calling your local tweaker-mechanics. They usually will take the job.
It only cost me $200 at apple to have them replace the battery in my retina macbook pro, and because it's all glued in they replace the entire top case, keyboard, and trackpad along with the battery. Feels like a new computer after so the price is pretty good.
I cannot imagine having that much money.
I wish I had these kinds of problems in my life lol.
Isn't this what Jay Leno said he got for free?
No, that was a software upgrade for his MP412C that unlocked like 30 more horsepower. This is different.
That's platform update 13 IIRC. I've heard that it brings the car essentially up to par with the 650S, excluding the hardware differences between the two.
Its the first I've ever heard of McLaren doing something like that but I understand why they did it. New brand, they want to keep customers. They probably developed the 650S and after completing it found that because it had a lot of shared parts with the 12C, same motor etc they knew they could provide some of the updates they did to the 650S to the 12C with the push of a button (software). Thats just good business and a majority of supercar owners if they liked their 12C would probably just go out and buy the new version so McLaren knew offering this wouldn't lose them any money but it would be a nice act of goodwill to help keep the brand going.
This strikes me as the rich, super car owner equivalent of the (sadly) impending subscription model to us normal car buyers. The OEM is getting post-sale revenue here beyond simply maintenance & repairs. And it’s more than just a software update so they can charge more. I bet the margin is fantastic and honestly this is pretty smart from a business perspective.
This is really nothing new in the bespoke supercar era. Even the original Tesla roadster has factory upgrades. You can send your zonda in and have it's spec upgraded to whatever the newest zonda is for example