It's still funny that People don't call the new Supra a real Supra because it uses a BMW engine and BMW Chassis, but nobody calls the McLaren F1 a "BMW" despite it using a BMW Engine and even some other smaller Parts. I guess BMW isn't bad after all if it comes to the F1. Nevermind Gordon Murray still praising BMW to this Day (including some new Models) Prost & Cheers from Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps
Honestly the bus taillights look a hell of a lot better than any of the other taillights from that era. The whole circle taillight thing may have started as a cost-saving measure, but it's iconic and beautiful in its simplicity.
Particularly the XJR-15 taillights which they show in the video, which look they're from a Vauxhall Somethingotother and are awful. The bus taillights are great and may have been quite lightweight compared to other OEM options.
Doug is also the type of guy that would completely lose it if someone else rested their biscotti on his Carrera GT, regardless wether it had a napkin/paper towel under it.
Besides the lightness and engineering perfectionism, the top speed record, and winning Le Mans, what really put the car in a completely different league was the way it was designed to be somewhat practical and enjoyable to drive (even at low speeds) -- the central driving position and mirrors with outstanding all-around visibility, the space for luggage, the fact your legs were't offset to the middle like other mid-engine supercars of the era.
Let's be honest, a quarter of this car's legend status was forged with Clarkson's "What you are about to see, is the difference between a really really fast car.... and a McLaren F1" played a few million times. Everything I built this car up to in my head (and probably a lot of similarly aged car UA-camrs) came from Top Gear.
Rowan Atkinson is legendary for daily driving his McLaren F1 simply because he liked driving it. He also wrecked it twice and reluctantly sold it because it had gotten too valuable to keep driving. It might be the highest mileage F1.
@@natesmith8020 just speaking for myself, I didn't even start watching Top Gear until the 2000's. I worshiped the car from the get-go because of the central driving position (I had dreamed of a 1+2 sports car for years before that) and the top speed blowing away the previous record. Back in the mid-90's I actually told a friend of mine whose dad had just sold his stake in a telecommunications startup for $10+ million that he should buy a F1 "as an investment -- I don't think you're going to see anything with that level of engineering-as-art come along again for a very long time, and the speed record may never be broken." The latter assertion was of course disproved by the Veyron (although the F1 is STILL the fastest naturally-aspirated car), but the former certainly proved correct.
@@nerva- I agree 100%, even wilder is the F1 - wasn't even purpose built to be the fastest car... it simply became the fastest due to its engineering - wasn't even purpose built to be a race car... and yet it won le mans I think that's what makes it legnendary, you have to think, to become the best when it wasn't even your focus, while all other manufactures purpose built to make it the fastest, to make it the most competitive race car etc etc... the car that dethroned the F1 was the Veyron... and guess what? before the first pencil was drawn, they already set out to make it the world fastest car in terms of top speed, that was the purpose, but not the F1.... That's why I think the F1 sits at the top by itself, nothing like it before, and nothing will even become like it after....
i work with a few of the designers who helped design the f1 and some of the stories you hear are amazing. the truly did not care about records during deign. they just wanted to build the best and most practical super car possible with the technology available at the time. The funniest thing is they arnt even happy with the final product. they say with more time they could have ironed out more flaws with the car. but the chase of perfection is never finished and eventually you have to ship the cars haha. but for me the floors within a car is what gives it personality. My susuki swift doesn't have Bluetooth so i have to use a cigarette lighter Bluetooth device that emits radio frequencies. it works well but if i dont play music somehow pics up coil whine from my engine which changes pitch as i accelerate. its a very weird qwerk which is almost unique to my car but that what makes me feel a connection with my car rather then it being a lump of steel. People that look at an F1 or a vayron and pick out floor or niggle and say this is poor design work have probably never worked in automotive engineering. Designers are aware of these issue but sometimes you just have to accept that something is the way it is in order to deliver. so i value those qwerks because i like to think about the time spent acknowledging the issue and i like the fact that some designer is out there frustrated about that part and that i understand their struggle
the race between the F1 and a Veyron they did on top gear a long time ago was really cool. wicked how fast it is and was winning until the veyron's hp advantage kicked in
It's the ultimate expression of an analog car. The fact that a road car spawned a Le Man winning racecar derivative, that it used off the shelf taillights, that it used a road car derived motor all just contribute to and enhance its mythology. Even that one crashed during very high speed testing and the driver walked away from it just furthers its legend.
There are several supercars using bus tail-lights such as the Lamborghini Diablo, Saleen S7, and Pagani Zonda. In fact, these cars are worse since their tail-lights are from tractors.
Exactly. The F1 actually had 3 different door mirrors. The first handful had mirror from the Citroen CX, the rest had VW Corrado mirrors and the few who had the high mounted mirror option were from a BMW Z1.
It had 3 types of mirrors. 1. Citroën mirrors (on prototyps and early production cars) 2. Corrado mirrors on later cars 3. Bmw Z1 mirrors, only 3 F1 has them.
There was also the German banker who commuted from Frankfurt to Bonn everyday on the Autobahn at 200+ mph and the car needed servicing every month so the dedicated F1 mechanic flew out from the factory in Woking to do it. See Autocar write-up.
Thomas Bscher is that man. He was not just a 'banker' but also a gentleman race car driver. He actually convinced McLaren to take the F1 racing and himself drove the McLaren F1 GTR in the BPR GT championship in 1995.
@@Andynath100 I remember the story of how Thomas Bscher persuaded Ron Dennis to do the race version. Basically, he pestered and pestered until Ron basically caved in and said "As it's you, Thomas, yes, we'll do it". However, Ron Dennis is a sharp cookie, and went on to say, "Of course, you'll need one for the road too". Which is how Bscher ended up with a road going one too, and used it for commuting. Apparently, the time he saved on his commute paid for the car! Paid off for McLaren too - the legendary win at Le Mans wouldn't have happened otherwise, and it meant that when they more recently said they were going to make road cars it certainly made everyone sit up and pay close, close attention.
@@hassyg4083 it’s about a 115 mile commute which he ran at over 200mph for about half of it. Rather like you or I driving to work in 1st gear everyday, we might need a service every month. By the way, I did take my FZR1000R Exup to work like that for one journey, 70mph in 1st at 11000rpm. My ears were bleeding and so was everyone else’s around me!
I believe the 240mph run didn't happen until '97 or '98...so about 4-5 years after the F1 came out, but it was already considered the best ROAD car ever made. The engine might have had similarities with the SOHC V12 found in other BMW's but it wasn't the same. Also MANY small batch supercars use off the shelf taillights...they're taillights, why does it matter, as long as they meet the requirements?
Although the maintenance is tremendously expensive, its not as expensive as many probably think (and especially not as expensive as some video on youtube tries to convince you to think it is…). Yes, bodywork for example is a lot of dough, but just keeping it running and giving it a good car life is way way less $$$ than one would assume. yeah, as pistonburner mentions, insurance is a thing. but, as it loses not that much value if you throw it in a ditch (and economically cant be totaled), there are multiple owners who do liability only and have a separate collection insurance which only covers the parked/stored car.
@@maxheeschter3009 gas tank bladder has to be replaced periodically and is prohibitively expensive. But it’s also worth a lot so the maintenance costs become a wash.
@@maxheeschter3009 it will cost you about 50k a year on average in maintenance without you ever even driving it. Its an incredibly expensive car to own.
Yes but is it 20million unequal is his question. It's value or perceived value has exploded in the last couple of years. Compared to others cars of the similar era it's not even in the same solar system anymore.
@@christianb1707 While true, the fact that this car was created by the same person speaks volumes about how unique it was and still is. I also thought the F1 is kinda overrated but considering for how well it held up except in track performance really shows how good the car is. I think the only car that even comes close to holding up in certain aspects is the Jaguar XJ220. 7:46 at the Nürb even in this day and age is nothing to sneeze at. Especially with 30 year old tires.
While the M70 engine in the E32 750i had 295HP, the S70/2 engine in the F1 made a little more than double that at 627HP. So much was changed on this engine that there are more things different than similar: The original engine was 2 valves per cylinder, and the F1 variant using 4 valves per cylinder meaning a totally new head design. More but not all changes included: Higher compression at 11:1, higher redline at 7,500 rpm, revised cylinder liners with reduced friction, different bore and stroke, new pistons, variable valve timing, two fuel injectors per cylinder (24 total), different intake manifold, different throttle body system consisting of 12 independent throttle bodies, and a tubular header design.
@@Smith1980 No, that was incorrect. They are automotive tail lights. It just so happens that in addition to cars, some companies used them on buses too.
@@pistonburner6448 duly noted. I meant " stock taillights " used on buses. (or at least happens to be used on buses amongst other things) But your correction stands
10:33 It’s my understanding that the S70/2 has more in common with the later S50 (4 valves per cylinder, VVT, ITBs etc) - a lot of the learning from developing the F1 power plant went into that. Paul Rosche’s work was stellar
"Overrated" and "overpriced" are two different things. Everyone thought the Ferrari GTO was crazy priced when itset the record for the most expensive car.
Doug, the engine was built completely from scratch. Gordon himself has confirmed this multiple times. See his interview with Chris Harris, it is at the 51:00 mark.
Sort of, he ordered it from Paul Rosche that worked at BMW at the time, he used the V12 from the 8 series as a starting point, but it was severely modified.
@@MatheusSilva-qm1ftit has nothing in common with the 8 series v12, not even the block, biggest similarities are with the e36 m3 3.2l Euro evo engine, S70/2 is basically two s50b32 engines mated together.
@@Yerrrrrrrrrt Murray is a genius no doubt. But he's also a salesman. Watch his T50 and T33 vids and he is selling HARD. I don't think he lied per se but I do think he leans on his mystique and monetizes it. Not saying he shouldn't just that he's well, a salesman. "From scratch" and "used the same layout" are opposing statements.
I remember reading about the F1 in this subscription thing I got when I was like 10 called ‘Wheels & Wings’. They dubbed it, “The Million Dollar Sports Car”. I fell in love with it immediately. Absolutely gorgeous car with performance to match. It will never not be at the top of my list, no matter how unattainable it is.
The XJR-12 (twelve) won Le Mans in 1990, not the XJR-15. It is a Group C race car, not a GT1 Class car. That is a difference in substance and invalidates that part of the argument.
Lambo Diablo 6.0, Saleen S7 and first Pagani Zonda also had bus tail lights... Also Jaguar XJ220 had Rover 400 tail lights and Countach had tail lights from Alfa Romeo Alfetta.
Carrera GT has the same headlight switch as a Skoda Citigo. I know this, because it's also the same one as in my Cayman and my friend who owns a Citigo won't shut up about it 😂
The price of this car is just a testament to the inequality of the world. Most people became poorer, the ones who grabbed their production improvement became cartoonishly wealthy and if they want an F1, an F1 they shall have.
Absolutely is not overrated! It was the first hypercar, it set a top speed record that stood for over a decade, it won an outright victory at Le Mans in 1995, beating the purpose built prototype cars. Again… it’s definitely not overrated, it’s rightfully considered amongst the greatest cars ever and it deserves every bit of that consideration.
The fact that, almost 30 years it’s still one of the fastest cars out there (not only on top speed), the racing achievements and that sound… how many cars do you know that are still this good?
1. It's 0-60 time is beaten by countless of other cars, and same goes for top speed. 2. The F1 has less racing achievements than most other cars. The various 911s and sports saloon, beat it in most catagories. 3. The sound is good, sure. But it's not that different to any other V12 with the correct exhaust. 4. Miura, Countach, Diablo, Murcialago, Ferrari F40/50, XJ220, EB110, Porsche 959, to name a few.
Yes! It also won the BPR GT drivers championships in '95 and '96 beating the F40LM and the EB110s that Doug mentioned. The series was reformed into the FIA GT for '97 when the CLK GTR and Porsche 911 GT1 caught up and beat the F1. They were hardly designed as road cars first though.
From an engineering, road-going and performance standpoint, the F1 is definitely NOT overrated, but way over priced. I think the overrated concept would only be relevant to it's value as a collector's item.
No - I’ve witnessed the McLaren F1 driving at 235mph and it was awesome. It was supposed to be paired against the XJ220 at MIRA test centres 75 anniversary event in 1997 on the high speed bowl which you stand in the centre of. Jaguar refused to run the XJ together with it such was its prowess.
It's still overrated, it may be glorious but so is every other legendary and overrated supercar, other overrated examples include the Ferrari F40 and the Bugatti Veryon
Somehow I missed out on that school trip. Wouldn't have minded to see and hear that. It's a bit odd to see such a high top speed for that (claimed) peak power. And then it's a 3-seater to boot.
@@NeurodivergentSuperiority I disagree, this was the first money no object version of a no-compromise, pure engineering solution. Practical with more than two seats, room for luggage / golf bats, every effort to solve engineering issues such as heat dissipation, high speed stability and effortless performance instead of straining the limits beyond a durable engineering solution. It was a easy to drive at 30mph as it was to drive at 200, you didn’t need to wear earplugs or get your clothes dirty on the unfinished carbon fibre bodywork or lack of carpets. It was the million Euro car and started the trend for perfectly engineered cars such as the Spyker and Konigseg.
Henry Catchpole relates that the taillights were chosen because TVR had also used them, and therefore they must have been approved for car use. He also said that, nope, TVR hadn't actually got them approved for cars, they just used them...
@@LouisSubearth I'm no expert - just relating what Henry Catchpole said when he reviewed an F1 alongside a P1. A possibility was that they'd been alright on that old Bova bus when the bus had been newly certified, but when TVR / McLaren picked them up years later, perhaps the standards had moved on and they were not approved for new applications. I can certainly imagine that an inspector - getting a good chance to look over a 240mph super car - might not have dwelt on the exact approvals lineage of the tail and indicator lights! I mean, had that been me I'd not have been looking at the taillights at all, and would be telling the manufacturer about the extensive amount of road testing I was about to have to do (months of it!).
Given how much engineering/material science has advanced since 90s, to this day McLaren F1 is the fastest N/A production car on the road. This alone amazes me.
I think the McLaren F1 is amazing, but not quite $20 million amazing. Even Gordon Murray himself has complained about many design flaws and compromises due to budget constraints, which (to my knowledge) he has attempted to correct when developing the T.50.
Kennan's argument: performance, prestige, engineering above all else, lightweight, race winning, limited availability, bespoke parts, driver focused, no assists, record holding, a machine that became greater than the sum of its parts. Doug's argument : Bus tail lights, other cars won Le Mans too, and it is worth too much now because it's so good. I know which side I stand on! Interesting debate though.
Doug should do a peice on how expensive it is to get lights on cars through the homologation process. Then he will see why they borrowed them,didn't design them.
A lot of dumb points. First of all, the engine was bespoke to the car. It shares the bore with the S70 in the 850CSi, but that's about it. It's a DOHC engine (the S70 was SOHC) with different heads, different ignition and injection system, it's dry sumped, it has VANOS, and the block is different as well to accommodate different plumbing and for structural reasons, as in the F1 was used as a semi-stressed member of the chassis. Just to prove the point, the S70 made 375hp, while the S70/2 made 618hp. You are not getting 64% power increase from just a tune, you know. It's true that the Mclaren F1 uses SOME off-the-shelf parts, but it's still BY FAR the most bespoke 90s car, and still more bespoke than most hypercars made today. As for whether the car is overrated or not, I would say it's absolutely not. Arguably, it's still quite underrated. No, seriously. It's not really until you understand the engineering behind it that you can really appreciate how ahead of the time it was. The most obvious giveaway should be that the car weighs 1170kg, making it one of the lightest supercars ever produced. Just to put it into context, the all carbon F50 that Ferrari made as a response (which had a smaller engine with less power) weighed 1400kg. The Jaguar XJ220 was 1490kg. The EB110 was 1600kg. The Diablo was 1650kg. There were no other cars at that time (or ever since, really, until the T.50) that even came close. The Carrera GT is about 1380kg. This is because of the attention to detail, as well as clever packaging that allows the car to be relatively small, as well as innovative engineering, such as CF front crash structure (still aluminium or steel on most supercars even today), semi-structural engine mounting, CF monocoque that extends all the way to the rear suspension pick up points instead of using a sub-frame like on almost all other supercars, as well as having the muffler double as the rear crash structure. The way the F1 was built is still superior to most supercars of today, not to mention comparing it to cars from the 90s. There was also an absurd number of innovations on the car. It was the first (talking production road cars here) all CF car, first ground effect car, first car with active aero, first car to use magnesium wheels, first car to use monoblock calipers, etc, etc. Then there is the performance. Not just top speed, but also acceleration. The Mclaren F1 was absurdly faster than any contemporary supercars. It would take 12 years before a car would come (the Veyron) that would beat it in acceleration. 12 years! And even in 2012, before the Holy Trinity came, apart from the Veyron, there still wasn't anything faster. The Aventador and the MP4-12C that came in 2011 were still slower. In fact, the Mclaren F1 is STILL the fastest accelerating manual car (soon to be beaten by the T.50, though). Again, just to give a bit of context, the 100-200km/h time for the F1 was 5.1s. For the F50 it's 8.3s. XJ220: 8.2s. EB110SS: 8.5s. The Carrera GT: 6.9s. The last thing - and really THE reason why the Mclaren F1 deserves to be called the greatest - is that all this incredible performance was achieved not at the cost of sacrifices in comfort or usability, but despite them, and despite the fact that the Mclaren F1 actually was MUCH BETTER in these things than contemporary rivals. That the car is also incredibly engaging to drive is almost just a cherry on top.
The issue is that there only 106 made, mostly as collection investments, so we don't even know the long term reliability of the BMW S70 V12! Also tire tread technology today is way better than the 90's, just imagine the performance of an F1 with Toyo R888R's or Michelin Cup 2! If we are all honest, yes it is a little bit overated but 240 mph with only 618 HP and a modified rev limiter is a prestigious accomplishment!
2400lbs, central driving position, NA 12 cylinders, manual transmission, beautiful interior and exterior. Not overrated. If I was worth 8 figures I would have one with the high down force kit and would replace the heavy steel brakes with modern carbon..
I, personally, don't think the F1 is overrated. It was one of the first super fast cars of it's day. I saw one, one time, at a car show, and the owner said it's a pain to service. It's still one of the fastest naturally aspirated cars on the planet, so it's going to live on as a huge leap for supercars.
I wish when people talked about the F1’s greatness, they didn’t lean so heavily on the “it won Le Mans” argument. If the car had finished 3rd overall or “7th overall and 1st in class” or 2nd in class, it would not change anything about the actual road car and the merits of that road car. The F1 was the crowning achievement in an era (late 1980’s into mid-1990’s) when manufacturers (starting with Porsche’s 959 and Ferrari’s F40) started building outrageously fast, exciting supercars and engaging in a game of one-upsmanship nudging the top speed record higher and higher. In a world of exciting, awesome cars like the XJ220 and EB110 and Diablo and F40 and 959, McLaren came to the table with a simply beautiful, outrageously expensive, audacious 3-seat speed monster. And the game ended there. The supercar competition changed after the F1 because no one (until Bugatti 10 years later) wanted to play the Top Speed game anymore.
Interesting question! To me it is and will always be a generational thing: To car-people growing up in the 90s the F1 will likely always come out as perfection, since it was the halo car of their youth. I was born in the mid-90s and started getting into specific cars in the early 2000s - so to me, if it had to be a supercar, I‘d take a CGT or Enzo over an F1 any day (money aside ofc).
@@MrTresto And I wouldn’t blame anyone for having that preference. The F1 just played no role at all during my and many others upbringing in the early 2000s so it never struck a cord with me. Again - generational thing.
I agree I Ford GT Porsche Carrara GT Lamborghini Murcilago too and I actually do like some 90s cars for me the king of 90s supercars is the Lamborghini Diablo all of them I feel the eb110 didn't get a chance don't like the xj220 originally it was appropriately rated now it too is overrated vector was overrated all in my opinion though
Nope. I was born in 2006. It's not a generational thing. Both the CGT and the Enzo, specifically the Enzo, are absolute turds. The Enzo was bettered in every way, experience included, by the 2013 Laferrari. The Enzo weighed 1.5 tons, which is quite a lot for a car with nothing in it. Like nothing. The gearbox was the worst piece of junk of all time. Not a manual with the feel and not even a dct. The CGT is also a overweight porsche el camino. The 918 was better in every way, including how it sounded. No one talks about this, but unlike the CGT, which had a fake Lemans v10, the 918 literally had it's V8 picked up from the LMP2 racecar porsche campaigned all over the world, including at lemans.
@@thehumanoid6543 exactly you were born the the late half of the 2000s of course you'd appreciate the 2010s cars you are actually maturing and have the ability to appreciate anything at all your comment is kind of negative I love the 2000s supercars while having respect for older cars and acknowledging they newer cars are better they had better be they are newer technology has advanced also the Enzo is lighter then the Laferrari p1 and 918 3000lbs is light for a car even supercars and hypercars. My thing is you can have your favorite group of supercars while appreciating and respecting the cats that came before and after
Exactly. I always thought it was bizarre that Jeremy Clarkson, a massive nationalist who should automatically love the car, never did too much just because it was expensive.
Awesome shirt Doug, the Shotover Jet is amazing and I’m glad you got to experience that! The Dart River jet is also incredible, in fact one of the greatest outdoor recreational experiences I’ve had
There is a naturally aspirated Honda Civic running 8s in the quarter mile. There's less money into it than a McLaren tire change. I think a clean Civic looks way better than the McLaren
In terms of top speed, it is still the fastest naturally aspirated production car in the world. The 812 comp doesn't even break 220 as standard, it's geared for track. Some (probably not road legal) modified civic is for a serial production car, so doesn't count.
Jay Leno is a big reason why it costs THAT much more than comparable Supercars. If it wasn’t for him not nearly as many people would know what the F1 is.
I disagree. Anyone who was into cars in the 90s and 00s knew about the F1. Jay Leno did little to nothing for the values of the F1. The car was always going to be a savvy investment. Only 62 road going versions, the fastest car in the world, racing pedigree, the ideal combo of lightweight, V12 and manual trans. The car has an aura about it that few things, let alone cars can match. With the world moving away from ICE and analogue cars, the F1 is near the pinnacle. I would fully expect them to be worth $100m in the coming decade or two. I also expect Carrera GTs to go up significantly in value.
@@fast.biking_freddy it actually has very little modern technology in the car but modern technology was used in designing it to make pretty much the same basic recipe much better.
Look for the video on F1 ownership costs. The fuel bladder ages out every 5 years. And to change the tires you need to rent a track, driver and ambulance. Definitely worth a follow up video I think. It’s insane.
I mean Picasso used the same paint and canvas that the other artists at the time did... One of those sold not too long ago for $179 million. Great car design is absolutely a form of art, and this one is about as close to a masterpiece as possible. Plus, your $25m purchase will probably appreciate much faster than most other investments so someone that can afford one of these is honestly just investing in a beautiful work of art that also happens to go 240mph.
13:12 - I've never noticed this before, but the lighting in the press photo of the McLaren F1 at this time stamp almosts casts a near perfect Senna "S" at the bottom of the front door/quarter panel.
I don't think it's overrated in any mean, based on what it was during the 90's it was way ahead of its time, not just with the looks, it looked sporty and the mixed fusion of Koenigsegg and Pagani, cuz it was good with the top speed also with the circuit, imo, the best appealing car even until today.
Several owners have already said that F1 is not so good, that it does not have high-speed installations, is not good at cornering, and only won Le Mans because the BOP at the time destroyed the performance of the competition, but there are several videos of races in which the BOP was more liberal and the F40LM, XJ220S absolutely destroy the F1 GTR and F1 LT ! F1 is just a lot of marketing
The mixed fusion of Koenigsegg and Pagani. I'm sorry how? Koenigsegg's very first CC prototype was in 1994 and Pagani's first car the Zonda debuted in 1999. The McLaren F1 was unveiled in 1992.
I think so. In the 90’s Mercedes bought a F1 and added their V12 and body kit. It got crashed, but it gave Mercedes the information to make there super car the cop gtr. The F1 was reverted back to its stock form and they sold it it auction anonymously.
The F1's legend was definitely helped by its win at Le Mans on its debut. A great car yes. But when other manufacturers caught on there was no contest. CLK GTR/LM>911 GT1>F1
The M70 V12 found on E32 models made 295 horse power and the enhanced Maclaren variant made about 618 horse power, and it was naturally aspirated in 1993. That is extremely impressive in my own opinion.
I think the top speed record is by far the biggest part of this car's appeal and legend, and rightfully so. One of my favorite quotes was from the president of Hennessy, certain automakers can brag that their car is fastest around nurburgring, on a drag strip, around an oval track, but when your car has the top speed record, you can say your car is the fastest, period. No other qualifications. For people that came into cars while this car had the record, it was the ultimate, and to a degree always will be.
The packaging is also so special. Three seats, super compact dimensions, and even a semblance of luggage space in the sides. It needs to also be considered that while these were $1M cars in the 90s, McLaren had nowhere near the resources to develop their own regulation-compliant lights and mirrors, much less a completely proprietary engine compared to even Porsche at the time. Extremely limited production run, plus the obsessive focus on weight savings (including one of the first production car carbon monocoques) meant that performance and function were far greater priorities than developing expensive lights in-house.
Greatest car in the world, but $20MILLION? I don't care how one can justify that price tag, still I can think of a number of cars that I can buy with that money..
If you have to look for other options rather than McLaren F1. Then you aren't ready to buy one. Atleast money vise. (Not you in particular, you as in general)
In an era where an 8oz container of Philly cream cheese is $12.99 at my local grocery, $25M is an actual bargain for an F1. In fact I'd bet by next year any name-brand cereal, pound for pound, will be worth MORE than an F1.
@@DUNEATV I'm not being political, in fact runaway inflation is currently a Global problem which began with supply chain issues during the pandemic. It has as much to do with corporate greed at this point as it does Governmental regulatory decisions, plenty of blame to go around imo. That said, $25M for one of only 106 of the most innovative cars of its period, in a world where there are billions of automotive consumers and hundreds of thousands who can actually afford it, seems like about the right price. The market, in this case, makes sense. Cream cheese, not so much 🤔
Here’s my door Tier List: 1: Butterfly (No roof/frameless glass) 2: Butterfly (with roof) 3: Scissor 4: Gullwing 5: Scissor (but goes slightly out) 6: Dihedral Synchro Helix 7: Suicide 8: regular door 9: McLaren 570s doors where it’s not really a scissor or a butterfly lots of cars have them and I don’t like it decide.
![Here Are the Best Bad Guy/Villain Cars [Doug DeMuro + Kennan]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9E7iMGLSmtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Here Are the Best Bad Guy/Villain Cars [Doug DeMuro + Kennan]](/img/tr.png)
Smart move Doug, tanking the market, buying 2 F1 and then going "is the F1 underappreciated?". Top player
Hahaha
Real mogul moves alert!
Doug Pelosi?
It's still funny that People don't call the new Supra a real Supra because it uses a BMW engine and BMW Chassis, but nobody calls the McLaren F1 a "BMW" despite it using a BMW Engine and even some other smaller Parts. I guess BMW isn't bad after all if it comes to the F1. Nevermind Gordon Murray still praising BMW to this Day (including some new Models)
Prost & Cheers from Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps
He bought 2 F1’s?! God damn his auction site has made him rich af.
Honestly the bus taillights look a hell of a lot better than any of the other taillights from that era. The whole circle taillight thing may have started as a cost-saving measure, but it's iconic and beautiful in its simplicity.
Aston Martin used similar on their 1990s v8 Vantage
Yeah and the F40 has round lights. I don't think they look bad. They do their job and you can see them.
Particularly the XJR-15 taillights which they show in the video, which look they're from a Vauxhall Somethingotother and are awful. The bus taillights are great and may have been quite lightweight compared to other OEM options.
Nah. The F50 has the perfect rear circular tail lights.
Doug the type to eat chocolate chip cookies on a Carrera GT fuel door
User name checks out.
It's already A Thing now. He can't stop.
And dip them in 10wt 30.
Doug is also the type of guy that would completely lose it if someone else rested their biscotti on his Carrera GT, regardless wether it had a napkin/paper towel under it.
@@richgallagher725 Truth. But, to be honest, so would I.
Besides the lightness and engineering perfectionism, the top speed record, and winning Le Mans, what really put the car in a completely different league was the way it was designed to be somewhat practical and enjoyable to drive (even at low speeds) -- the central driving position and mirrors with outstanding all-around visibility, the space for luggage, the fact your legs were't offset to the middle like other mid-engine supercars of the era.
Let's be honest, a quarter of this car's legend status was forged with Clarkson's "What you are about to see, is the difference between a really really fast car.... and a McLaren F1" played a few million times. Everything I built this car up to in my head (and probably a lot of similarly aged car UA-camrs) came from Top Gear.
Rowan Atkinson is legendary for daily driving his McLaren F1 simply because he liked driving it. He also wrecked it twice and reluctantly sold it because it had gotten too valuable to keep driving. It might be the highest mileage F1.
@@natesmith8020 just speaking for myself, I didn't even start watching Top Gear until the 2000's. I worshiped the car from the get-go because of the central driving position (I had dreamed of a 1+2 sports car for years before that) and the top speed blowing away the previous record. Back in the mid-90's I actually told a friend of mine whose dad had just sold his stake in a telecommunications startup for $10+ million that he should buy a F1 "as an investment -- I don't think you're going to see anything with that level of engineering-as-art come along again for a very long time, and the speed record may never be broken." The latter assertion was of course disproved by the Veyron (although the F1 is STILL the fastest naturally-aspirated car), but the former certainly proved correct.
@@nerva- I agree 100%, even wilder is the F1
- wasn't even purpose built to be the fastest car... it simply became the fastest due to its engineering
- wasn't even purpose built to be a race car... and yet it won le mans
I think that's what makes it legnendary, you have to think, to become the best when it wasn't even your focus, while all other manufactures purpose built to make it the fastest, to make it the most competitive race car etc etc...
the car that dethroned the F1 was the Veyron... and guess what? before the first pencil was drawn, they already set out to make it the world fastest car in terms of top speed, that was the purpose, but not the F1....
That's why I think the F1 sits at the top by itself, nothing like it before, and nothing will even become like it after....
i work with a few of the designers who helped design the f1 and some of the stories you hear are amazing. the truly did not care about records during deign. they just wanted to build the best and most practical super car possible with the technology available at the time. The funniest thing is they arnt even happy with the final product. they say with more time they could have ironed out more flaws with the car. but the chase of perfection is never finished and eventually you have to ship the cars haha. but for me the floors within a car is what gives it personality.
My susuki swift doesn't have Bluetooth so i have to use a cigarette lighter Bluetooth device that emits radio frequencies. it works well but if i dont play music somehow pics up coil whine from my engine which changes pitch as i accelerate. its a very weird qwerk which is almost unique to my car but that what makes me feel a connection with my car rather then it being a lump of steel.
People that look at an F1 or a vayron and pick out floor or niggle and say this is poor design work have probably never worked in automotive engineering. Designers are aware of these issue but sometimes you just have to accept that something is the way it is in order to deliver. so i value those qwerks because i like to think about the time spent acknowledging the issue and i like the fact that some designer is out there frustrated about that part and that i understand their struggle
The fact that it still is the fastest naturally aspirated cars to this day is wild
the race between the F1 and a Veyron they did on top gear a long time ago was really cool. wicked how fast it is and was winning until the veyron's hp advantage kicked in
With a manual too!
yeah because everyone stopped using na for top speed
Thank you for the opinion X AE A-12 xd
@@tattttu9 this wasn’t built for top speed, all the others were
It's the ultimate expression of an analog car. The fact that a road car spawned a Le Man winning racecar derivative, that it used off the shelf taillights, that it used a road car derived motor all just contribute to and enhance its mythology. Even that one crashed during very high speed testing and the driver walked away from it just furthers its legend.
I actually like the way the rear end looks with the bus taillights.
The F1 LM replica (it's awesome) has those rear ligths as sole original items. And its BMW V12 is sortof close.
Agreed. The only think that looked like an afterthought was the front turn signals IMHO.
There are several supercars using bus tail-lights such as the Lamborghini Diablo, Saleen S7, and Pagani Zonda. In fact, these cars are worse since their tail-lights are from tractors.
6:25 it was the XJR-12, not the XJR-15 that won LM in 1990
Also I thought the F1 had the door mirrors from the VW Corrado.
Exactly. The F1 actually had 3 different door mirrors. The first handful had mirror from the Citroen CX, the rest had VW Corrado mirrors and the few who had the high mounted mirror option were from a BMW Z1.
It had 3 types of mirrors.
1. Citroën mirrors (on prototyps and early production cars)
2. Corrado mirrors on later cars
3. Bmw Z1 mirrors, only 3 F1 has them.
And the doors were inspired by a quirky obscure little Toyota
@@Lord0fPvnder obscure and obscure. It was the Toyota Sera, basically a Toyota Paseo with modified doors 😂
There was also the German banker who commuted from Frankfurt to Bonn everyday on the Autobahn at 200+ mph and the car needed servicing every month so the dedicated F1 mechanic flew out from the factory in Woking to do it. See Autocar write-up.
Lol
Thomas Bscher is that man. He was not just a 'banker' but also a gentleman race car driver. He actually convinced McLaren to take the F1 racing and himself drove the McLaren F1 GTR in the BPR GT championship in 1995.
@@Andynath100 I remember the story of how Thomas Bscher persuaded Ron Dennis to do the race version. Basically, he pestered and pestered until Ron basically caved in and said "As it's you, Thomas, yes, we'll do it".
However, Ron Dennis is a sharp cookie, and went on to say, "Of course, you'll need one for the road too".
Which is how Bscher ended up with a road going one too, and used it for commuting. Apparently, the time he saved on his commute paid for the car!
Paid off for McLaren too - the legendary win at Le Mans wouldn't have happened otherwise, and it meant that when they more recently said they were going to make road cars it certainly made everyone sit up and pay close, close attention.
everyone month? was he driving to other side of the planet
@@hassyg4083 it’s about a 115 mile commute which he ran at over 200mph for about half of it. Rather like you or I driving to work in 1st gear everyday, we might need a service every month. By the way, I did take my FZR1000R Exup to work like that for one journey, 70mph in 1st at 11000rpm. My ears were bleeding and so was everyone else’s around me!
I believe the 240mph run didn't happen until '97 or '98...so about 4-5 years after the F1 came out, but it was already considered the best ROAD car ever made. The engine might have had similarities with the SOHC V12 found in other BMW's but it wasn't the same. Also MANY small batch supercars use off the shelf taillights...they're taillights, why does it matter, as long as they meet the requirements?
Fastest car in the world for 15 years is, um, quite a piece of history.
11 years*
The XP5 prototype was modified to beat that record ... so it wasn't really a stock car.
@@Elberoth they only changed the rev limiter, it was mechanically identical.
And still the fastest naturally aspirated car
@@Lianpe98 still a modified car. They decided to risk blowing the engine up, to beat the record.
Doug’s got the most hilarious “I’m listening to you but I can’t wait to tell you why I think you’re wrong” face
Even Gordon Murray himself admitted that the biggest problem with the F-1 is the absolutely insane cost of maintaining it.
Mostly he complained about the crazy value causing insurance to be prohibitively high...you have to pay insane amounts to drive it on the road.
Although the maintenance is tremendously expensive, its not as expensive as many probably think (and especially not as expensive as some video on youtube tries to convince you to think it is…). Yes, bodywork for example is a lot of dough, but just keeping it running and giving it a good car life is way way less $$$ than one would assume. yeah, as pistonburner mentions, insurance is a thing. but, as it loses not that much value if you throw it in a ditch (and economically cant be totaled), there are multiple owners who do liability only and have a separate collection insurance which only covers the parked/stored car.
@@maxheeschter3009
I'm also going by the words of a previous owner.
ua-cam.com/video/EsKDGdcb6BQ/v-deo.html
@@maxheeschter3009 gas tank bladder has to be replaced periodically and is prohibitively expensive. But it’s also worth a lot so the maintenance costs become a wash.
@@maxheeschter3009 it will cost you about 50k a year on average in maintenance without you ever even driving it. Its an incredibly expensive car to own.
Kennan: expounding his adoration for one of his favorite cars
Doug: BUS TAIL LIGHTS👹👹👹
Doug said it himself in his F1 review "It basically has no equal"
Yes but is it 20million unequal is his question. It's value or perceived value has exploded in the last couple of years. Compared to others cars of the similar era it's not even in the same solar system anymore.
Uh. gordon murray t.50
he's putting on a show for this video, it was his plan to end the video in favor of the mclaren. Doug is a businessman.
@@christianb1707 While true, the fact that this car was created by the same person speaks volumes about how unique it was and still is. I also thought the F1 is kinda overrated but considering for how well it held up except in track performance really shows how good the car is.
I think the only car that even comes close to holding up in certain aspects is the Jaguar XJ220. 7:46 at the Nürb even in this day and age is nothing to sneeze at. Especially with 30 year old tires.
t50 is the updated equal
While the M70 engine in the E32 750i had 295HP, the S70/2 engine in the F1 made a little more than double that at 627HP.
So much was changed on this engine that there are more things different than similar:
The original engine was 2 valves per cylinder, and the F1 variant using 4 valves per cylinder meaning a totally new head design. More but not all changes included: Higher compression at 11:1, higher redline at 7,500 rpm, revised cylinder liners with reduced friction, different bore and stroke, new pistons, variable valve timing, two fuel injectors per cylinder (24 total), different intake manifold, different throttle body system consisting of 12 independent throttle bodies, and a tubular header design.
I like Doug's friend, he truly knows what makes the car special!
Agreed !
Watching a couple of guys geek out about tail lights...this is heaven.
Is it tho?
Doug made only horrible, invalid and incorrect points about the tail lights.
@@pistonburner6448 well he was correct in that they are a stock bus tail light. It's just that no one cares.
@@Smith1980 No, that was incorrect. They are automotive tail lights. It just so happens that in addition to cars, some companies used them on buses too.
@@pistonburner6448 duly noted. I meant " stock taillights " used on buses. (or at least happens to be used on buses amongst other things)
But your correction stands
10:33 It’s my understanding that the S70/2 has more in common with the later S50 (4 valves per cylinder, VVT, ITBs etc) - a lot of the learning from developing the F1 power plant went into that. Paul Rosche’s work was stellar
The bus tail lights look good on it tho
I really like the fact that Kennan is very informed makes the discussion that much interesting
It’s Pedegree is unlike anything in the car industry. So I would say no. Plus, it’s admired by Mr. Bean.
Rowan owns one.
"Overrated" and "overpriced" are two different things. Everyone thought the Ferrari GTO was crazy priced when itset the record for the most expensive car.
Doug, the engine was built completely from scratch. Gordon himself has confirmed this multiple times. See his interview with Chris Harris, it is at the 51:00 mark.
Sort of, he ordered it from Paul Rosche that worked at BMW at the time, he used the V12 from the 8 series as a starting point, but it was severely modified.
@@MatheusSilva-qm1ft layout design sure, but if Gordon says it was built from scratch, I tend to believe him.
@@MatheusSilva-qm1ftit has nothing in common with the 8 series v12, not even the block, biggest similarities are with the e36 m3 3.2l Euro evo engine, S70/2 is basically two s50b32 engines mated together.
@@r129r16pfl technically the E36 has half the F1 engine as it came first. It is not two mated together.
@@Yerrrrrrrrrt Murray is a genius no doubt. But he's also a salesman. Watch his T50 and T33 vids and he is selling HARD. I don't think he lied per se but I do think he leans on his mystique and monetizes it. Not saying he shouldn't just that he's well, a salesman. "From scratch" and "used the same layout" are opposing statements.
I remember reading about the F1 in this subscription thing I got when I was like 10 called ‘Wheels & Wings’. They dubbed it, “The Million Dollar Sports Car”. I fell in love with it immediately. Absolutely gorgeous car with performance to match. It will never not be at the top of my list, no matter how unattainable it is.
Doug's introduction to "CARS AND BIDS" nearly blew my damn eardrums out.
The McLaren F1 is underrated! How many cars are going 241 with 641 hp naturally aspirated
Some older lambos (1990s-2000s can go over 200 with under 600hp on a naturally aspirated v12
Do some research you’d be surprised
@@cablevamp3163 tell us
627*
@@Nocturnal39 the difference between 200 and 241 is like the difference between 120 and 200, drag increases exponentially with speed.
The XJR-12 (twelve) won Le Mans in 1990, not the XJR-15. It is a Group C race car, not a GT1 Class car. That is a difference in substance and invalidates that part of the argument.
Lambo Diablo 6.0, Saleen S7 and first Pagani Zonda also had bus tail lights... Also Jaguar XJ220 had Rover 400 tail lights and Countach had tail lights from Alfa Romeo Alfetta.
Even the Diablo GT had 300ZX headlights.
Carrera GT has the same headlight switch as a Skoda Citigo. I know this, because it's also the same one as in my Cayman and my friend who owns a Citigo won't shut up about it 😂
The price of this car is just a testament to the inequality of the world. Most people became poorer, the ones who grabbed their production improvement became cartoonishly wealthy and if they want an F1, an F1 they shall have.
6:00 & 8:43 the editor's zoom into the cookie on the CGT lmao
Absolutely is not overrated! It was the first hypercar, it set a top speed record that stood for over a decade, it won an outright victory at Le Mans in 1995, beating the purpose built prototype cars. Again… it’s definitely not overrated, it’s rightfully considered amongst the greatest cars ever and it deserves every bit of that consideration.
If the tail lights is bespoke, Gordon Murray need to charge additional 15K quid for it.
The only race the XJR15 won contained only other XJR15's...
The fact that, almost 30 years it’s still one of the fastest cars out there (not only on top speed), the racing achievements and that sound… how many cars do you know that are still this good?
First generation VW GTI are still that good 💓. And the E30 M3!
Plus, the timeless looks..
1. It's 0-60 time is beaten by countless of other cars, and same goes for top speed.
2. The F1 has less racing achievements than most other cars.
The various 911s and sports saloon, beat it in most catagories.
3. The sound is good, sure.
But it's not that different to any other V12 with the correct exhaust.
4. Miura, Countach, Diablo, Murcialago, Ferrari F40/50, XJ220, EB110, Porsche 959, to name a few.
@@rickg8015 timeless!
The F1 didn't only won le mans, it was so good it won so much more
Yes!
It also won the BPR GT drivers championships in '95 and '96 beating the F40LM and the EB110s that Doug mentioned. The series was reformed into the FIA GT for '97 when the CLK GTR and Porsche 911 GT1 caught up and beat the F1. They were hardly designed as road cars first though.
@@Andynath100 and both of them took elements from the f1 lol
From an engineering, road-going and performance standpoint, the F1 is definitely NOT overrated, but way over priced. I think the overrated concept would only be relevant to it's value as a collector's item.
No - I’ve witnessed the McLaren F1 driving at 235mph and it was awesome. It was supposed to be paired against the XJ220 at MIRA test centres 75 anniversary event in 1997 on the high speed bowl which you stand in the centre of. Jaguar refused to run the XJ together with it such was its prowess.
It's still overrated, it may be glorious but so is every other legendary and overrated supercar, other overrated examples include the Ferrari F40 and the Bugatti Veryon
Somehow I missed out on that school trip. Wouldn't have minded to see and hear that.
It's a bit odd to see such a high top speed for that (claimed) peak power. And then it's a 3-seater to boot.
@@NeurodivergentSuperiority I disagree, this was the first money no object version of a no-compromise, pure engineering solution. Practical with more than two seats, room for luggage / golf bats, every effort to solve engineering issues such as heat dissipation, high speed stability and effortless performance instead of straining the limits beyond a durable engineering solution. It was a easy to drive at 30mph as it was to drive at 200, you didn’t need to wear earplugs or get your clothes dirty on the unfinished carbon fibre bodywork or lack of carpets. It was the million Euro car and started the trend for perfectly engineered cars such as the Spyker and Konigseg.
@@gbphil Get over it
Gordan says his new version is better
Henry Catchpole relates that the taillights were chosen because TVR had also used them, and therefore they must have been approved for car use.
He also said that, nope, TVR hadn't actually got them approved for cars, they just used them...
Aren't taillights certified for road use in general like they do in the States?
@@LouisSubearth I'm no expert - just relating what Henry Catchpole said when he reviewed an F1 alongside a P1.
A possibility was that they'd been alright on that old Bova bus when the bus had been newly certified, but when TVR / McLaren picked them up years later, perhaps the standards had moved on and they were not approved for new applications.
I can certainly imagine that an inspector - getting a good chance to look over a 240mph super car - might not have dwelt on the exact approvals lineage of the tail and indicator lights!
I mean, had that been me I'd not have been looking at the taillights at all, and would be telling the manufacturer about the extensive amount of road testing I was about to have to do (months of it!).
Given how much engineering/material science has advanced since 90s, to this day McLaren F1 is the fastest N/A production car on the road. This alone amazes me.
At this point, Doug needs to start a podcast for his Sunday videos where he invites a guest/friend for this content
of all the useless creator podcasts that exist, doug is the only one that I would watch, and he doesnt have one :(
I think the McLaren F1 is amazing, but not quite $20 million amazing.
Even Gordon Murray himself has complained about many design flaws and compromises due to budget constraints, which (to my knowledge) he has attempted to correct when developing the T.50.
Kennan's argument: performance, prestige, engineering above all else, lightweight, race winning, limited availability, bespoke parts, driver focused, no assists, record holding, a machine that became greater than the sum of its parts.
Doug's argument : Bus tail lights, other cars won Le Mans too, and it is worth too much now because it's so good.
I know which side I stand on! Interesting debate though.
Doug should do a peice on how expensive it is to get lights on cars through the homologation process.
Then he will see why they borrowed them,didn't design them.
It was an XJR-12 that won Le Mans 1990, not the XJR-15. The XJR-15 was built after and never won anything except its own racing series.
Isn't it STILL the fastest naturally aspirated road car ever?
Yes it is
Still is
You forgot to mention that there was only 103 of them ever produced. By comparison, they made 1500 of the Carrera GT
Doug literally gives ZERO arguments why the F1 would be overrated lol
A lot of dumb points.
First of all, the engine was bespoke to the car. It shares the bore with the S70 in the 850CSi, but that's about it. It's a DOHC engine (the S70 was SOHC) with different heads, different ignition and injection system, it's dry sumped, it has VANOS, and the block is different as well to accommodate different plumbing and for structural reasons, as in the F1 was used as a semi-stressed member of the chassis. Just to prove the point, the S70 made 375hp, while the S70/2 made 618hp. You are not getting 64% power increase from just a tune, you know.
It's true that the Mclaren F1 uses SOME off-the-shelf parts, but it's still BY FAR the most bespoke 90s car, and still more bespoke than most hypercars made today.
As for whether the car is overrated or not, I would say it's absolutely not. Arguably, it's still quite underrated. No, seriously. It's not really until you understand the engineering behind it that you can really appreciate how ahead of the time it was.
The most obvious giveaway should be that the car weighs 1170kg, making it one of the lightest supercars ever produced. Just to put it into context, the all carbon F50 that Ferrari made as a response (which had a smaller engine with less power) weighed 1400kg. The Jaguar XJ220 was 1490kg. The EB110 was 1600kg. The Diablo was 1650kg. There were no other cars at that time (or ever since, really, until the T.50) that even came close. The Carrera GT is about 1380kg.
This is because of the attention to detail, as well as clever packaging that allows the car to be relatively small, as well as innovative engineering, such as CF front crash structure (still aluminium or steel on most supercars even today), semi-structural engine mounting, CF monocoque that extends all the way to the rear suspension pick up points instead of using a sub-frame like on almost all other supercars, as well as having the muffler double as the rear crash structure. The way the F1 was built is still superior to most supercars of today, not to mention comparing it to cars from the 90s.
There was also an absurd number of innovations on the car. It was the first (talking production road cars here) all CF car, first ground effect car, first car with active aero, first car to use magnesium wheels, first car to use monoblock calipers, etc, etc.
Then there is the performance. Not just top speed, but also acceleration. The Mclaren F1 was absurdly faster than any contemporary supercars. It would take 12 years before a car would come (the Veyron) that would beat it in acceleration. 12 years! And even in 2012, before the Holy Trinity came, apart from the Veyron, there still wasn't anything faster. The Aventador and the MP4-12C that came in 2011 were still slower. In fact, the Mclaren F1 is STILL the fastest accelerating manual car (soon to be beaten by the T.50, though). Again, just to give a bit of context, the 100-200km/h time for the F1 was 5.1s. For the F50 it's 8.3s. XJ220: 8.2s. EB110SS: 8.5s. The Carrera GT: 6.9s.
The last thing - and really THE reason why the Mclaren F1 deserves to be called the greatest - is that all this incredible performance was achieved not at the cost of sacrifices in comfort or usability, but despite them, and despite the fact that the Mclaren F1 actually was MUCH BETTER in these things than contemporary rivals. That the car is also incredibly engaging to drive is almost just a cherry on top.
Doug's the type of guy to make wonderful videos for us all to watch! :)
The issue is that there only 106 made, mostly as collection investments, so we don't even know the long term reliability of the BMW S70 V12! Also tire tread technology today is way better than the 90's, just imagine the performance of an F1 with Toyo R888R's or Michelin Cup 2! If we are all honest, yes it is a little bit overated but 240 mph with only 618 HP and a modified rev limiter is a prestigious accomplishment!
Nah, it's criminally underrated.
2400lbs, central driving position, NA 12 cylinders, manual transmission, beautiful interior and exterior. Not overrated. If I was worth 8 figures I would have one with the high down force kit and would replace the heavy steel brakes with modern carbon..
I, personally, don't think the F1 is overrated. It was one of the first super fast cars of it's day. I saw one, one time, at a car show, and the owner said it's a pain to service. It's still one of the fastest naturally aspirated cars on the planet, so it's going to live on as a huge leap for supercars.
Actually it's Still the fastest NA car
It’s the SR-71 of cars. Extremely hard to pay for and maintain, but a dream of every car fanatic.
Spoiler: No, it is not.
I wish when people talked about the F1’s greatness, they didn’t lean so heavily on the “it won Le Mans” argument. If the car had finished 3rd overall or “7th overall and 1st in class” or 2nd in class, it would not change anything about the actual road car and the merits of that road car.
The F1 was the crowning achievement in an era (late 1980’s into mid-1990’s) when manufacturers (starting with Porsche’s 959 and Ferrari’s F40) started building outrageously fast, exciting supercars and engaging in a game of one-upsmanship nudging the top speed record higher and higher. In a world of exciting, awesome cars like the XJ220 and EB110 and Diablo and F40 and 959, McLaren came to the table with a simply beautiful, outrageously expensive, audacious 3-seat speed monster. And the game ended there. The supercar competition changed after the F1 because no one (until Bugatti 10 years later) wanted to play the Top Speed game anymore.
Interesting question! To me it is and will always be a generational thing: To car-people growing up in the 90s the F1 will likely always come out as perfection, since it was the halo car of their youth. I was born in the mid-90s and started getting into specific cars in the early 2000s - so to me, if it had to be a supercar, I‘d take a CGT or Enzo over an F1 any day (money aside ofc).
McLaren F1 any time for sure...
@@MrTresto And I wouldn’t blame anyone for having that preference. The F1 just played no role at all during my and many others upbringing in the early 2000s so it never struck a cord with me. Again - generational thing.
I agree I Ford GT Porsche Carrara GT Lamborghini Murcilago too and I actually do like some 90s cars for me the king of 90s supercars is the Lamborghini Diablo all of them I feel the eb110 didn't get a chance don't like the xj220 originally it was appropriately rated now it too is overrated vector was overrated all in my opinion though
Nope. I was born in 2006. It's not a generational thing. Both the CGT and the Enzo, specifically the Enzo, are absolute turds. The Enzo was bettered in every way, experience included, by the 2013 Laferrari. The Enzo weighed 1.5 tons, which is quite a lot for a car with nothing in it. Like nothing. The gearbox was the worst piece of junk of all time. Not a manual with the feel and not even a dct. The CGT is also a overweight porsche el camino. The 918 was better in every way, including how it sounded. No one talks about this, but unlike the CGT, which had a fake Lemans v10, the 918 literally had it's V8 picked up from the LMP2 racecar porsche campaigned all over the world, including at lemans.
@@thehumanoid6543 exactly you were born the the late half of the 2000s of course you'd appreciate the 2010s cars you are actually maturing and have the ability to appreciate anything at all your comment is kind of negative I love the 2000s supercars while having respect for older cars and acknowledging they newer cars are better they had better be they are newer technology has advanced also the Enzo is lighter then the Laferrari p1 and 918 3000lbs is light for a car even supercars and hypercars. My thing is you can have your favorite group of supercars while appreciating and respecting the cats that came before and after
Don't forget, the McLaren F1 also won the 1996 season of JGTC and to this day, is the only non Japanese manufacturer to win JGTC/Super GT.
With just 450hp and 150kg ballast😮 jgct F1 was heavily restricted (because of balance of performance) and still won.
I don't think cost = over/under rated. Cost = rating+scarcity
Exactly. I always thought it was bizarre that Jeremy Clarkson, a massive nationalist who should automatically love the car, never did too much just because it was expensive.
Awesome shirt Doug, the Shotover Jet is amazing and I’m glad you got to experience that! The Dart River jet is also incredible, in fact one of the greatest outdoor recreational experiences I’ve had
Not only are the tail lights from a bus but the side mirror are also from the VW Corrado
“Toyota won Le Mans last year with a hybrid, I ain’t gon buy a Prius” with the junkyard dog voice is priceless Doug
Still the fastest naturally aspirated car in the world
No it's not I think it's the ferrari 812 comp
@@mikainaidoo938 yes, it is
There is a naturally aspirated Honda Civic running 8s in the quarter mile. There's less money into it than a McLaren tire change. I think a clean Civic looks way better than the McLaren
In terms of top speed, it is still the fastest naturally aspirated production car in the world.
The 812 comp doesn't even break 220 as standard, it's geared for track.
Some (probably not road legal) modified civic is for a serial production car, so doesn't count.
@@TheRoverspeed yes, Mclaren F1 can crack 240mph with rev limiter removed
Jay Leno is a big reason why it costs THAT much more than comparable Supercars. If it wasn’t for him not nearly as many people would know what the F1 is.
I disagree. Anyone who was into cars in the 90s and 00s knew about the F1. Jay Leno did little to nothing for the values of the F1. The car was always going to be a savvy investment.
Only 62 road going versions, the fastest car in the world, racing pedigree, the ideal combo of lightweight, V12 and manual trans. The car has an aura about it that few things, let alone cars can match. With the world moving away from ICE and analogue cars, the F1 is near the pinnacle. I would fully expect them to be worth $100m in the coming decade or two.
I also expect Carrera GTs to go up significantly in value.
So here is the question Doug, would you rather have a McLaren F1 or a Gordon Murray T50?
The T50 wasn’t discussed enough imo
@@charlessloane definitely agree, especially since it's the successor, and has more modern technology and the hindsight of the F1
@@fast.biking_freddy it actually has very little modern technology in the car but modern technology was used in designing it to make pretty much the same basic recipe much better.
@@zvonimirkrajina2211 idk the hybrid system is pretty modern and so are the fan systems, but yeah lots of modern engineering too
The rear lights of a bus… And let’s not forget the purpose built side mirrors… …of a VW Corrado lol
6:33 eh? not xjr-12? the purpose built race car?
when honda rejected mclaren, isuzu offered a 3.5 litre v12 that produces 750hp to mclaren for the f1, but gordon murray rejected.
Doug is the type of guy to sell his best friend Ken the Cars and Bids t-shirt for double the price
Doug's argument is weaker than my Accent 1.6 engine.
Look for the video on F1 ownership costs. The fuel bladder ages out every 5 years. And to change the tires you need to rent a track, driver and ambulance. Definitely worth a follow up video I think. It’s insane.
Damn I spent all my money on the F1, I had exactly 25mil$. Now I can’t afford to fix it…
I mean Picasso used the same paint and canvas that the other artists at the time did... One of those sold not too long ago for $179 million. Great car design is absolutely a form of art, and this one is about as close to a masterpiece as possible. Plus, your $25m purchase will probably appreciate much faster than most other investments so someone that can afford one of these is honestly just investing in a beautiful work of art that also happens to go 240mph.
Doug’s McLaren F1 video title: “The McLaren F1 is the greatest Car Ever Made”
I love how Doug, even after all this success, is still just being himself. Nice, down-to-earth guy who genuine likes cars just like the rest of us.
13:12 - I've never noticed this before, but the lighting in the press photo of the McLaren F1 at this time stamp almosts casts a near perfect Senna "S" at the bottom of the front door/quarter panel.
I don't think it's overrated in any mean, based on what it was during the 90's it was way ahead of its time, not just with the looks, it looked sporty and the mixed fusion of Koenigsegg and Pagani, cuz it was good with the top speed also with the circuit, imo, the best appealing car even until today.
How can it be a fusion of things came after it? 😅
Several owners have already said that F1 is not so good, that it does not have high-speed installations, is not good at cornering, and only won Le Mans because the BOP at the time destroyed the performance of the competition, but there are several videos of races in which the BOP was more liberal and the F40LM, XJ220S absolutely destroy the F1 GTR and F1 LT ! F1 is just a lot of marketing
The mixed fusion of Koenigsegg and Pagani. I'm sorry how? Koenigsegg's very first CC prototype was in 1994 and Pagani's first car the Zonda debuted in 1999. The McLaren F1 was unveiled in 1992.
@@electrikoptik I'm not saying it looks the same, it has the elements of those two
@@alienxthemostpowerfulficti2888 How does it have elements of them when it predates them?
When I read the headline, I thought they were talking about the McLaren F1 Team, not the car
A F1 is more deserving of $25M than a Carrera GT is of $1.3M.
The person to have this conversation with is leno. A guy who owns one and has no problems with knocking on it if necessary
I think so. In the 90’s Mercedes bought a F1 and added their V12 and body kit. It got crashed, but it gave Mercedes the information to make there super car the cop gtr. The F1 was reverted back to its stock form and they sold it it auction anonymously.
The F1's legend was definitely helped by its win at Le Mans on its debut. A great car yes. But when other manufacturers caught on there was no contest. CLK GTR/LM>911 GT1>F1
The M70 V12 found on E32 models made 295 horse power and the enhanced Maclaren variant made about 618 horse power, and it was naturally aspirated in 1993. That is extremely impressive in my own opinion.
There's nothing wrong with bus tail lights. They're quite nice looking.
A guy who got semi famous for simply reviewing cars, making fun of any aspect of the F1……. peak clown world. 🤡
I think the top speed record is by far the biggest part of this car's appeal and legend, and rightfully so. One of my favorite quotes was from the president of Hennessy, certain automakers can brag that their car is fastest around nurburgring, on a drag strip, around an oval track, but when your car has the top speed record, you can say your car is the fastest, period. No other qualifications. For people that came into cars while this car had the record, it was the ultimate, and to a degree always will be.
Biggest McLaren F1 fan here…ready for this!
Geek.
@@pissoff234 you have 226 comments on this channel though 💀
The packaging is also so special. Three seats, super compact dimensions, and even a semblance of luggage space in the sides. It needs to also be considered that while these were $1M cars in the 90s, McLaren had nowhere near the resources to develop their own regulation-compliant lights and mirrors, much less a completely proprietary engine compared to even Porsche at the time. Extremely limited production run, plus the obsessive focus on weight savings (including one of the first production car carbon monocoques) meant that performance and function were far greater priorities than developing expensive lights in-house.
Doug using a Carrera GT as a coffee table is hilarious
I don't care if those tail lights came from a moped, those tail lights look perfect, and that is all that matters.
I'm happy that Doug found another Doug
Greatest car in the world, but $20MILLION? I don't care how one can justify that price tag, still I can think of a number of cars that I can buy with that money..
For the price.. yes. I would rather have a house with 20 super cars and a vacation house for the price of an F1😂
You can get a lot of nice cars for $20 million
If you have to look for other options rather than McLaren F1. Then you aren't ready to buy one. Atleast money vise.
(Not you in particular, you as in general)
F1 owners already have those and more.
@@AndrasMihalyi touché
In an era where an 8oz container of Philly cream cheese is $12.99 at my local grocery, $25M is an actual bargain for an F1. In fact I'd bet by next year any name-brand cereal, pound for pound, will be worth MORE than an F1.
Let’s Go Brandon
@@DUNEATV I'm not being political, in fact runaway inflation is currently a Global problem which began with supply chain issues during the pandemic. It has as much to do with corporate greed at this point as it does Governmental regulatory decisions, plenty of blame to go around imo. That said, $25M for one of only 106 of the most innovative cars of its period, in a world where there are billions of automotive consumers and hundreds of thousands who can actually afford it, seems like about the right price. The market, in this case, makes sense. Cream cheese, not so much 🤔
Bus tailights!!! Brilliant of McLaren to ues them as they would have to be the most durable tailights ever made!!! Lol
Doug is the type of guy who would not make a video on "Is The Porsche Carrera GT Overrated?"
Hi Doug, I love your videos.
Really looking foward to dougs review of the T50
Nah its perfectly rated
Its just not too much or too less of a car
And i like that
Here’s my door Tier List:
1: Butterfly (No roof/frameless glass)
2: Butterfly (with roof)
3: Scissor
4: Gullwing
5: Scissor (but goes slightly out)
6: Dihedral Synchro Helix
7: Suicide
8: regular door
9: McLaren 570s doors where it’s not really a scissor or a butterfly lots of cars have them and I don’t like it decide.
Kennan missed an opportunity to buy a t50 and have both the greatest NA cars ever made.