Yeah but they weren't basing that off of the production assembly just the ' feel ' of the car , remarkable car either way , remarkable company
Yeah, I know...Jeremy Clarkson and Co, Tiff and 5th Gear among others. They pretty much have said that car feels "clinical", not wild child, less emotion...and even Mclaren went to fix things about the car to give it more "emotion".
But, if you look at where it was birthed...the "parents" (workers) move about in Robot fashion...Whereas Ferrari was voted one of the best places to work in Europe. Lots of light in facility, talking, trees in the plant. Open air design, no working on weekends. Plus that Italian Flare.
AMG's plant looks like a American hotrod place---although very German...remember their the ones that also make the Pagani's engines.
I think the attitude of the workers---the company, especially with small volume cars (read supercars) does have an effect on the "soul" of the car. And so does the attitude of the designers and the people who conceive (draw up, design) the car, engine..."Do we want to evoke emotion?", "Do we want a car that is just capable, and is only about numbers?", "Do we want to scare the balls off of people (Viper)?",
Calloway, in a 1996 interview on Disco channel had talked about cars designed by Committee vs those designed by A Man...the ones designed by committee tend to lack "soul", vs the ones that are not.
So, I wonder what were the stated goals (and the committee) that Mclaren had. Were certain customers demanding a less emotional car, or are they saving the emotion for the true F1 successor?