Skip to main content

The Porsche 918 Spyder vs. the McLaren P1: Battle of the hybrid hypercars

Welcome to the two most incredible cars on the road today: the McLaren P1 and the Porsche 918 Spyder. Sure there are some other contenders, but the Bugatti Veyron is getting on in years and we still don’t know enough about the Ferrari LaFerrari to say what it’s really like; besides, it has a stupid name.

So that leaves us with the Porsche and the McLaren. And I am fine with that. Not only are these the absolute pinnacle of the engineers craft and art, they also show the future performance motoring.

With their hybrid drivetrains, the P1 and the 918 Spyder are the first of a generation of eco-hypercars. An era in which it’s not just the ultimate performance of the car that matters, but how efficiently it can get there.   

So just how much separates these two marvelous machines? Which one should you buy … a poster of?

So without further ado let’s look at these bad boys.2015 Porsche 918 Spyder 7

Performance

Really, this section alone could be an entire article. These cars are actually made of incredible performance figures. But for the sake of everyone who would like to finish this article in less time than it takes to read “War and Peace”, I will try and be concise.

Both the Brit and the Kraut will do 0-62 mph in 2.8 seconds, thanks to their insanely powerful hybrid drivetrains. The Porsche packs a 608-horsepower gasoline powered V8, but as the late night infomercials say: “Wait! That’s not all!” This Teutonic Titan also has 279 hp worth of electric power for a total of 887 hp.

If you think that’s impressive, the McLaren has done even better. Its combination of twin-turbo V8 and electric motors is good for 903 horsepower. I mean, really, how does Porsche think it can compete with just 887 measly horsepower?

McLaren P1 wheel CuThat difference in power shows up when the cars get up past  100 mph. The McLaren can get to 124 mph in just 6.8 seconds, more than a second faster than the Porsche. In hypercar terms, that might as well be a week.

It is not all about straight line speed. The 918 Spyder looks like it can do more than that on the track.

The 918 Spyder currently holds the production car lap record at Nurburgring, having made the nearly 13-mile loop in  just 6:57. That means it averaged around 110 mph … AVERAGED! That puts it almost a full minute faster than an Audi R8 V10.

As for the McLaren, it claims that the P1 has made it around the ‘Ring in less than seven minutes, but McLaren hasn’t actually announced a time. This makes me strongly suspect that McLaren couldn’t get around faster than the 918, because if it had, McLaren would be crowing about it. At the same time, Porsche wants to bring the 918 back to the ‘Ring because they believe that the Spyder can manage an even faster time.

It is nearly impossible to draw  line between these two cars, but, despite the lap record, I think that the edge has to go to the McLaren because of its significantly quicker high-end acceleration.

Environmental Cred

Ordinarily, talking about a super car’s environmental qualities would be like talking about a pornstar’s bowling skill: it’s beside the point. These cars are different, though. Twenty years ago, Lamborghinis used panda slurry as a fuel additive (or so I’ve heard). Today, though, car companies are increasingly conscious of their greenness.

Obviously both the Spyder and the P1 are hybrids. Impressively, though, both are actually plug-in hybrids that are capable of running entirely on their batteries alone. The McLaren can run solely on its batteries for about nine miles. Coincidentally enough, nine miles is more than enough range to get the P1 from the casinos to the harbor in Monte Carlo, which is the main journey that this car is likely to make most of its life. On top of that, McLaren claims that the P1 can manage 35 mpg – close to 20 more than you get in the pathetically slow BMW M3.

McLaren P1 wheel MS
Image used with permission by copyright holder

But if you are really a cheapskate billionaire, allow me to direct your attention back to the Porsche. The McLaren manages nine miles on batteries? The Porsche can do 18: more than enough to lap the ‘Ring at speeds of up to 93 mph.

Not only that, it in its normal driving mode, the 918 Spyder can get an astounding 85 mpg. Thats more than double the McLaren and more evidence that you might be able to go faster than the Germans – if you try really hard – but you can never out-do them in efficiency.

Speaking of which, this road-going 887 hp fighter jet puts out just  79 g/km of CO2, which is 20 percent better than most versions of the Toyota Prius. Remember, this is the same car that currently holds the lap record at the Nurburgring … incredible.

The clear edge goes to the Porsche.

Poster Cred

Which one of these cars you would rather have on a poster isn’t just important to you, it is surprisingly important for the companies themselves.

Low volume halo cars like the P1 and 918 Spyder typically cost so much money to develop and produce that the company actually loses money on each sale. For instance, Bugatti and its parent company Volkswagen lost nearly $2,000,000 on each Veyron sold. The point isn’t immediate profit, but to develop new technology and build interest in the brand.

With that in mind, how a car looks and the excitement it generates is just as important as the power it puts out.

Oddly, both of these cars have some problems in this area. Porsche and McLaren’s work is more about engineering mastery than the passion of a Zonda or the sheer excitement of a Koenigsegg. Still neither car is slouch on looks.

The McLaren looks like something straight out of a Michael Bay sci-fi movie. It looks cool, poised and calculated. Unfortunately, the interior of the car is just plain boring. Aside from all the carbon fiber there is literally nothing that would tell you that you are in one of the fastest cars on the planet. That might be fine for some people, but it is hardly exciting.

2015 Porsche 918 Spyder 6The Porsche on the other hand is a bit more stiring. In its racing colors especially, the 918 Spyder looks like it has a personality, whereas the McLaren just looks like it has a wind tunnel. One detail I like in particular are the two humps that rise up behind the seats. It’s very reminiscent of classic racecars and I really enjoy it.

The interior, too, is far better. The combination of gauge cluster and large touch screens is a nice combination of classic and futuristic. Personally, I think it’s great.

There is more to the Porsche’s thrill, however, than just the looks. The 918 Spyder is thrilling, not only on its own merits but because it offers hope. Porsches may be expensive, but mortals can afford them. And because of that, we can look at the 918 Spyder and know that we have an actual chance of enjoying the technology that makes it great.

The McLaren is more like the CERN particle accelerator: hugely impressive but lacking visceral excitement. You appreciate that car with your head, not your heart.

The edge goes to the Porsche.

Checkered flag

In a competition between these two cars, it’s very hard to call one a loser. Both of them are almost unbelievable machines. However, because I pitched this article, I have to choose … and I choose the Porsche.

It may not have quite the performance of the McLaren, but it gets its job done with a bit more flare. I still cannot get over the fact that a 211 mph hypercar gets better gas mileage on lower emissions than a Toyota Prius.

On top of that, this car is better looking and more exciting. I have huge respect for the McLaren, but I just don’t love it the way I do the Porsche.  

Peter Braun
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Peter is a freelance contributor to Digital Trends and almost a lawyer. He has loved thinking, writing and talking about cars…
The week in EV tech: From sky-high dreams to ground-level drama
tesla robotaxi feud alef in transition flight

Welcome to Digital Trends’ weekly recap of the revolutionary technology powering, connecting, and now driving next-gen electric vehicles. 
Buckle up, folks — this week we’re taking off with a look at the futuristic dream of flying electric cars possibly gliding above U.S. roads sooner than you think. But before we get carried away, let’s bring it back down to the bumpy road of present-day realities.
Even if you’re mostly interested about the tech powering the electric vehicle (EV) revolution, it’s become increasingly hard to avoid the politics around it: You guessed it, we’re talking about this week’s public feud between Tesla CEO Elon Musk and U.S. President Donald Trump.
What does this have to do with EV tech? Well, quite a lot actually. For starters, the technology behind Tesla’s Autopilot and Full-Self Driving (FSD) modes may return in the crosshairs of regulators: Despite the names, these are still driver-assist features that require active driver supervision, and until Trump’s election, they had been under heavy scrutiny by safety regulators for several years.
Last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration  (NHTSA) launched an investigation into 2.4 million Tesla vehicles equipped with FSD. Big questions remain about the driver-assist system's performance under adverse, yet naturally-occurring conditions such as fog, sun glare, rain, and snow.
When Musk, who spent about $275 million to help elect Trump, was appointed to head a newly-created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), it raised more than a few eyebrows about his power and influence over the regulators who are supposed to oversee traffic safety, and therefore Tesla.
It didn’t help that the Trump administration followed Musk’s recommendations and relaxed crash-reporting requirements put in place since 2021, while also relaxing rules to accelerate the deployment of fully-automated robotaxis.
The Trump/Musk clash takes place just as Tesla is due to launch its robotaxi pilot progam in Texas later this month. While Trump is now threatening to pull billions of dollars in government subsidies and contracts from Musk’s companies, it’s unclear whether he might pressure the Department of Transportation to again tighten the regulatory screws on Tesla. What is clear is that Trump has never been a fan of electric vehicles and is already trying to end federal subsidies on EV purchases and leases. And while he had made a big deal about buying a bright red Tesla Model S back in March, Trump now says he wants to sell it.
Back to the tech
Meanwhile, Tesla is still required to respond to information and data requests from NHTSA regarding the safety of its robotaxis by July 1. And ultimately, it should come down to the performance of the technology.
For Autopilot and FSD, Tesla has opted for less expensive navigational tech relying on multiple onboard cameras that feed AI machine-learning models. But especially for so-called adverse driving conditions, it’s the more expensive technology relying on a blend of pre-mapped roads, sensors, cameras, radar, and lidar (a laser-light radar) which has received the nod of regulators.
Waymo, the sole robotaxi service currently operating in the U.S., and Zoox, Amazon’s upcoming robotaxi service, both use that blend of navigational tech.
For its robotaxis, Tesla is said to have upped its game in terms of autonomous driving with its Hardware 4 (HW4) technology, which does include radar sensors and promises enhanced environmental perception.
Will that be enough for Tesla to convince regulators, catch up with Waymo, or compete effectively with Zoox?
We’ll have to wait and see.
Flying cars
In a recent edition, we noted that while consumer confidence about robotaxi technology is on the rise, most people also want more data before they hop into a self-driving vehicle.
What about flying taxis? According to a recent survey by Honeywell, nearly all U.S. airline fliers, or 98%, said they would consider using a so-called electric vertical take-off and landing vehicle, or eVTOL, as part of their travel journey.
But while the buzz around flying electric vehicles has mostly focused on air taxis— like Archer Aviation’s Midnight, expected to fly athletes around the 2028 LA Olympics, or Joby’s slick air taxi, backed by Toyota — one California startup is shooting for something a little more... driveable.
Meet Alef Aeronautics, a Bay Area company that wants to put the “car” back in “flying car.” This week, Alef announced it has received over 3,400 pre-orders for its electric flying vehicle, the Model A — and get this: it’s not a futuristic prototype gathering dust in a lab. Alef says production could begin by the end of 2025, or early next year.
On the ground, the Model A operates like a low-speed electric car, complete with hub motors in the wheels and—wait for it—a real steering wheel. You can legally drive it at up to 25 mph on public roads, parking it in a normal garage like any other EV. It’s refreshingly manual in an increasingly hands-free world.
But when it's time for lift off, the steering wheel takes a backseat. For vertical takeoff and flight, the Model A transforms into a drone-like aircraft. Its cabin rotates sideways to create lift, and eight electric rotors—controlled by a flight system and joysticks—take over. No pedals, no yoke, just a bit of joystick magic (or autopilot, if you prefer).
The Model A has already received the nod from regulators for test flights.
While the $300,000 price tag won’t fit everyone’s budget, the company is clearly betting on a future where you don’t have to choose between a car and a flying machine—you can have both.

Read more
8 key things you need to know from Apple’s WWDC 2025 event
From a fresh look and updated names, to new features, more intelligence and live translation
iOS 26, iPadOS 26 and macOS 26 shown on devices.

The WWDC 2025 keynote ran for just over an hour and a half. For those of you who don't fancy sitting through the whole presentation, we've pulled out the key things you need to know from the latest Apple event.

1. Welcome to the 26 club

Read more
Tesla’s robotaxi service is almost here, but it’s not the car you want to see
Silver Tesla Model Y Juniper side

Tesla chief Elon Musk has said that the automaker is aiming to launch its robotaxi service on June 22, in Austin, Texas.

“Tentatively, June 22,” Musk said in a post on X on Tuesday, adding: “We are being super paranoid about safety, so the date could shift.”

Read more