| Author | Message | ||
| Taek-Ho Kwon (Stickanddice)
Intermediate Member Username: Stickanddice Post Number: 2037 Registered: 11-2002 |
>>People who love Ferraris rarely ever have this feeling because the cars are the "est" of anything (fastest, latest, prettiest etc). They simply love the cars and the philosophy of the man who decided to build them.<< Very well put Alex. Cheers | ||
| Alex Papas (Alexpapas)
Junior Member Username: Alexpapas Post Number: 57 Registered: 2-2003 |
Ferraris will never be mass production cars. They have history in racing that is unsurpassed and they still have way more demand for their new cars than they build. Their current supercar is undoubtedly the best thing going and the McLaren never exceeded sales of 100 even 'though they had planned to build 400. So apart from simple statistics, there is obviously something much more about Ferraris than just the name. I kinda get annoyed at the Ferrari naysayers on this forum and elsewhere. The universe of Ferraris ever built since 1947 is really quite small (including race cars) and they bear zero comparison to anything else. People who love Ferraris rarely ever have this feeling because the cars are the "est" of anything (fastest, latest, prettiest etc). They simply love the cars and the philosophy of the man who decided to build them. So for Frank and anyone else who needs to have the fastest car to feel good, buy a Honda Civic and breathe on it with nitrous and attach huge exhaust tips and then go out and race kids in Firebirds - you'll feel good and we won't really care one way or the other. | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 677 Registered: 11-2001 |
No one will be able to say when the HP wars will stop, I know money doesn't stop so the manufacturers will still accept taking more, the buyers are the suckers. A high percentile of sports car owners can't even handle their cars properly so guess what? figure that out if you can. | ||
| Taek-Ho Kwon (Stickanddice)
Intermediate Member Username: Stickanddice Post Number: 2019 Registered: 11-2002 |
I think this thread proves that vintage Ferraris are the way to go!  You gotta love those old ones. Cheers | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 1778 Registered: 7-2002 |
my point was simply...how fast does a car need to be to be "current and worthy"? I meant that a cyclone might kick the f cars ass, but as JGlick said there is more to a car than #'s. At the current rate where is the stopping point? 2500HP, 0 to 60 in 1.2 secs, corners like on rails? At some point they just become bragging rights...aka viper owners! | ||
| jeff ryerson (Atheyg)
Member Username: Atheyg Post Number: 414 Registered: 8-2002 |
Entry level Ferrari? The V8 Ferrari's have always been priced new more than the average home, A pompus description, I would not classify any Ferrari as entry level, it sounds like a new grads first job econo box car. Ferrari has always priced the V8 series a good 40% more than Porsches premier car the 911, in 1987 a Porsche 911 Carrera sold for around $40k and the 328 sold for $70k,the Turbo 911 around $60k at he time, the same today as the 996 is in the low $80s and the 360 around $150k. Its much easier today to design a fast car with computers which have greatly reduced costs and improved performance, this began in the 90s with the NSX and Viper which took Dodge only a year to go from prototype to production. All this has leveled the performance playing field | ||
| John A Sanders, PhD (Sandersja)
New member Username: Sandersja Post Number: 11 Registered: 1-2003 |
What must be considered is the amazingly high levels of performance from todays even average cars. For a STREET CAR there is very little opportunity to get near the limits of a Ferrari, or even a BMW/Corvette/etc for that matter. I think that exotic cars vendors like Ferrari must get away from just performance numbers and focus on style, balance, and elegance. When 'vettes and vipers (et al) are within only numeric fractions of measured performance times at only a fraction of the cost, some change has to happen. For me, the difference that a car can do 200 mph vs someone elses 190 (or 0-60 of 4.0 vs 4.3) is meaningless. | ||
| Rikky Alessi (Ralessi)
Member Username: Ralessi Post Number: 289 Registered: 5-2002 |
Ok I have a question : If you took the F2003-GA and this year' Minardi, and compared them in cornering G's, acceleration, 0-100-0, and all of the other relevant test areas, which one would be better? The Ferrari of course, but probably by a slight amount. Week in and week out we see what actually happens though - am I correct? | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 57 Registered: 5-2003 |
Michael, It's Syclone. And I was wrong about the test. It was a 348, not a TR. Greg A | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 676 Registered: 11-2001 |
There will always be a faster car out there and as far as performance for dollar value I'd have to put the newer Ferrari's on the bottom of my car list & I could care less of what's the fastest because it's all temporary and you won't see the practicality in it anyway. In fact I'm starting to lose more interest in most of the F-cars except for some models of the past. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1320 Registered: 1-2002 |
Oh man. More bench (arm-chair) racing? | ||
| Michael C. James (Mjames)
Junior Member Username: Mjames Post Number: 103 Registered: 6-2003 |
The GMC Cyclone test was conducted against the Ferrari 348, not the TR, BTW....and the test conducted was straight-line acceleration. Interesting point neglected by people rooting for the GMC was that at the 1/4-mile, the truck was 'topped out', while the Ferrari was still strongly accelerating! And since there are no turns/curves on a dragstrip, other important factors never came into play in the test. What I find interesting regarding the Enzo vs. McLaren argument is that Ferrari and the Enzo designer never set out to match or beat the McLaren performance figures - that the Enzo CAN beat the McLaren was something of an afterproduction 'accident' of sorts. Had Ferrari and the Japanese designer attempted to make a McLaren-beater from the start, I don't think there would be any argument what the outcome would have been. A Formula One-esque car with covered wheels - certainly in line with an appropriate Enzo Ferrari tribute, but...one thing's for sure, Ferrari Spa can build a car that beats most superbikes off the line if they REALLY WANTED TO. However, Ferrari has never been about 'chasing numbers' for people to buy their cars, why start now? There aren't many people on the Road & Track staff who can afford Ferraris anyway, why should Ferrari kiss their as$?? | ||
| Andrew-Phillip Goalen (Andrewg)
Member Username: Andrewg Post Number: 336 Registered: 9-2002 |
Frank, the entry level Ford is a KA that will struggle to hit 90mph, the flagship is the new GT, you may want to revise your thinking over what entry level to compare 3X8 Ferraris with, a good comparison instead of the Porsches you mention(all of which cost half the 3X8's price), why not compare the 328 to the 911 3.2Carrera, and the 348 to the 911/964, you'll find that the Porsche's match if not better the ferraris, and they cost 20% less to buy new. As James has already pointed out magazine racing's great but you cant beat a real jump out of one into the other test to form your own opinion's | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 55 Registered: 5-2003 |
Fine. I probably wouldn't have even said anything if you had just mentioned the 60's in your original post. I only mentioned the truck b/c it isn't a sports car and it was quicker than the TR. I didn't realize you were qualifying your statement about the level of the car in the manufacturer's lineup when I commented on the 911 Turbo and the 3 Series Ferraris. I understand the concept, but your original post was so general that it appeared that any comparison would be accepted in this discussion. Jim, I am not saying the Syclone is more desirable than a Ferrari, I simply used it as a comparison point. This wasn't an example of, "I'd rather have..." Greg A | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 1771 Registered: 7-2002 |
How fast do you guys need to go on yer way to McDonald's? I'll take a slow, ratty 308 over a tricked up Cyclone truck any day. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2880 Registered: 9-2001 |
Greg, you are correct that I didn't mention the 1960s in my original post. but, that was the era when you could say that a Ferrari looked great, sounded great and performed better than other sports cars on the market at the time. You couldn't say that about Ferrrais since then. I did say "sports cars" in my first post which rules out comparisons to trucks. As far as entry level vs. flagship, you have it backwards. A flagship Ferrari will probably beat all entry level sports cars on the market even today. but, an entry level Ferrari will not beat a flagship model of all other makes. | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 54 Registered: 5-2003 |
Frank, That's great, except you didn't say anything about the '60's in your original post. You didn't mention the Boxer, James did. If you read my post, I said, "Syclone Pickup Truck". Therefore, you can assume that I know it's a pickup. You are now qualifying your original post. You said, "peformed better than all sports cars on the market". So, now I have to compare entry-level to entry level? That sure doesn't sound like all sports cars on the market. Greg A | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2879 Registered: 9-2001 |
Greg, I didn't even mention the Boxer. Other than the 288GTO, all the cars I made reference to were 1960 era cars. FYI, the 365GTB/4 is a Daytona, the 365GT4BB was the eary Boxer. The Syclone was a "truck" not a "sports car" .The 3 series Ferraris a/k/a Dinos, were entry level Ferraris, while the 911 turbo was the Porsche flagship. The Ferarri 3 series competed very well against the Porsche 912, 914 and 924 at that time. You must compare entry level to entry level and flagship to flagship to make a valid comparison. Take issue all you want, but in the 1960s there was Ferrari and then everyone else. James, I believe you have driven both an Enzo and a McLaren, but I doubt you had all the test gear and fifth wheel monitoring done in most good magazine tests. A seat of the pants comparison can be deceiveing. My Boxer feels much faster than my M5, but my M5 will blow away my Boxer in all areas of high performance. Even the factory provided info on the Enzo and McLaren indicate they are very close in all areas, | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 53 Registered: 5-2003 |
James, I love Ferraris. I know there is more to a car than just the numbers. However, I do not like it when people make extremely over-generalized statements regarding Ferraris, such as Frank has. The Boxer was never officially sold here by Ferrari. I didn't say you couldn't buy/own one, just that it wasn't sold here. Semantics, I suppose. Greg A | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2475 Registered: 10-2002 |
Greg There is a very good comparion of the 959 and the 288 in Classic Cars. The 288 and the Boxer were sold here. (The 959 is now sold here). IMHO there is more to cars than #'s. My P4 is slower than my MK-IV but that never enters my mind when I run my hands over her cruves. | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 52 Registered: 5-2003 |
James, Frank said,
The TR was beaten in a 1/4 mi. test by a GMC Syclone pickup truck. Out of the cars you mentioned, the Boxer and 288 GTO weren't even sold here. I can't remember ever seeing a comparison, but how did the GTO compare to the 959? The majority of the 3 series cars were inferior to the 911 Turbo. I take issue with Frank's sweeping statement of Ferrari's performance superiority in the market. Greg A | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2474 Registered: 10-2002 |
Frank Unlike other's I prefer the real thing over magazine racing. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2877 Registered: 9-2001 |
Greg, the 250GT, 275GTB, 365GTB/4 and 288GTO all come to mind as past market beating "production" Ferrari road cars. James, no I have not driven an Enzo or a McLaren but I have read many tests on them aand their performances are very close . And, the McLaren is an over decade old design and seats three to boot! | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2472 Registered: 10-2002 |
250 GTO 275GTB Daytona Boxer TR 288GTO Enzo | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
Junior Member Username: Teflon Post Number: 51 Registered: 5-2003 |
Frank, Yes, you could say that, but it wouldn't be the truth. Please name some specific past models that were market beaters, excluding the F40 & 50. Greg A | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2471 Registered: 10-2002 |
Frank Have you driven an Enzo and a McLaren? I have. Once again your remark is incorrect. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2876 Registered: 9-2001 |
Willis, the Enzo is a NEW CAR yet it doesn't perform much better if any than the over 10 year old McLaren F1. | ||
| S Rovito (Riv)
New member Username: Riv Post Number: 26 Registered: 9-2002 |
I had a conversation with Frank at claccic coach (Elizabeth NJ) a month ago and we were talking about mid 90's 8cyl cars. He had mentioned it was not until the mid to late 90's that Ferrari started incorporating some of its racing technology into their production cars so I can see that Ferrari may have fallen a little bit behind the competition. I do not know exactly what technology but if Ferrari can include it in production cars why not? Riv | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 1974 Registered: 10-2002 |
I think part of this is Montezemolo's influence who is catering more to the 'spoiled' folks who demand creature comfort. Not that you couldn't have it both ways (comfort and power), but the focus seems to have shifted a bit. I think I read in Forza an interesting point: With Maserati on board, going forward they will cover the 'limosine' segment with the Masers and use Ferraris for the less compromised cars. Haven't really seen that so far, but there is hope. | ||
| Willis Huang (Willis360)
Intermediate Member Username: Willis360 Post Number: 1496 Registered: 8-2001 |
No. Notice that the competition are NEW CARS while the Ferraris being compared are current models designed several years ago and have been on the market for a few years. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2875 Registered: 9-2001 |
I recall in the past you could always say a Ferrari looked great, sounded great "and" performed better than all other sports cars on the market at the time. Now, Ferraris look great, sound great "but" they don't perform better than all other sports cars on the market. There are a lot of new sports cars on the market for 1/2 or less the cost of a Ferrari that perform as well as or better. Has the competition gotten that much better or has Ferrari gotten a little lazy and started depending on it's name rather than it's performance ? |