| Author | Message | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
Junior Member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 59 Registered: 3-2002 |
Well I guess your right there Bret..the mclarenF1 and the lambos that can go fast lack one thing..the ferrari passion..ferrari IS a unique company and being unique menas not competing for top speed..so i agree with you | ||
| William Huber (Solipsist)
Junior Member Username: Solipsist Post Number: 247 Registered: 9-2001 |
Jezzz, sorry all, I thought you would enjoy a FERRARI going 266+ MPH. | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2266 Registered: 2-2001 |
There was an article about Luca in Forza that said just that a couple months ago. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2359 Registered: 2-2001 |
Giving credit to Brets' comments, Ferrari has everything down to a science. I you want a car beg for it, If you want dealer service pay dear for it, If you want Ferrari parts, pay dear for them. If you want anything direct from Ferrari you will pay a lot for it, and take it like it is. With this , following, if you will, why should Ferrari only concentrate on the top end, "Speed." They end up in a rat race that only costs them more in the long run. They know they have the name that carries the passion of their car and they know how far to go to keep that passion alive. They do know what they are doing. On the other hand there are those potential buyers who do look at the top end speed specs. But Ferrari knows that only they build "The Ferrari." | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Junior Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 73 Registered: 2-2002 |
I read an article sometime in the last 6 months in which Montezemolo stated that Ferrari was not going to get into an insane speed race with other manufacturers. He was referring to the FX (or F60, or whatever they will call the F50 replacement) and the fact that Ferrari was above competing with lesser manufacturers for the outright speed crown. Sorry, but I don't rember where I read this, so I can't refer you to the article. | ||
| Manu Sachdeva (Manu)
Junior Member Username: Manu Post Number: 153 Registered: 2-2002 |
Heard rumours that the Ferrari F60/FX may do 254mph!!! | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2260 Registered: 2-2001 |
Everyone seems to be missing my point though. By allowing the car to go these ridiculous speeds you have to give up a lot of overall performance (braking, cornering, acceleration, etc) at ever other speed. These Bonneville cars would get killed by the "slower" Ferraris (F50, F40). | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
Junior Member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 51 Registered: 3-2002 |
I would want a car that could theoratically go a certain speed because its not how fast uve driven ur car, its what your car can do | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 277 Registered: 11-2001 |
Well to add to this post, I just read about the Murcielago. They where trying for the FIA endurance record for 100 kilometers and 100 miles average top speed. They where at a track in Italy that is, I think, 6.7 miles round. Fells let me tell you that car hauls ass. It was averaging 196mph from a standing start. So it had to have been over 200mph. Oh yeah in order to comepete the car had to be bone stock. | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2252 Registered: 2-2001 |
My point is just that the only people that care about it are the ignoramus. But you guys are correct that it sells papers, and cars. Would you rather have a car that is glued to the ground all the way to 200mph because of ridiculously high downforce settings, or a car that can theoretically go 230+mph but can only do so because of a low downforce setup and needs to be driven by an F1 driver at speed? | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
New member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 38 Registered: 3-2002 |
While Top Speed won't be approached by most of us (hehe) it has to do with how well your ferrari can actually perform, as many of you have found out when u pushed it hard (over 150mph) while anything over 170 is completly insane since we wont get those speeds on the street, top speed is relevenet, if they made a ferrari like the F60 that could do around 220mph i bet rhode and track or mototrend would have in big letters " THE 220 MPH FERRARI F60" I can see the headlines now  | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Junior Member Username: Modman Post Number: 144 Registered: 11-2001 |
Fast cars are good for the adrenaline but for me looks and respectable power and handling does fine for me - Oh, forgot about the sounds of the exhaust note. Don't care for going over 200 since there are not many places you can do that safely, gives me the chills- imagine a tire blow out at over 200mph. or even take flight and flip over! My 348 is not the fastest car out there but it's still my most enjoyable car to drive of all the cars I ever had, and to consider it one of the least expensive cars I've had. I call it cheap thrills. By the way doing 170 was fast enough, don't know if I'll see that again.. was curious if the car could really do it, crazy enough , did it with the top off with a passenger. Don't ask where.... | ||
| Nunja Bitness (Jaxfl)
New member Username: Jaxfl Post Number: 29 Registered: 11-2001 |
Lamborghini has always been pretty optimistic with its top speed claims. I think one of the early Countachs was supposed to do 186 but only could manage 168 in one magazine test. The new Lambo did set some sort of speed record for staying around 202 for a time period. I seriously doubt if any of the previous models were much (if any) faster. A cars handling, ergonomics and 1/4 mile performance are stats that matter so much more than the top speed. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2354 Registered: 2-2001 |
We may say who cares about top speed, but this is one of the statistics a lot of potential Ferrari owners base their buying decision on. We as Ferrari owners don't care because we like our cars no matter what. But to some people it does matter. | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2247 Registered: 2-2001 |
Who cares about top speed anyway. This has nothing to do with you Andrew, but with magazines like R&T and C&D. IMO the people that right articles and down Ferrari for being slower than some competitors are simply idiots, there is no other explanation. Has anyone here actually gone 200mph? Does anyone see a need to do so? I would take the GIANT performance acceleration benefits of lower gearing and performance gains because of high downforce over the stupid, oh my car can go 240mph. I'm of course assuming most of my driving will be at speeds less than 200mph... BTW, the super, everybody loves it, coolest car in the world, McLaren F1 has been known to be inherently twitchy as a race car, well powered, but nowhere near as complete a car as an F40 or F50. Only the brave need apply to pilot it to high speed. But of course you'd never hear this. I only found it out when watching a video about it and a race driver (their LeMan driver commented on the road car and the track version). | ||
| William Huber (Solipsist)
Junior Member Username: Solipsist Post Number: 246 Registered: 9-2001 |
JUST FOR GRINS, CHECK THIS OUT http://www.bobnorwood.com/accomp.htm | ||
| Ryanab (Ryanab)
New member Username: Ryanab Post Number: 11 Registered: 3-2002 |
I believe the F60 should break it. | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
New member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 36 Registered: 3-2002 |
the 550: top speed: 199mph (i think) 355: 186mph 456: mid 180's same with 360 f40: 201mph f50: 202mph mclaren F1: 230mph + Various Lamborghini's: around 210mph anyone see a pattern here? keep up with the times ferrari? is there a reason for this sacred 200mph benchmark? |