| Author | Message | ||
| Nick (True)
New member Username: True Post Number: 49 Registered: 6-2002 |
F50. I like the front nostrils.  Beautiful.   | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
New member Username: Aventino Post Number: 47 Registered: 6-2003 |
Just while we're talking F40s can anyone enlighten me as to how the LM and GTE cars compare and how many are floating about with the 3.5litre engine in them. | ||
| ryan (Ferrari_kid)
New member Username: Ferrari_kid Post Number: 8 Registered: 7-2003 |
seeing as how most of you have experienced the F50 and F40 in person it seems stupid for me to even post my opinion since it is based on videos and pictures. i have read many reviews and articles about how a lot of drivers say the F40 handles like a kart. you sit so far up near the front wheels the response is that of a race car. as for the F50 i do see it as a showy type of anniversary car but with the perks of having an F1 derived engine. part of me wants to side with the F40, it being the last car Enzo designed. but another part of me likes that modern appeal of the F50 with its styling that i've grown to like. at first i thought i might pick the F50 for its NA engine and F1 derived V12. but the way a few of these posts have been about the raw power and kick of a turbo'd V8 and the skill that is required to harness that type of beast makes me want to learn how to do that. of course in the end i won't be that picky about it. being able to own either of them would be more than a dream come true. btw, Koenig did turbo an F50 giving it 800+hp but with adjustable boost from the cockpit to tune it down to "just" 660hp. i don't know how well it handled but they claimed 0-60 times of 3.0 with a top speed of 231 mph. | ||
| Dave Penhale (Dapper)
Member Username: Dapper Post Number: 747 Registered: 4-2002 |
Wow, that F50GT pic...the dogs dangly bits for sure! | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 781 Registered: 11-2002 |
Hmmm, very interesting and love this comment:
hahahaha Pete | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 634 Registered: 6-2002 |
PSK- it's a race motor to be sure, but check this: F50 road-going. 4.7litre V12, 520bhp @ 8,500rpm *right at redline*. torque (347 lb ft) at 6500rpm Designation "Tipo 130" F50GT race car. 4.7 litre V12, 750bhp@10,500rpm. *right at redline AGAIN!* torque peak: 383.5 ft lbs @ 8000 rpm. They just let it breathe a little longer, that's about it. Designation "Tipo 130a" You do the math, was it a pretty basic high compression rebuild: cams/pistons/springs and that's about it? Was the Tipo 130a motor actually slated for production, but Ferrari SPA decided to have it de-tuned because it would make the F50 into something you'd step into an INDY car to RELAX from? Oh, it's fun to think of the possabilaties, but this IS the only engine Ferrari ever elected to use as part of the car's frame directly ala F1... ever... Best! Ben. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 778 Registered: 11-2002 |
Holy cow:
Now that is some motor!!! Pete | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 632 Registered: 6-2002 |
This isn't a fair comparison, but it IS fairly astounding!!! F40- 164hp/litre. Turbo 2.9litre. (and pretty dam amazing) F50GT- 159hp/litre. NO TURBOS! (FSCKING UNBELIVEABLE!) Agree with you though, especially about the power bit. I think modern F-cars have PLENTY of power, but each and every one of them could loose 1,000lbs and gain some build/interior/driveline quality if you ask me! I'd rather see engine sizes come down a bit. I would LOVE for the new Modena to be a restyled Elise with a 2.6litre, 12,000rpm DOHC 180* V8 built from two 1300cc 4cyl motorbike engines. Imagine an Elise with 338bhp and a CG at your ankles! (assuming 130hp/litre, not impossible at all in a bike motor.) F50GT got it right, 750hp and only 1995lbs to carry around. Holey Hell! (too bad they only made 3  Best! Ben. | ||
| John (Ferrarifreak)
New member Username: Ferrarifreak Post Number: 37 Registered: 4-2003 |
Opps my mistake... sorry DES | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 773 Registered: 11-2002 |
Ben, Yes I guess lazy is going to far but the F40 is producing 170hp/litre if you just equate to the 478 standard hp. Anyway each to their own, and no Ferrari engine is lazy, I am just having a dig at Gordon Murray dispelling turbo engines just because he does not like them. I personally think that Ferrari should be working at making their engines even smaller, as I do not believe that we need to break the speed of sound  with a road car. Thus lets be sensible (putting my flame suit on now) and set a practical limit of 180 mph (300 kmh) and work at making Ferraris more efficient and clever. The time has passed for road rockets, so unless Ferrari are going to officially attack the tracks, lets design better cars not just faster cars. Pete | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 625 Registered: 6-2002 |
PSK- agree with you, except on one point. The 6 litre v12 in the Enzo is hardly lazy, at 110bhp/liter AND 6 litres, it's got exactly the right idea IMO. (ok, so I like the F50's 4.7litre V12 making *750bhp* better My opinion on turbo cars is just a very personal one. I like smooth revhappy screaming N/A better. May be mostly a sound thing (F40 is excepted from this, it sounds friggin incredible somehow!) I really dig the F40, infact it may be one of the only/few turbo cars I'm head-over-heels for! Best! Ben. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 5451 Registered: 8-2002 |
Kevin, please drive across the country and buy groceries here on Long Island... | ||
| todd (Flat12)
New member Username: Flat12 Post Number: 7 Registered: 7-2003 |
"the day I get the money. One of those (as seen above) is going in my garage. " Hugh, You're garage is full. I'm running a special sale right now on storage in my garage. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 770 Registered: 11-2002 |
Just want to discuss the turbo versus big engine philosophy. I know that Gordon Murray, in his very opinionated and out spoken way, has his views that turbo charging is the lazy mans way to power, but surely building these huge displacement engines like the McLaren F1 and F50/Enzo is just as lazy if not more so. My respect for Gordon Murray has reached an all time low because of these opinionated comments. My lovely wife bought me the 2000 Auto Course book and unfortunately it had a chapter on Gordon's views of motor racing design history. Not only are his sketches incredibly amaturish, but reading his article shows the most condensending attitude to every other idea other than his own. It is quite unbelieveable. What he embarrassingly has forgotten to think about is that he is looking back on old designs with the hindsight of modern automotive and racing thinking. When these cars were originally designed, they were breaking new ground and the industry was still trying to stand on its own 2 feet. How somebody can rubbish designs and expect to be respected is beyond me. All you read is how clever Gordon is and why does'nt every designer just do it my way. Well I think we all need to sit back and think about Gordon Murray's time in F1: - Started seriously at Brabham ... and yes they won WC's with his BMW turbo engined cars. The rest of the car was good, but the BMW engine was head and shoulders above the competition. Infact one of Gordon's cleverest designs, the car that resembled a dart, was a huge failure. Oh BTW they had Nelson Piquet at his peak driving for them. - Went to McLaren where he continued to revise an already brilliant design by John Barnard (who you do not read articles from in magazines rubbishing any other persons thoughts or ideas), i.e the MP4. Right up to the time of the McLaren F1 road car they were still racing revised versions of the MP4 (and they had Alain Prost and Ayton Senna driving too) ... how much revision I do not know, but the seed was sewn by Barnard not Murray. Thus I imagine that alot of us have got this opinion of normally aspirated engines versus turbo engines from Gordon Murray's frequent articles about how brilliant he is, and while I am the first to admit that the McLaren F1 is probably his best work ... what is so bloody efficient about a big lazy engine. A small turbo engine running under much higher stress is surely pushing the boundaries more?, and where is the laziness in this. It takes a lot of effort to cool a turbo engine and to keep it hanging together, plus the control side is complex. It is not just the case of slapping on a turbo ... the F40 is not a rice rocket modification, but an integrated design that put race car like performance at the front. The McLaren F1 is a better car because it excels in more areas, but that does not mean that is the only way to do it ... er, unless you read Gordon's writings ofcourse Yeah clever man, but too big headed for my respect. And I love the Auto Course book, especially as it was the year that Ferrari finally did it again, but what a shame they got him to tarnish it with more opinionated crap. Pete ps: Listening to other opinions is how the world goes forward, and the more I read about the Enzo the more I am warming to it. In black it looks great ... still rather Ferrari made a race car, but I can flap my arms around as much as I like, Ferrari aren't listening to me | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 5447 Registered: 8-2002 |
John, i know, that's why i put it in quotes, sorta going along with the F40/F50 theme of the thread... i believe it's aptly named as it is and shouldn't bear some silly numbers... | ||
| John (Ferrarifreak)
New member Username: Ferrarifreak Post Number: 36 Registered: 4-2003 |
DES, The Enzo is the Enzo ....and not the F60 at the same time. It was the journalists who started naming this car the F60 ....but Ferrari had no plan of naming the car ..F60.....it was to be named Enzo all the way and before that it was FX (code name only). Wait until 2007 for the 60 th anniversary of Ferrari ....and then the F60 will be build ..But we still dunno ..if Ferrari are planning for a F60. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 5431 Registered: 8-2002 |
i agree with Ronny, the F40 seems to be favored heavily over the two... For me, though, the F50 GT has a mean-ass look that screams exotic racecar... Now, if we throw the Enzo into this discussion, well, then, there's no other choice; it's the "F60" for me, all the way...! i'll take mine in black, thanks; it makes the bat mobile look like a Geo... | ||
| Pat Pasqualini (Enzo)
Member Username: Enzo Post Number: 800 Registered: 2-2002 |
Coop, try starting it in "safe mode" | ||
| Coop (360)
Junior Member Username: 360 Post Number: 132 Registered: 4-2002 |
Chris, I concur. I was shocked at their selection. I can't turn on my old laptop to retrieve the pics. I keeps on crashing. Anybody know how to take the hard drive out and retrieve them? | ||
| Greg (Teflon)
New member Username: Teflon Post Number: 32 Registered: 5-2003 |
Frank, You are probably thinking of Jim Spiro's F50 which he used as a daily driver. He sold it a few months ago though. I don't remember who owns it now. Greg A | ||
| Chris Parr (Cmparrf40)
Member Username: Cmparrf40 Post Number: 657 Registered: 3-2002 |
Coop, I always loved that pic, wished they would have used it in FORZA. Chris | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2750 Registered: 9-2001 |
There was an article in a recent FCA Newsletter about an F50 owner in La. that had over 60k miles on his car. He used it as a daily driver . | ||
| Coop (360)
Junior Member Username: 360 Post Number: 131 Registered: 4-2002 |
UPSSSS.... Forgot the main one... Tripple-Trouble...  | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 692 Registered: 2-2003 |
Kevin, awesome to hear! And I love the pic, btw. Larger res, perhaps? send it over to me in e-mail.. [email protected] Sunny | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 766 Registered: 11-2002 |
James,
Actually the reason they do not sell is simply because of maintenance costs and they are much harder to drive. You are talking nonsense saying Turbos do not have anything to do with Ferrari. Ferrari raced Turbo F1 cars just like the rest and won the WC for manufacturers in 1984 with a Turbo F1 car ... and I have seen one of these F1 beasts up close and nothing like a street car turbo application with things jutting out everywhere. Remember Enzo would race a diesel truck if it was the winning formula, he doesn't care how as long as you win F40 is a race car, the F50 is a car designed to make you FEEL like you are driving a F1 race car. Thus the most important thing was NOT performance but how it felt ... this confirmed it as a poseurs car forever. Fancy having a removable roof on a supposed race car ... only can do that when you get rid of the passenger, windscreen and every other aerodynamic restriction that is not required for open race cars. I have seen them all, at the same time, ie. F40, F50 and Enzo, and the F40 is the one I lust after and is probably the Ferrari I would buy if I won squillians of dollars ... maybe even more than a 250GTO, as I would love to try and tame a F40. Pete ps: It is not just about how fast the car is, but how it delivers the rush. Bad and mean turbos are just plain scary , and that is what I want to buy ... yep scary power! | ||
| Jordan Witherspoon (Jordan747_400)
Intermediate Member Username: Jordan747_400 Post Number: 1579 Registered: 12-2002 |
Kevin, if I ever saw an F50 at a grocery store I would probably have a heart attack! That really is awesome you do that! | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 607 Registered: 6-2002 |
Kevin- awesome. -Ben. | ||
| Kevin Marcus (Rumordude)
Junior Member Username: Rumordude Post Number: 173 Registered: 9-2001 |
sunny - it is funny you mention that. there was a comment from some ferrari dude talking about how you would never see this car at a parking lot for a grocery store. So i go out of my way to take it to get soem groceries here and there. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 691 Registered: 2-2003 |
I'm just chuckling that the word practical shows up in this thread at all The first thing I do if ever get an F50 is go to the grocery store and take a pic with groceries stuffed in the passenger seat in front of the supermarket, after pulling the car from around back of course long enough for the pic, of course... you have to do it, even if its just once! Sunny | ||
| David R. (Rodsky)
Junior Member Username: Rodsky Post Number: 142 Registered: 3-2003 |
This is a great thread - great to read all the responses (very informative). Coop - That F50 GT pic is gorgeous, I agree that the f50 would be my pic if I could only have one. I love the Enzo but think that the F40 and F50 are both better looking - as of now. They are over 9 out of 10. The Enzo is an 8.5. The F40 is also absolutely amazing - brutish, a drivers car, great look. Probably not as "practical" in that it should be more of a track/race car vs. street. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 690 Registered: 2-2003 |
Roland, I have no doubt! And what sweet torturous dreams that day will create in its wake. I can't wait! Sunny | ||
| Coop (360)
Junior Member Username: 360 Post Number: 130 Registered: 4-2002 |
F50 4 me... (I know it's a GT...)  ... F40 for you, Enzo for??? There, everybody happy ! ! !  | ||
| Andy Klueber (Adk)
New member Username: Adk Post Number: 7 Registered: 1-2003 |
For me if I where to win the lottery. It would be the F40 for me. With the simple mods like the brakes with better fade resistance and stoppng power. Also I think most here know of the differences of the F40 and F50 in the driving experience. Like the Forza issue Number 15 from Febuary '99 where they did a little test of Paul Frame's F40 and F50 around Texas World Speedway. All agreed in that issue the F50 was easier to drive at the limit when compared to the F40. But the F40 was a more rewarding drive at the limit and need a master hand when driven at the limit. And it was and some still say a brute of car that was uncompromising in what it did. That's the car I would want to test myself and learn to drive fast on a road course. With never really having to worring about getting to bored with it when for a few thousand dollar's worth of mods you can make the car into even more of a fire breathing beast that can still conquer all before it on the track even today. Yours Humbly, Andy K. | ||
| Jeff (Jeff_m)
Junior Member Username: Jeff_m Post Number: 184 Registered: 9-2002 |
Since I would be using my car for pimpin on the street, I would definately take the F50. Top off on Ocean drive, thats what the road cars are all about! | ||
| Kevin Marcus (Rumordude)
Junior Member Username: Rumordude Post Number: 172 Registered: 9-2001 |
i also find it interesting to see that everyone always talks about how they change this and that ont he f40, but not this and that ont he f50. That leads me to two thoughts: The car "as is" isn't enough, or the car "as is" is made to be tuned into a racecar - not one for the streets. And if you want a racecar, why not buy a purpose built one? I had this same line of thinking while pondering the stradale. I thoguht of it as a mix of my f355c, and f50 -- nice performance, trackable, all that jazz - but in the end it is a car dogged by compromise, just like the porsche cayenne and every japanese car i have ever seen tricked out. | ||
| Patrick Denonville (Arizonaguy)
Member Username: Arizonaguy Post Number: 345 Registered: 4-2003 |
James, and sticking a detuned F1 engine wasn't an easy way to get HP either? | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
New member Username: Aventino Post Number: 45 Registered: 6-2003 |
The motor is the soul. Sorry but IMHO the F40 lost a large chunk of credibility when (in designing) they stuck turbo's on it. That is a cheap way of going about getting horsepower and has nothing to do with what Ferrari is all about. Considering how much flak the XJ220 gets for it's Turboed V6 (that won plenty) in what is a beautiful car, the F40 doesn't deserve half of the praise it gets. And don't start me on horsepower, the LSR in NZ (around 290 mph I think) was recently taken by a Blitz Twin Turbo 3.0 litre Supra with about 1800 hp that was still a pig. Fiddle your wastegates and boost gauges all you want but Turbo's aint Ferrari. Explains why the Turbo F1 cars don't sell as well as any others. But it's your money Hubert and as James G has already told me, if you don't like it don't buy one. But, thank's to all the F40 supporters, it must be the cheapest way (other than a Daytona) into a Ferrari that is appreciating. | ||
| Patrick Denonville (Arizonaguy)
Member Username: Arizonaguy Post Number: 344 Registered: 4-2003 |
USA is at 515RWHP I think.For the F40... | ||
| Neal (Mercedes_benz)
New member Username: Mercedes_benz Post Number: 14 Registered: 5-2003 |
First of all both these cars are unbelievable peices of art. To me one is not better than the other. One is just alot more modern. I give the F-50 alot of credit for still looking like a car that can be brand new, or even a future car. The F-40 on the other hand still looks incredibly exotic, but no one can mistake it for a brand new car. I am more into the street look and i prefer the F-50's newer more civilized simple interor aswell. The performance on the other hand to me is a toss up, one may be better at something, but then the other can make up for it in a different way. If i was to choose one and moeny was no concern, it would be the F-50. I would not be upset with the f-40 though. :-) | ||
| peter brinzey (Ferraripete)
Junior Member Username: Ferraripete Post Number: 87 Registered: 11-2002 |
frank, your comment on usa hp is substantiated in the ferrari buyers guide by dean batchelor. usa is quoted as higher. | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 355 Registered: 9-2001 |
I think I would take the F50 over an F40, only because of the V12. I would have a 288 before either! Of course I have never ridden in any of the above and only have seen one F50 in a show room. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2748 Registered: 9-2001 |
Hubert, there was a recent article in either The Sports Car Market or AutoItalia that stated that USA-spec F40s had more HP than euro-spec F40s. I recall when I read it that that sounded unusual but the article claimed that Ferrari did that on purpose to help prevent gray market cars coming into the USA. | ||
| M.J. Callie (Dream_cars)
Junior Member Username: Dream_cars Post Number: 65 Registered: 5-2003 |
my # came from a couple of books on Ferrari. I dont have them here or Id reference them. if memory serves me right. while coverting to us specs the car gained about 35-45+hp over the factory stated hp. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1121 Registered: 1-2002 |
mj: euro spec f40's made ~ 478 hp. the US spec made ~ 450 oh account of the cats, and emissions equipment. neither made anywhere near your #. and all road going f40's featured the tipo f120a engines derived from the gruppeB f114ck engines used in the 288 evoluziones, et. al. | ||
| M.J. Callie (Dream_cars)
Junior Member Username: Dream_cars Post Number: 62 Registered: 5-2003 |
a u.s. f40 makes around 520hp if i recall. and yes a f40 over a f50 anyday. the car has "shock value" that the f50 misses. | ||
| Chris Burch (Cyb)
New member Username: Cyb Post Number: 47 Registered: 1-2003 |
Frank, have you heard an F40 with sport Tubie's and no cats? You might moderate your opinion on the F50 once you do. It's pretty impressive! Given, the F50 does sound reasonably well in factory tune, however when you experience the F40 "opened up" a little??? | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 901 Registered: 4-2002 |
Why not put an F50 engine in an F40 chassis/body. The best of both worlds! | ||
| Kevin Marcus (Rumordude)
Junior Member Username: Rumordude Post Number: 171 Registered: 9-2001 |
 | ||
| gian maria traversone (Giamma)
Junior Member Username: Giamma Post Number: 70 Registered: 10-2002 |
how many HP of the F40 does the American version has? | ||
| Dr. Ken Lee (Kenster888)
Junior Member Username: Kenster888 Post Number: 171 Registered: 4-2003 |
F50. End of discussion. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2744 Registered: 9-2001 |
gian, FYI unlike most other Ferraris, the USA-spec F40 has more horsepower than the euro-spec F40. | ||
| gian maria traversone (Giamma)
Junior Member Username: Giamma Post Number: 69 Registered: 10-2002 |
F40 , Once I almost sold the house for one!!! The F50 aaaaahhah , and by the way now a days you can get 2 F40 for the price on an F50. Cavallino magazine gives a price of 480 000 for the F50 and I saw an european f40 for 220 000.... | ||
| Tenney (Tenney)
Member Username: Tenney Post Number: 428 Registered: 2-2001 |
Like the sound and build details of the F50. But prefer the raw simplicity of Enzo's parting shot. That car's the bidness. Oh, and could have two F40's and a 550 for the price of an F50 in today's market. That adds a bit to the appeal also, IMO. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Advanced Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2743 Registered: 9-2001 |
I like the looks of the F40 better even with its little Dino engine. But, the sound of the F50's V12 is intoxicating. Can I have both ? | ||
| TomD (Tifosi)
Advanced Member Username: Tifosi Post Number: 4223 Registered: 9-2001 |
f50 for me but hard choice | ||
| Willis Huang (Willis360)
Intermediate Member Username: Willis360 Post Number: 1399 Registered: 8-2001 |
F40 for me. | ||
| Mark Moon (Enzomoon)
Junior Member Username: Enzomoon Post Number: 189 Registered: 4-2002 |
Tyler: I agree....if given the choice I would have the F50 in the garage, no question. | ||
| Tyler (Bahiaau)
Member Username: Bahiaau Post Number: 908 Registered: 12-2001 |
Sorry guys, I'm in the minority too. F50 all the way. | ||
| Roland E.Linder (F40lm)
New member Username: F40lm Post Number: 28 Registered: 3-2003 |
Here is a picture at PPIR  | ||
| Roland E.Linder (F40lm)
New member Username: F40lm Post Number: 27 Registered: 3-2003 |
Dear Sunny, I a few weeks, you'll change your mind when you'll be next to the LM for our road run... Some pictures are on their way if I can figure out how to do that.. Roland Players Run | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 684 Registered: 2-2003 |
F50, no doubt about it. If performance was my first priority, I'd choose the F40 as well. But I can't get my mind off the F50, the more visual appealing including the Enzo, at least in my mind, which counts as much with me as it does performance. Sunny | ||
| Dave Penhale (Dapper)
Member Username: Dapper Post Number: 740 Registered: 4-2002 |
Though I can understand why the F40 is the clear favourite, if I had the money to spend and the choice of either I'd have to plump for the 12 potter, and I seem unusual in loving the shape of the F50 just as much as the F40. | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
New member Username: Aventino Post Number: 44 Registered: 6-2003 |
Hubert, I'm too poor for an F50 but the wife's ok with a Maranello. I had a look at the specs for the Prodrive 550 buildup and think I can do a weight loss program/displacement and horsepower increase/better handling Maranello (starting with a '97 Euro high miler) that is going to give your F40 a run for it's money. Think 600hp and lots of carbonfibre. Sort of like a modern version of a 250SWB if you will and no Tubi, I'm making the exhaust myself and using the wall of noise approach. No contest with that poor little F40 V8, though it has occurred to me that some may possibly think I'm jumping the gun here a little. So I'll happily throw you in and let the car do the talking and then tell you how you should have bought more than 8 cylinders............ Bare with me though, only allowed one mess in the garage at a time and I'm still about 6 months to a year off finishing the current track day/laugh-your-ass-off project. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1120 Registered: 1-2002 |
ben: pssst:  (taken during the test day at BW for the forza "f40 spectacular" article, or debacle) regards, hubert. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1119 Registered: 1-2002 |
ben: somedays youre lucky, and on one day, i was witness to three f40's, on track, at buttonwillow; they sound amazing, look stunning, and go like stink. i won't lie, i've never been smitten with the f50 . it does sounds good, but it's too "inspired" as if there was some profound shape in mind, but ferrari couldn't make it happen and it looked proper tooling down the main ave in monaco during the GP; i.e., it looks rittzy, flashy, and "modern"; too street car for me. and, it just isn't an f40, and never will be. the f40 was the razors edge, and was the car i grew to idolize as "the" pinnacle of sports cars, in my mind. anyway, if i'm still in CA when i take delivery, i'll gladly drive anywhere, to give anyone (within a days drive) a ride, in CA. ps: about the sound; the f40 benefits from a flat carnk v8 ( you know this) and if you've ever heard a turbo flat crank v8 at full song, uncorked, you wouldn't lust after anything more... cart cars come to mind. hubert. | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 593 Registered: 6-2002 |
Hubert- I'm with you buddy! (and yet, I still lust after the F50 about as hard. Maybe harder? The engineering alone that went into the F50 just boggles the mind.) I posted again to say this: go STRAIGHT PIPES on the F40! Turbos quiet the exhaust enough that it's 'managable' on the street from what I hear. Shoots flame 2 feet out on the off throttle, very cool. I also hear an F50 with just straight pipes is something incredible to behold. "It dosen't sound like an F1 car anymore... It *IS* a bloody F1 car!!!" Both cars have their own appeal to me, and there is NO DOUBT I want to own both! Best! Ben. | ||
| gary green (Minuke)
Junior Member Username: Minuke Post Number: 63 Registered: 7-2003 |
I like the look's of the F-40 & F-50 better than the Enzo! | ||
| gary green (Minuke)
Junior Member Username: Minuke Post Number: 62 Registered: 7-2003 |
Ken, YOU ARE RIGHT! | ||
| Ken A (Zff)
Junior Member Username: Zff Post Number: 97 Registered: 12-2002 |
Wasn't the F40 the last car Enzo had a hand in? | ||
| Patrick Denonville (Arizonaguy)
Member Username: Arizonaguy Post Number: 341 Registered: 4-2003 |
Kevin, Gotham Racing 2? | ||
| Kevin Marcus (Rumordude)
Junior Member Username: Rumordude Post Number: 170 Registered: 9-2001 |
not to be too much of a reposter, but you can get soem nice soudns from my f50 in a 50mb mpeg with pretty cruddy footage: http://www.autosensations.com/video3/as-f50.mpg And, again not to be too repeatative, but the audio from this exact car will be used in an upcoming street racing game by a "large software manufacturer" in my neck of the woods. Might have to wait until around xmas time for that though. ;) | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1118 Registered: 1-2002 |
james: when i get mine ( sans cats and plus tubi exh.) I'll look you up, honest to god, and let you tell me how i wasted my money on the way home, and in person. | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
New member Username: Aventino Post Number: 43 Registered: 6-2003 |
Dave Helms, thank god you're here and a little sanity can prevail. Hubert, it's your money and if you want to waste it on an F40 instead of saving towards an F50 (hey, you're nearly half way there already) I can't do much about it. There is that old saying many years ago about how when you bought a Ferrari you bought the motor and got the rest of the car thrown in for free..... As for the shape that doesn't look as good, the F40 has taken the balanced 308 shape and ruined it. IMHO the F50 will always look good, distinctive, and not a product of any particular era the way the F40 does. Do I need to mention that F1 derived motor again? | ||
| Eric Stringer (Vette79)
New member Username: Vette79 Post Number: 13 Registered: 12-2002 |
john: read back through my post.... although I did say the f50 looked at home with testarossas , 550's etc youll notice I have "although it demands much more respect" right after that statement. im not saying it doesnt stand out. hell no. im saying that I view the F40 as something that, is a question of sanity to have on the road. perhaps that is a bit of an exageration, but I know many would agree with that. although I have never had any first hand experience,ie driving or rides, I have talked to owners of both f50's and f40's, and I have been in the presence of both, each once and once only. I do not know if either of them had stock exhaust. however, watching the F50 run, I can tell you that power seems very linear once you get the rpms up a bit. also the engine note is deeper than anything you can ever experience through a video on the computer. listening to f50's on the computer I find myself noticing part of the engine note and its presence that cannot be reproduced through a data file, partially I beleive because of resonance and part of it being that nothing compares with being there. you have to be there. I am not downplaying the f50 in any way. beautiful machine. on the other hand, the f40 was amazing. on the F40, you have one turbo kick in at a certain rpm then have yet another monster turbo kick in a few thousands later.... and each time one kicked in, you knew it. there was no mistake, no doubt in your mind how serious the consequences were when those turbos kicked in. the engine note changed, morphed into a throaty, vicious, howling scream. the car leapt forward, and if you hadnt thought ahead you were going to eat a wall. hard. but if you had the car pointed the way you had wanted, and managed to master that oncoming rush of power, you were god for a few moments. its about as subtle as a jogging headon into freight train at full tilt. the whole car is raw, visceral emotion poured into a work of metal and glass. ok. im done now. *********EDIT**************** hubert, Im with you there buddy. except mine will be black! | ||
| Dave Helms (Davehelms)
Junior Member Username: Davehelms Post Number: 86 Registered: 5-2003 |
Im one of the few that picks the F50 as one of the most incredible Ferrari's ever made. One must sit behind the wheel to truly gain a respect for these cars. Either that, or get elbow deep into the workings of the car (I ended up neck deep in one of the 50's I service) There is nothing like the sound of a V-12, hard mounted to a carbon tub sounding chamber, at a wisker short of 10K RPM. NOTHING! Now pull the cats, add a Tubi, and Tubi headers and the sound from 3 blocks away will make your hair stand on end! Couple all that nonsence to the fact you could eat a cheese burger while doing in excess of 150MPH if you so wished, it is so well designed. One gasket in the whole engine, as it is all o ringed! Think about that when you are moping the floor under most other models. Yes I also love, and have a great respect for the F40, and have a good fair amount of seat time in those as well. What a rush! They are 2 differant cars that each show the most advanced aspects of their respective era. I guess talking about the "looks" of each car is personal preferance. As a final thought, you can hang a pair of hair dryers on a VW, and that is pretty quick as well! | ||
| Byron (Bmyth)
Member Username: Bmyth Post Number: 995 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hubert - AMEN. I'm right there with ya, buddy. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2101 Registered: 6-2001 |
The F50 is a poser: it's slower than the car it replaced, and in my humble opinion, doesn't look as good. Art | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1117 Registered: 1-2002 |
james lee:  the day I get the money. One of those (as seen above) is going in my garage. | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
New member Username: Aventino Post Number: 42 Registered: 6-2003 |
Nope, you guy's must be on medication, it's gotta be the F50. Turbo's on a Ferrari? On a Ferrari, Turbo's? Had to repeat that. On a car that was supposed to be a celebration of the marque? Turbo's? Don't get me started. And they dragged a lot of the F50 out of the early 90's F1 effort. Remember those days, Ferrari struggling, Prost driving for them, cheering them on just to qualify in the top half of the grid. The suspension and internals are a work of art in the F50. It is beautiful. There are a lot of lost souls out there, and my work is not yet done. | ||
| John (Ferrarifreak)
New member Username: Ferrarifreak Post Number: 33 Registered: 4-2003 |
Ok ....I agree with you all for the F40. Twin-Turbo V8 ...First anniversary car....more special..and got more attention than the others. But I would disagree for saying the F50 '' reminds us more of a high end production ferrari and that the f50 looks at home in a bunch of 550s and testarossas'' I'v seen the Enzo , F50 and the F40 and I have to say ..their all look special. And the F50 ...V12 engine...it Sounds soo good!!!.. But like you guys I would still take the F40. | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Intermediate Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 1186 Registered: 3-2002 |
I kind of like the "crappy sweathole biker bar" analogy! Sometimes that's pretty appropriate. | ||
| Jeff Green (Carguy)
Member Username: Carguy Post Number: 395 Registered: 10-2002 |
Ya know....some of you guys really do a good job of expressing emotions in writing....and it's the F40 that's causing that emotional outpouring. I picture it like your in a crappy sweathole biker bar, and the biggest slobbiest guy in the place suddenly stands up and quotes Shakespear! I have thoroughly enjoyed reading these posts. Whew....got that off my many chest... | ||
| Eric Stringer (Vette79)
New member Username: Vette79 Post Number: 12 Registered: 12-2002 |
id go with the f40 also, without a doubt. ive been in both seats- fast street cars and fast race cars. the f50 simply looks too "finished" for me... it reminds me more of a high end production ferrari, ie a street car because the windows, doors, cooling, etc was almost too well integrated. its too clean. dont get me wrong, clean is good- for a ferrari that you want to take your date to dinner in. but if im spending 400 g's plus on a car that is supposed to be a model of a racecar, I dont want it to be "clean." i want to see those huge-ass slats in the back for airflow.i want to see composite windows riveted to the body. I want a powerplant that not only requires but also DEMANDS a talented hand. the whole aura of the f40 is that it looks, feels and has more presence of a race car because it is more of a race car. the whole car from the race sized wheelwells begging for slicks and the bare bones interior to the hi-performance turbo'd motor just screams "EAT ME!" its not civilized in any way, it doesnt try to be in any way, and whats better is it just looks like it doesnt care one bit that its not. to me, because of the windows for one, the slats in the back, the way the interior is finished. an f50 looks at home in a bunch of 550s and testarossas, although it demands much more respect. the f40 on the other hand doesnt look at home with these other ferraris. rather, you ask yourself if it should have a license plate. thats just cool. yes, it would take a lot more effort and practice to run it hard and to its potential, but its SUPPOSED to be a racecar, right? id take the f40 any day. not that ill ever be able to make that decision. | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Intermediate Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 1185 Registered: 3-2002 |
The F40 has a kind of "Don't F**K with me" look about it. Also, coming before it may have lessened the impact the subsequent F50 made. It had been so long since Ferrari made a car like F40 (I don't count the GTO, since that was based off the 308 body) and then a short decade later comes another generation. People weren't as starved for the F50 as they were the F40. And first impressions are lasting ones. | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 588 Registered: 6-2002 |
I REALLY dig the technical aspects of the F50, engine stressed member, slightly detuned F1 motor, etc. Not so hot on it's skin though. F40 "hits it" big time. Some LM versions had a 3.4litre motor, and about 750hp withought restrictors I wonder how many of us like the F40 better, have we ever driven/ridden in an F50? (I haven't...) F50 is actually supposed to be about the same or a tad faster in a straight line, but it sure dosen't look it. One of the big F-car mysteries actually. Best! Ben. | ||
| Kevin Marcus (Rumordude)
Junior Member Username: Rumordude Post Number: 168 Registered: 9-2001 |
if you want a car you can't drive without experience, get the f40, if you want a car your wife could also drive, get the f50. The f50 suspension can go up and down for speed bumps. Since there are no turbos you don't have to worry about suddenly losing it while in the turn -- or if it's wet, losing it even going straight. In a straight line, the a stock f40 will probably beat the f50. But with the same experience driver around a real road course, the f50 will win every time. Also, of the f40/f50/enzo/288 gto (if you want to include it), the f50 is the only one which has a top that can come off. Mcuh like I consider the 456, I'd call it it exactly not the 'bad boy' -- it's the more mature and behaved of the set. | ||
| Paul Thompson (Paul_t)
New member Username: Paul_t Post Number: 5 Registered: 6-2003 |
I had the pleasure of seeing both an F40 and F50 at a recent Ferrari owners club display. The F50 is stunning but the F40 just makes me speechless from every angle. It just looks brutal and so purposeful. Maybe it is because I had it on my wall as a kid, maybe it was because it could do over 200mph before any other car. Don't get me wrong I would dearly love to be able to have either car but if i had to make a decision on either it would be the F40 without a moments hesitation. I remember when I saw my first F40. I was on holiday with my parents and we went to Monaco for the day and we were driving from Casino Square and this F40 came down the hill like nothing else, simply amazing. I think that the other major factor in my own personal feelings for the F40 is that it was Enzo Ferraris swan song. It is one of the few cars on this planet that really moves me. There, I've said it. Going to sit in a dark, quiet room and contemplate!!!!!! | ||
| Oldslow308 (Djparks)
Member Username: Djparks Post Number: 423 Registered: 2-2003 |
I've seen the Enzo a number of times, parked and moving. It changes in character with every new angle I view it from. At some angles it is stunning and at others rather disjointed or awkward like where the aft inlets join the body and roof. Almost like there is something missing...like styling continuity or flow. I can't place it in a catagory with the F40 or the F50. There is no comparison. I was told the F40 is simply a street legal race car. The F50 could have been what the Enzo is but appears to have been designed by committee. It's neither or. To me the Enzo is a killer performer like the F40 but with maximum refinement (not to be confused with luxury or comfort). A class all it's own, simply put. The styling is still taking some getting used to though. A matter of taste. DJ | ||
| '75 308 GT4 (Peter)
Advanced Member Username: Peter Post Number: 2944 Registered: 12-2000 |
Jeff: "...Imagine if the F40's engine was bigger than the puny 2.9 liters..." Hey dude, you feelin' alright? 'Cause I think 470+HP makes for mighty fast in my books...  F40 does it for me, no question. The F50 never did anything for me and the Enzo, well, I have yet to see one... | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1111 Registered: 1-2002 |
I love the F40, and if there's a ferrari that I just had to have, that would be it; however, the f40's got a weak spot: the brakes. Most owners upgrade to LM spec (or custom) brake setup. Anyway, the f40 is everything you'd want out of a drivers car (in one machine) and it apologizes for nothing; the f50 always seemed to me to be a little confused. Yes, it's engine was a stressed member, it had a detuned f1 derived f12, it had a c/f tub, etc., but it's shape and it's delivery seems apologetic; the shape and guise of the cars is very much more "look at me" and it tries to be a street car, it tries to be pretty, and it comes off exuding a perplexed sense of self. The f40 tells everyone, and anything, around it to shove it if they don't like what they see, and makes no bones about it. I see the f50 GT cars as more closely hitting the mark for a follow up to the f40, but they're not, nor were they ever intended to be. | ||
| Dave Goldman (Dave328)
Junior Member Username: Dave328 Post Number: 235 Registered: 11-2002 |
I agree. The F40 just speaks to me on a different level than the F50. Maybe it appeals to the muscle car/ drag racer in me. I just love anything that has to be "tamed", instead of just used. Dave | ||
| Jeff Green (Carguy)
Member Username: Carguy Post Number: 393 Registered: 10-2002 |
I agree...the F40 is just a "bad boy" Ferrari. The F50 seems like it's in the same game but wants to wear a tuxedo instead of sweat pants. Imagine if the F40's engine was bigger than the puny 2.9 liters, I think it's amazing it does as well as it does with just 180 cubic inches. If I had my choice of these two cars, and I'm SURE I never will, I'd pick the F40. It just has the itangible "something" that makes you want one. It evokes the Ferrari passion. Just my opinion. | ||
| Patrick Denonville (Arizonaguy)
Member Username: Arizonaguy Post Number: 332 Registered: 4-2003 |
The F50 was launched 5 years after the F40, but is slower in most cases, and I think it's rather ugly with its nostrils...The F40 is just bare bones with its looks,performance,and power. | ||
| Ronny Jones (Ronny)
New member Username: Ronny Post Number: 23 Registered: 6-2003 |
It seems to me that the F40 has a better reputation and desireability than the F50 - why so ? The F50 is younger and as a consequence should be more technically advanced etc.. With the arrical of the Enzo, it seems like the poor F50 is the ugly sister of the family. Or is it just I've misunderstood ? Ronny |