is it just me ?

Doesn't get my attention, it doesn't scream Ferrari. If I saw it on the road, I wouldn't even take a second look. However, If I saw an older, more beautiful and true Ferrari, say a 328, 348, 355, TR, 550 or anything like that, then I'd stare at it until my eyes start to bleed. This company is going in the wrong direction and fast.

 

Ouch, but +1!

 

+2 but I'm a bit biased.

 

Am I right in saying that the last pretty car was the Stradale?

What the heck were they thinking with this thing?

 

What was Ferrari thinking? Resale on that thing is going to be a big goose egg. It's the perfect Ferrari for those that bought a Pontiac Azteck.

 

A lot of F Chatters share the same sentiment that all the Modern Ferrari's have lost the old Italian flair. The last model to carry on that heritage was the 355.

However, as I recall, the 328, 348, and 355 could be bought at a discount often without a wait list.

Yet, the modern so-called "globalized, diluted, designed by committee , no soul, non-Italian , enzo roll over in his grave, mitsubishi-like", Ferrari's sell at a premium, with long and often sold out waiting lists and in greater production volumes.

If these modern Ferrari's are so much less soulful that the 355,348,328, and 308 lines why is it that the prices for these latter infinitely more collectible models haven't skyrocketed?

I mean why spend 260k for an F430 spider when you can have the real deal: a 355 spider for 80k or
the 328 for 40k ?

If you believe the F Chatters it is because the buyers are too stupid to know the difference. If you ask modern Ferrari owners i think most will tell you that it's because they feel the cars are so much better.

 

Sorry malibuguy,but originaly, Ferrari is a classic design and not an up to date design like today.You can t change the story.In the future,people ll remember a Dino,308,328,355,456,550;but probably not actual F-cars.Not because technology wasn t ok,just because they don t have the real italian design;and this last remains the reason why you don t buy another car.
etter car argument is a no sense,just because less than 5% drive their Ferrari at the limits on the track. Ferrari customer has changed.Nowadays,they want absolutly the last new car,a kind of up to date object.They don t care about history,design, F-culture...
Even if you give me a 430,i prefer keeping my older 355 like you said...

 

they are just better cars in terms of quality and drive and performance it also has to do with the fact that wealth across the world has skyrockted, its no longer limited to Europe and North America, there is just more demand for these cars and hence the prices reflect that when the model first comes out. I'm not arguing that the newer cars are not better in terms of quality of finish, drive, and performance, that I agree with (the 355 I had came with a plethora of issues with it but I still loved it), what I'm taking about is form and design, "Eye Candy" and in this case Italian Eye Candy like the 355 and F40 and Daytona and so on.

So in a nutshell we want beautiful cars not just performance.

S

 

Exactly what I was thinking

 

Design and forms do change over time, but beauty is timeless. Just because the classics were beautiful doesn't mean that the new ones require a non-beautiful form to be modern and not derivative of the past. Besides, Ferrari mines the past like nobody's business and is always sticking classic design themes on cars as a marketing ploy. The California is a prime example; it appears to be designed by the marketing department which is why it is full of compromises.

When you taste a great wine nobody has to tell you that it is good wether you have a sophisticated palate or not. Likewise, when you look at a new car it is apparant if it is a stunner or a dud. Nobody had to look at the new Maserati Granturismo and debate if it was beautiful or not. Nobody had to explain that it was a 'new design language' which was the excuse used for the awful Bangel-butt BMW's. And nobody had to say 'keep looking at it for awhile, it will grow on you'. Everybody who saw it raved, both in person and in photos.

Ferrari appears to be getting the second tier designs from Pinifarina. The Maserati's are looking much better so maybe guys like Jason just have a more free hand without the marketing department's influence, so they can produce purer forms. There is no question that left alone PF could have produced a fresh, beautiful, or even revolutionary next generation form that set the world on its ear without any problem. They are the best in the business.

It is Ferrari marketing that dictated the design of the California, not the designers. Ferrari wanted to make sure they could sell 10,000 cars a year so marketing was power at the table when the trade-offs were being debated and decided. Luca wanted to check as many boxes as he could so they would be certain to move cars.

 

it looks very TVRish to me

 

No one will be impressed when they get the bill for a clutch change or a new set of pads. Sorry, but this car will depreciate faster than any other Ferrari ever made. It certainly will be a first! Wait until 430s start to come off warranty. They will also lose 50+K of value overnight. (That's the price of a new set of rotors and pads!)

 

IMO this car is strictly for women and guys who complain that Ferrari's don't have the same comfort characteristics their Mercedes has ...................

This F-car iteration should be a huge hit with paris, britney and lindsay................ Ferrari should have cut straight to the chase and named it ....... the ......... 'Ferrari Hollywood'!!!!!

On the other hand it will do as the factory intended ........... tap into a whole new market of buyers and bring in the green ...... .

 

I think it looks good...it doesn't look Ferrari though. But I think the styling is great. I'll probably get flamed here, but the TR, F40,F50 were the epitomy of exotic for Ferrari and the Enzo is up there with them somewhere. Low, wide, great performance, and unparalleled F1 sounds.

 

In five years they'll be worth $60,000 and all over ebay.

 

Completely agree with arezzo and gothspeed, no soul that make you wonder how they did it, and it feels like it's geared towards the Hollywood crowd.

 

What you've said about beauty being instantly recognizable is not actually true. Just look at the history of art and music and even science. Sometimes it takes time and understanding to see things for what they really are.

There are a lot of artists who were not appreciated during their lifetimes because they were ahead of their time. And there are a lot of art that was very popular during the life of the artist which became forgotten.

Every hear of Van Gogh. The only person to buy his paintings during his life was his brother. And remember those one hit wonder bands whose songs shot up on the chart only to fall off the map 3 months later.

This applies to science as well. Ancient astronomers who dared to believe that the earth revolved around the sun were punished for their heretical beliefs.

And it still happens today. A doctor who thought that ulcers could be caused by a bacteria was ridiculed by his peers local and global, lost his medical license, and almost had to give up his practice. Years later, his ideas are taught and practiced by doctors all over the world.

But cars are less important matters to the world. We can hate or love the California. But I don't think the road is going to be worse off with the California.

 

The cost to repair Ferrari's is a whole other topic.

Why are they so expensive to fix? Is it reasonable for some rational person to pay $3,000 for a clutch change?

But are the older cars any cheaper to fix?

BTW the dual clutch transmission is supposed to last over 100K miles. And carbon ceramic brake rotors more that 100K.

 

I hate all of it I really need to see one up close to fairly judge

 

Why is it the design of the California has to be relentlessly defended and apologized for? Why does this car require so many apologists?

I have read all of these apologist's rationales but comparing it to a Van Gogh represents a new high water mark. What is the idea here 'no prophet in his own time'? Are you suggesting that in 20 years it will be regarded as a masterpiece and all the critics just lack artistic insight? Those who think it is stunning are visionaries ridiculed by the ignorant masses?

These are cars, not inspired paintings or scientific insights. The analogy is a non-sequitor. Worse yet for the arguement, this is a car for the masses relatively speaking, not the rare, inspired elite who could precieve its beauty.

The California starts with a derivative front and ends with a big rear to hold a folding roof with sides given the impossible task of integrating them together as a whole. No more, no less; no harm, no foul. It is what it is, it just isn't great, inspired, or god sakes a timeless masterpiece and a contribution to mankind.

No one has to buy it if they don't want to, but if it were not on the road and we never saw one it sure would be no loss, as there are lots and lots already.

And they will probably sell a lot of them because it is badged as a Ferrari. After all, even the BWM 7 series with its ugly Bangle-butt has sold like crazy because its a Bimmer. Ferrari is much better at it than those guys.

 

Ferrari need to sell new cars they build NOW, not tomorrow or next year by the time some have warmed to their current shocking poor styling.
Pete

 

1. Not everybody loved the Daytona when it came out.
2. There are 2 years waiting lists, so it seems that many buyers don´t need warming up to that "poor styling".

Said that, I don´t get crazy about modern Ferraris, but I don´t think that the California is an ugly car. I just think that it´s too much "mainstream"; I mean, it needs 4 more cylinders and one less navigator screen.

 

What I don't understand is how little faith many FChatters have about Ferrari. To me Ferrari have had a pretty good record of producing better and better cars. The 360 was a pretty big jump over the 355. The F430 a significant improvement over the 360. The 599 is a major improvement over the lackluster 550/575. And so on.

Anyway, the extreme criticism over the California is unbalanced and unreaistic. Those who have actually seen the car attest to this. Even if they don't think the California is the greatest, they do find it is appealing and impressive.

Furthermore, it is puzzling that the vocal and extreme critics most of whom haven't seen the car are the most intolerant of anyone who likes the car.

It is almost as if some FChatter want to dictate what Ferrari should have the right to produce and what the public should have the right to like let alone buy.

 

...Blind people who like to drive.

 

Because it was deemed (like the more recnet 456, 550/575, and 612) too sedate, too restrained when compared with the Miura and Mangusta.

All the Ferrari designs I've just mentioned have aged very well indeed, whereas cars like the 599, and now this California, will look like the 2nd gen Supras they derive from in just a few years.

There's a two year wait for the California 2+, specifically?

One US dealer was recently soliciting orders for the Scuderia, so I think the bubblicious raison d'etre for this nuovo FIAT Dino has all but popped.