Dan Neil (LA Times) does NOT like it...

He gave it the number 1 turkey award at the LA Auto Show.

http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-turkey-cars-pg,0,2675967.photogallery

You’ve got to hand it to Ferrari. When they shoot themselves in the foot they fire both barrels and then reload. This silly, swoopy red confection, with a face like Pokemon and a keister like Tom Arnold in a thong, is probably the single least desirable Ferrari ever made. I didn’t like this car when it was called the Maserati 4200 and I like it less now. They will sell thousands.

Ouch!

 

"They will sell thousands."


Lol, so true.

 

It seems Dan Neil isn't giving Ferrari much credit for trying to make a nice 'silk purse' here...
CH

 

Pokemon face? Here is a pic of the red Ferrari California at the LA Auto Show.

Well, at least they didn't put a big smile on the front of the new Ferrari California like the 2010 Mazda 3.
Check out the grin on this new silver Mazda!

In case you don't know what a Pokemon face looks like, here is a close-up of Pik-a-chu.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

And Dan Neil is who?
Am I missing something or has the definitive Ferrari guru emerged from seclusion to throw his pearls of wisdom before us?

 

Not to defend his intentionally acerbic style, but Dan is actually a pretty good journo. He's got a long history of pissing BIG people off, including GM. As a matter of fact, it's cost him a few day jobs. Some of it's shock value but some of it is unvarnished criticism. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Neil

He is a bona fide car nut, however. He used to come by my old shop decades ago after he started at the News and Observer (Noisy Disturber) and he'd come along for test drives in various vintage F-cars, Countachs, Fiat Dinos and the like. We had some fun together.

He wrote a wonderful story about getting married in Italy and enjoying the entire way of life. He does "get it," most of the time. Heck, he's won the Ken Purdy Award and a Pulitzer Prize...

He didn't get to drive it? Maybe that's it...

 

He lost all credibility with me when he called it a "Maserti 4200". There are no common parts between the two. If you want to slam something, fine. But to base it on falsehoods shows ignorance.

I bet he loves the Smart car (which is why he hates the Brabus), thinks the GT-R is a bold beautiful statement, and considers the glass window in the hood of the corvette Zr-1 (that shows... a boring piece of cast aluminum) is "clever".

I actually thought the Mustang looked much better than the original (the tail lights did see like a gimmick and the interior is not much better) and the Honda Concept looked pretty impressive when sitting in a gallery of row after row of Japanese blandness.

 

I love Dan Neil, but he is wrong who has shot himself in the foot, it is him.

 

I´m wondering if this guy has ever drive tested the car or just saw it at the L.A. Auto Show.

 

Having just gone to the LA Auto Show I have to agree with all of his picks...especially that Toyota. It IS uglier than the Aztek.

The Califonia just doesnt have any presence in person. It could have come from any manufacturer. Im sure it drives great but thats always been secondary to me after looks/presence as Im an artist not an engineer.

 

+1, I'm a big fan of his writing.

all of you with your shorts in a knot, go watch his review of the 599 GTB, that will make it all better

 

Wrongo, dude. This car started out as the Maser GT replacement with platforms shared by Ferrari and Alfa. After the separation, it morphed into the entry level Ferrari GT. Somewhere along the line, possibly due to emerging markets demand for exotics, aging demographic for Ferrari buyers or the sliding dollar compared to the euro (and Ferrari possibly not currency hedging - why would they need to anyway?) the car became what it is. It was re-engineered to be the aluminum bodied, tech stuffed, GT-vertible we see now.

Maserati, on the other hand, took what they could of the design (not sure how much Luca let them have), did the body in steel, adapted their trademark interior work (to me this is Maser's best feature), put the Quatroporte engine in it and there you go - Gran Turismo. The GT S is the evolution of the car. In fact, it seems that it is probably what the car was supposed to be all along with the development engine before the whole Ferrari-Maserati separation. I was at the LA show and crawled all over the California. It is not what I would characterize as a Ferrari sports car, but then it seems that Ferrari is more interested in making and selling cars that are more mass market. This is a GT car with a gimmick folding top. It has a long nose and a rear end that only a mother (or BMW designer) could love. Now, if they offered a completely stripped down version with a fixed top, no tech and a manual 6-speed, I might take the car more seriously. As it is, only the 430 line provides a link to the sports car legacy of Ferrari. So, Neil is quite correct, IMO.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I say again, this car has no common parts with the Maserati 4200 (a car I happen to own and like very much). Saying so shows the writers ignorance on the subject.

 

He never said it had common parts. He implied that the concept for the California was originally going to be released as a Maser...which from what ive read on this forum by the more knowledgable folk was true at one point.

You are putting words into his mouth.

 

Aside from the Maserati jab, I can't say I disagree. The Cali isn't pretty enough for a Ferrari.

 

The actual quote: "I didn’t like this car when it was called the Maserati 4200 and I like it less now."

If that doesn't sound like he's saying its the same car but rebadged, I don't know what else I can say.

Don't miss my original point. Its OK for the writer to criticize the California. I'm just saying he lost his credibility with me when he stated his ignorance on the matter.

Now, you guys can go back and debate whether a Dino is a Ferrari or a Fiat.

 

In retrospect, yes that statement is technically incorrect. This car is not the Maser 4200 (or GT as we know it) nor does it have parts in common except the engine (short block mostly) being an evolution. However, if Neil meant that this was supposed to be the new 4200, then he would be entirely correct. Or if he was speaking metaphorically rather than literally, he would also be correct, taking in account literary license. Either way, I would not discount the guy's opinion since he is correct.

 

That quote's most obvious meaning is that it was going to be the Maserati, but then became the Ferrari. It does not imply anything about the current Maserati, whatever that may have started out as and whatever it may be now, sharing parts with it.

How can you base everything on one sentence? Take his writing as a whole. Point after point, well made.

 

I like the car but the Maser GT looks much better, IMHO. I like Maser in general, and that is probably why I like the California. It's really a Maser convertible with a horse badge. Ever since the F430, Ferrari, Alfa, Maser are parts-bin sharing iterations of each other, with variants of the same engine used between them (and probably more than only that).

 

Erm, not sure I agree. Aren't the engines based on the same block (with other components differing), on the same production line, by the same people, in the same factory??? At least that's what I saw when I was touring the engine shop...

 

The entire car was originally a Maser. This was to be the successor to the 4200 Spyder. It's gone through several prototype versions including one with an Alfa Engine. Years later it's turned into the California.

 

I wonder what Dan Neil drives? An old 82 nissan with primer on the rear quarter panel and a broken tail light? Yeah Danny boy, the California is really awful. He would never want to own one! I believe him!

 

IIRC
The Maserati GranTurismo chasis is based upon a shortened Q-porte.
The new Alfa chassis is based upon the Maserati 4200/GranSport
The 4.2L engine is similar between the F430, 4200, and Granturismo...though in various states of tune, crank geometry, etc.

Fiat is just trying to fill in a "niche grid" and maximize parts, overhead and generate profit.

I think Jaguar has now realized it is better to be small and luxury than bring your "brand" to all people.

Ferrari risks a lot here I think.

Should be:
Ferrari = ultimate everything...nobody on Earth can compete, even those posers at Lamboweenie
Maserati = Italian mystique in sporty luxury...compete with Aston, Bentley, MB, etc.
Alfa = downscale sporty....compete with mid-range for MB, BMW, etc...
Fiat = GM.....oops

 

Dan Neil is a creative writer-that's all he is. He never went to design school or even took any engineering or physics classes. He never worked in the automotive business either. He was a creative writing major at some no name college. He probably wanted to write novels. Too bad he doesn't spend more time trying to write his novel then pen his uneducated opinions about cars he hasn't even driven and can't afford to anyway. Reminds of some poor fat bald guy going on about how he has seen Gisele Bundschen and thinks she is ugly and would never want to date her.


Okay now I feel better!

 

for what it's worth, I just read that the Alfa 8C's engine is actually the V8 block from the F360 stroked and bored out to 4.7; very interesting and didn't quite remember that. I knew the 8C was a Ferrari, in part, somewhere.