Why so much Cali hate?

Another modern cookie-cutter F-1 autobox car, to drive around and blab on the cell phone.


Buy a nice used Daytona or 512TR - a real car.

 

Thank you.

Dave

 

Given the option of cars at the price, the choice is obvious for me, I would rather have a mid engine rear drive Modena-F430.

 

That's nothing, I've ridden in 2 planes worth over $100 million dollars in just the last two weeks....... and it only cost me $400 round trip.

 

good one!

 

Some may argue, with varying success and precious little influence, the 330 2+2, C/4 and Mondial are "unattractive" as a result of their conservative and purposeful designs; but to compare them negatively to the Cali 2+ is to reject the whole of modern automotive aesthetic development, if not indeed the total of Western Art from the Etruscans up until the abstract expressionists.

To compare the C/4, in particular, to the Cali 2+ is to compare Botticelli's Birth of Venus with Picasso's Woman In An Armchair.

...No insult intended.

 

Sure, but you make "daft" look "reasonable".

(Do I really need a smiley?)

 

I'm not a buyer for a California, but I don't hate it, I wish Ferrari well with the car.

Almost nothing designed today IMO is as beautiful as the Italian designs of the 40s-60s. To my eyes the California is fine looking and fills a niche. What's wrong with a useable car? I also liked the elegant 456, especially the manual versions. The Maranellos are a bargain at current prices IMO. Not everything has to be hardcore, does it?

I have a 612 and, like most other 612 owners here, absolutely love the big bulbous thing. I drive it every day, take it everywhere and love all its poseurisms, especially the BOSE with the nav and TV and 3 year satellite radio subscription, the magic adjustable roof, the console switch that lets you combine superfast shifting with the comfort suspension setting, the trunk I fill with groceries and other badges of suburban life. I even love the tiny, grudging cupholder. Drive it in the rain, over gravel, through mud and so far on two 1000 mile + trips, with more to come. Do we love the car because we have no choice, the beasts are probably unsellable without taking a Madoffian loss? No, I think owners love the 612 because they can use it.

To those who'd say I'm a poseur:

- so many of the beautiful older cars IMO were incredibly luxurious indulgences

- I ordered my Scuderia without a radio!

 

There's a great yawning spectrum between 'not hardcore' and Milquetoast.

On top of which the thing is sinfully unattractive.

 

Ah, it's not milquetoast (great comment, by the way). 0-60 in 4 secs, not too bad.

Would I rather have them spend time and resources developing a mid engine 12 cylinder 21st century Boxer? Of course.

But they've built spirited but "comfy" cars for a long time. Take the 330GTC: some have electric windows and a/c, a very luxurious interior. Are the GTC or GTS milquetoasts?

Pretty entertaining thread, and I admit the haters are a better read than the defenders.

 

Yes, but that's expected. The defenders have spent more time driving Ferraris, the haters more time reading about Ferraris.

 

IMO the California could be viewed like a Benz...........its popular in the new subdivisions

 

This is a picture of my wife's 2005 Maserati Spider I took today - does it not look like the Californias forerunner?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

A bit.


Love the garage.

 

No.

 

errr it looks like a maser in log cabin

 

Had to laugh as I thought of an appropriate change/addendum to you post...........

"IMO the California could be viewed like a Benz..........." its what you get when you come up too fast

Cheers, Hank

 

My only point is that Ferrari has been making cars that are not hard core enthusiast rides for decades so criticizing Ferrari for making a "practical" model now is simply unjustified. BTW, I think your art analogy is a poor one.

Dave

 

Comparing the California spider to the Maserati spider is like comparing it to this. Both have about as much in common.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

goober.

welcome back.

However, your last remark ain't gonna cut it.

72 hours in the sin bin.

DM

 

???

About the log cabin?

 

This is the first log cabin I've actually found interesting.

Not sure I'm a "hater", but I'm not keen on the California's looks, and I'm a Ferrari owner/driver. Moreover, I've read the same critiques from several journalists, and discussed the car with Ferrari friends, and the comments are fairly consistent: some nice bits on the front, bulbous backside, overstyled on the side. I think some of the commentary here is over the top, but there are truths in automotive design related to proper proportions, and the California misses on several of them.

I love Ferrari, but this isn't one I'd lust after. As posted earlier, the car's intended for a new target market. Obviously most of us aren't in it.

Well, no.

 

I'm in complete agreement with you.

But, it's OK to not appreciate the car (believe me, there are several -- which shall go nameless-- that I don't care for either) but still appreciate these "new target market" buyers into the fold. They too will be Ferrari enthusiasts. They chose to buy the California over a Mercedes AMG or BMW or Porsche or Aston Martin or Maserati for a reason. It's a reason we should applaud, appreciate, and respect.

 

Top Gear gave it a back handed compliment by saying that it was the first Ferrari that drives better than it looks

 

glad I dint say what I really thought