Why so much Cali hate?

I'm confused. I've never said Ferrari has sold out.
I like modern Ferraris. I own one. I simply think the
Modern Cal is not something that because of it's looks
that I would want to own.

As for not being able to pass one that's something that doesn't keep
me up at night.

 

OK, now here is a reasonable comment. Like I have said many times: sure, I wish they had the same car in an ultra-light, luxury-stripped, pure coupe version: a front engined Scuderia if you will. Hell, if enough people buy one, maybe they will. In the meantime I'll take what I can get. After all, I can't complain that they built the car to suit the bulk of purchasers: I won't be able to buy one until one of those kind people first buys one, drives it for a while, and then goes to sell it.

"goes to sell it" while eating major depreciation... Thanks!!

 

This is also a reasonable comment. I am not thrilled to pieces with the looks of the Cali. What I am anticipating being thrilled to pieces about is the way it drives. That's what will help me get over the styling. Quickly and easily!

 

Excellent. So this thread is done.

 

Wishful thinking...

 

There are plenty of echo chamber threads where you can hear how wonderful your fine new clothes are without any contradiction of the unseemly voice of reason. This is not one of them.

The 246 and 308 GT4 were not designed by FIAT to a lesser pricepoint and then re-badged as Ferraris in order to maximize the fleecing of the rubes. That, not time, is how they are different from the Cali.

 

Credit to Napolis, I may have to make this quote my signature, I love it:

"225K for a car that you have to explain why its butt is not ugly."


Edit - I don't hate the California, I think the performance is great, Jim's description just makes me laugh out loud every time I read it. My wife loves the car, and indeed she may be in the target demographic. I recently read that "the California has a host of features that will help it appeal to wearers of Manolo Blahniks not brogues." Now, where did I see that ....

 

It would probably be a good thing if this thread would die.....but for some reason this one has turned out to have a strong life.I think it must be because the car (the new California)is such an insult to the traditional Ferrari supporter.It hurts when a manufacturer we all consider the best in the world perpetrates a lump such as this upon us.Perhaps deep down we feel betrayed,insulted by the notion that Ferrari expects us to accept this crap.If this is the new standard,I'll be lookling elsewhere.
-raptr

 

Exactly. And so we move on to other topics and fondly leave this one behind.

 

I don't think that Ferrari intends to build and sell 5000 California's a year. Montezelmolo has publically announce that Ferrari plans to sell 2,600 California's a year. Prior to the recent slump in the global car market, Ferrari was selling about 6,800 cars per year according to Ferrari's own publication.

The merits of the billion dollar investment to add capacity may not have come at the most opportune time. But improving production facilities on real estate you own sound like basic good business sense. Montezemolo has that in spades.

He didn't steer Ferrari off into a dead end like so many of the other Marques. Merecedes spent more than 30 Billion buying Chrysler- wasting countless manpower hours to sell it for a 26 Billion loss not counting the opportunity cost of captial. Heck, GM loses 1 Billion dollars every week due to years of stupid management decisions.

Luca has been at the helm of Ferrari for close to 18 years hitting home run after home run. He's the best in the business IMO.

If the world does not go down the financial drain without return, the customers will line-up again and Ferrari will be there to capture the business.

 

Luca, as the chairman of FIAT, now has a platform to build a Ferrari Town & Country minivan in that fabulous new factory

 

You know, now I don't feel so bad about the few thou I overpaid on my Mondial. What the hell were they thinking - even stupid Americans knew Chrysler sucked.

 

You were lied to, and you don't have the means to recognize that.

And to address your earlier silliness; the "Daytona" was not compromised by systems engineered to make the inept appear artful and the impotent seem masterful. It is a tool for traversing great distances with equally great rapidity in safety, with a high level of comfort characterized by competence and control rather than designer logos, shiftlessness and "the world's fastest folding hardtop". In it's day it had no equal, and 40-odd years later it is still a better choice.

It is ridiculous to compare the two.

 

You presume to be their spokesperson?

 

Luca is a codpiece macher.

 

The Daytona was the flagship 12 cylinder supercar praised in its day pure testosterone, the Cali is a bitsa with Maserati DNA pure estrogen, Ferrari should include a color matched handbag,purse and nail polish in a box with each new Cali

 

Toyota, Mitsubishi, Hyundai, and Ferrari
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

...Free strap-on with every purchase.

 

LOL ha ha with the Cavallino logo on it of course

 

I wish: "I know my needs" lived to see this.

 

That's all swell, but a Cali will dust a Daytona, so how you figure that it's a girlyman car is way beyond me.

(One proviso: I am only talking about the model with the clutch pedal. Cars without clutch pedals are boring, and, yeah, a bit pink.)

 

Saddle Up.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Here's a nice video of a Pozzi Blu California. I think it gives a better idea of the proportions and shape of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFozdI4HSJ4

 

A lot of 2009 cars will dust a lot of 1970 cars. That's more about technology than girlymanishness.