Were we all wrong about the FF?

Are you kidding me?

If I was your son I would have PLEADED how comfortable I was! Just get it get it get it getiti getitgetit!

 

I have seen many Cali's in the flesh and do not agree. The lines are disjointed, and particular that streak on the side from the small vent behind the front wheel looks completely at odds with the rest of the side profile. It is a car that is trying to be good looking but fails. It's by no means ugly, but too disharmonious to be called beautiful.

For the people that say that the FF is in line with the very first road cars that Enzo produced, I can only say that I am very confused by that statement. Ferrari made some enclosed 166 Berlinetta's but they were hardly the last word in comfort, and as far as I know all 2 seaters. According to Hans Tanner there were some, extremely rare, Ghia clothed 2+2 212´s but those were hardly comfortable cars (particularly for the passengers in the back) and have, IMHO, nothing in spirit with the FF. The 250GTE was the first 2+2 Ferrari produced in series, and that was introduced in 1961, the 15th year of Ferrari. Hardly one of the first cars to come out of Maranello.

I feel the FF is more in line with 365GT 2+2, and the 365GT/4 2+2/400i/412i, which were also heavy, comfortable, real 2+2's with ridiculous horse power and speed for their days. All these cars also featured innovative technology and gadgets (like the electric quarter lights, first IRS on a Ferrari 2+2, an automatic that could handle 350+ bhp).

I think the FF is a tour de force but I'm not in love with it. I'll try to get a test drive this week and see if I change my mind. I'm also curious to see it in the flesh, somehow I've missed it so far.


Onno

 

'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder'. We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

Its an old turn of phrase - no longer in common use (but made me laugh - my dad used to use it ) meaning "don't include me in you generalisation - I always thought that"


And I'm with bulletproofwallet and a number of others having always liked the FF

 

I wil find out next Monday when in Maranello

 

All good points. My initial negative impression of the FF has completely changed. It is a technological "tour de force", aesthetically pleasing, and clearly a 2+2 in the best Ferrari tradition.

I apologize for my rash judgment.

On the other hand, I still find the Cali a horror which does not deserve the badge (nor the name). Every time I see one "in the flesh" it only reinforces my opinion. Sorry Bdelp!

 

So did it all fit? I don't really think there is any sportscar that is able to fit a whole family comfortably. Only car that does such a thing is a bentley azure, can't come up with anything else.


I remember seeing a picture of a porsche 997 turbo cabrio with the parents in the front and their son of 20 and 6"0 in the back. Looked really bad.

 

The FF sounds unbelievable, but when I saw it back at the beggining of January, I hoped some of the design stuff was just a disguise. Unfortunately, it wasn't What is the worst part, is there are several proposed designs that accomplish the same ideas but look amazingly better.

 

Absolutely. But this was just to counter your argument that it looks great in real life. To you it does, to me it's not quite there.

Glad you're enjoying it!


Onno

 

The FF is a great car but not an all round car. Would you really pack your dirty mountainbike in that full leather boot? Do you think it would be great to go skiing and put the wet stuff inside? Will the 4WD really work in 20 cm of fresh snow and rough icy european roads?
NO - NO and NO!
i will keep my Porsche Cayenne for these things, drive my Ferrari Spider on hot sunny days and short trips and enjoy my great 456 MGT on highway-rides with my wife and daughter.
There is no "all round car".
i like the FF and maybe sometime it will replace the 456 but there will always be a SUV in my garage and a Spider for top down driving.

 

Onno, we actually did not buy the California due to the lack of true 4-person seating. And, although I do like the appearance, I do understand your issues with the "disjointed" lines. BTW, you've got a beautiful assortment of Ferraris!

Michael, you make great points about different cars being best suited for different purposes. I've also never found the perfect all-around car, but I suspect the FF comes closer than any other car probably ever has. And, I would gladly take it skiing if we had ski slopes anywhere close to here. My go-to car for snowy and icy days in Kentucky is my 1997 Porsche 993TT, with no electronic gizmos other than ABS. The FF would have to be a better option. I'm just not an SUV man, although we do own a Cadillac Escalade for hauling 7 people and formerly had a Range Rover. I've never been able to bond with such tall, ponderous vehicles.

 

Onno, you are correct in that it best lines up with cars like the 500 Superfast, 400 series, or 365 GTC4. However, it is in the same spirit of the early 2+2s as well, saying the FF isn't like them because it's comfortable is like saying the 458 is not in the same spirit as the 308 because it is so slow (comparatively). I will agree that the size disparity does have an effect on the comparison though

As others have said, you have a fabulous assortment of Ferrari's. It would be interesting hearing your thoughts on the FF having lived with a 330GTC

 

At the risk of being flamed, I think the FF is a huge improvement over the 612 in the areas of performance, appearance, and utility. If you need 4 seats (which eliminates the 599 and 458) and carrying capacity (which eliminates the Cali) then there's no better ride.

 

Exactly, Ferrari asked 612 owners what they would like improved or changed and applied that to the FF. Hands down it is an improvement in all areas, and the 612 is one of my favorite Ferrari's

 

Thank you kind Sir. I wish they were all roadworthy! We are working on that, though.

I hear what you are saying, but I have to disagree Bryan, at least if you're talking about the 212 2+2's. The problem is that the early 2+2's based on the 212 were not really 2+2's. They were comparable with the new California in terms of their rear cabin space. To me, that is not on a par with the philosophy of the FF which is really designed to be practical for the rear passengers as well. Secondly, the 212's engine in these cars was not detuned, with a narrow power band and very little torque. I don't know if you've ever seen a 212 in action but it makes a hell of a racket. Great for the driver, not great for the kids in the back. Now this is not related to the state of technology at the time - in those days there were already very comfortable cars available to people who could afford Ferraris. I am certain that if an owner back in 1951 would have used it as a Bentley replacement, his wife would have said "the Bentley back or a divorce". To me, the FF is a direct competitor to the Bentley Continental GT. It is a sporty car when you want it to be, but can waft along to the shops, schools, or chalet in Aspen. This is why I think the FF doesn't qualify as a direct spiritual descendant of those cars. The first true start of the line would be the 250GTE which was really designed to be a 2+2, and as mentioned that doesn't qualify as one of the "very first cars to come out of the Ferrari gates".

I'm enjoying this conversation, BTW. And I have to qualify that my comments about what I think the FF represents are made without actually driving one, and for that matter I haven't driven a 212 either. And I hope to never be a passenger in the back of either. LOL!

You are very kind indeed. If/when I get a chance to sample the FF I will report back, and I promise to keep an open mind!

Incidentally, last week someone was trying to convince me my 330GTC was a 2+2.


Onno

 

Sorry, I still view it as a relatively unattractive car.

Hopefully I like enough other finer cars that my tastes are valid.

 

+100

 

I actually quite like it....but I don't love it.

Yes, it's a 4 seater Ferrari (a proper 4 seater, not like the California), but I just can't find the reason behind it to buy it, regardless of the amount of money I'd have burning a hole in my pocket.

I think that 90% of the FF buyers already have one or more Ferrari's in their garage and the FF will be bought as a daily driver that can transport more than 2 people, and look a bit less flashy.

But if I was a serious buyer, and I'd be in the showroom about to put my signature down...I really do think my mind will be racing with the things I could buy instead...a quattroporte S, 750iL, flying spur or S63L....yet still have cash left for a Challenge Stradale for instance.

But that's just me.

If I loved it, the thought of thinking of buying the above instead wouldn't occur to me.

I still think it's a great car, especially in a colour that isn't red. I just think that if I would have one in my garage (and going with the assumption that I'd already have one or two other Ferrari's sitting next to it), I think it would barely be driven at all. And I don't like the idea of that.

 

Agree 100%

 

I think the FF actually serves a unique niche. The quattroporte S and 750il are lesser machines, the flying spur is hardly the a performer that is the FF, the S63L is the only thing that comes close but then you're in a Benz, not a Ferrari.

In spite of the high price tag, you don't pay the sticker for the car, in reality you pay the depreciation on the car (plus some forgone interest, etc). With history as a guide (and supply vs. demand), the FF will depreciate less than a Maserati, BMW or Bentley and thus be a less expensive car to drive.

 

Lol

 

OK I'll buy that. What happened to beauty though. Recognizing that beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, I'm not swayed.

Checking all the boxes is not a box I have to, or want to have to check. It will take a good bit of time. I just now have come to accept the Panamara. I would reluctantly go that way. That's a far cry from being joyful that I am getting a Ferrari.

I find it kind of like the Bentley. Works real well.

Pass.


Pass on the FF too. But then I'm a used car buyer, so maybe with time. But probably not. I'd reluctantly do the Panamara if I want four wheel drive and the Aston if otherwise because the Aston is a beauty.

One man's opinion. That having been said, I believe the majority of detractors are disappointed in the looks and little or nothing else. Indeed, in the world we live in, in which everything works darn well, I find beauty to be the one thing most desired. Subjectivity (my appreciation) is very important to me.

Life should have beauty in it. And not just half way unless you are willing. IMHO.

 

Very well said. Very well said.

Dale

 

'Beautifully' said, Open Roads. I'd suggest life should also include passion and a commitment to excellence. I think Ferrari as a company embodies those feelings, and that's why we love their products, even if we may occasionally vary in our attraction to a particular model. What they've been able to achieve and create as a small company is nothing short of remarkable.