Um just out of curiosity, I know that sergio and ferrari say that they made the 488 turbo because of emissions (no, this is not another "turbo is bad and NA is good" statement, so chill.), but how is lambo able to get 260g/km out of the huracan's 5.2 v10, while ferrari and mac are only able to get that out of a smaller ttv8? And if you decide to go with lamb's posted c02 of 290g/km, here's a link that states an independent testing company got better 11% better mpg than lambo posted. http://emissionsanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Lamborghini-Huracán-owners-pleasantly-surprised.pdf, and 11% from 290 is 260. This is a genuine question. Here's the link to the lamb's c02 and its at the end of the review.Lamborghini Huracan LP610-4: Revisited | PistonHeads
First: did you read the links? Second: I am legitimately starting to think thats now true after reading those two. LOL
Because that's not what it's actually about. They've gone turbo because McLaren have backed them into a corner in the performance stakes.
These are real world CO2 emissions, aka only relevant for the owner not for the manufacturer. What counts is that the 488 is rated at 260 g/km, Huracan 290 g/km. That is a significant difference if you consider that the 458 was at 307 g/km. Right.. You guys do realize that switching to forced induction for a manufacturer's main engine family is a long term strategic decision? And that engineering from scratch something like the F154 engine with no recent experience takes years? It is not something you do in 24 months as a rebuttal to a competitor... Here Fedeli states that they started gathering know-how in 2008, and development of the Cali's engine began in 2010: Engine Technology International - June 2014
Well, they didn't start from scratch by any means. This engine feeds off all else that they are currently doing both on the road and on the track. Second, do you really think Ferrari would countenance continuing to give away a significant performance advantage to McLaren? That just ain't going to happen. If they went N/A then McLaren would just turn up the wick again.
I don't think so. Ferrari is not slower though. Lap time is equal with Mac, just straight. Ferrari has been famous of lap time, not straight. 911 VC were faster than 360, 430, and 458 is still NA. The reason behind VC is everything about $$$. It's just too much to develop a high rev NA. VC-engine is so much cheaper, and the next development is also very cheap, just add some more boost and give it a new name. And then in many Asian countries, tax is based on the size of the engine. So VC-cars will have a much lower price. IMO, Ferrari should build 488 with more engine options : NA or VC. They are doing this with Maserati, not VC or NA though, but you have options V6 or V8. Ferrari should build 488 with V8 NA, or V8 VC.
They had to build one of the best TTV8s around, and the last one in the company history was in the F40. That is starting from scratch! I think two factors went into choosing the turbocharging route: reducing CO2 emissions, and the fact that continuing to increase displacement while keeping the V8 high revving was becoming impossible. And let's not forget that Maserati has its needs too. All of its main competitors have gone twin turbo V8.
As has been said previously. In certain countries tax is by displacement of the engine. Turbo engine allows for lower displacement engines equals lower tax. As Ferrari sells in numerous countries it has to take all that into account. From the videos I have watched and the video reviews the sound maybe not exactly as the 458 but Ferrari got it really close. That is a good thing. As the saying goes proof is in the pudding.
I know that makes sense to you, and it seems plausible to me also, but do you have any actual proof? Good example is BMW and Merc. Merc has brought up the performance of their cars over the years. Merc has had a paper advantage over BMW for like 5+ years now, yet BMW still outsells them in the segment because they have the better driver's car. BMW went turbo for emissions, not to beat the AMGs on paper - same deal here with Ferrari and McLaren as far as I can tell. Given the same drivers, an MP4-12C could definitely beat the 458 on many circuits. But pretty much everyone in the world agrees that the 458 is the benchmark. It isn't just about lap times and numbers on paper. I think Ferrari went turbo for the reasons they publicly stated - for emissions (edit and cost I should say)...just like BMW.
They'd never go for a V10 and a larger V8 gets hit by scandalous tax in a number of important markets.
No proof. But there's no way on Earth that Ferrari are going to giveaway a significant performance advantage to the thorn in its side.
Fair enough. But then how about as to why the regular 2016 r8 v10 (non-plus) can get 275g/km, which is the same as the mac? Its in the press release. http://www.autoblog.com/2015/02/26/2016-audi-r8-geneva-official/
Bingo. It's a marketing gimmick. In two years Ferrari will bump the boost and always stay on top without significant retooling or re-engineering.
