The Ferrari SUV Thread

Were on the same page. Something for the unwashed masses thats a true sportscar. The best part is modern tech means the ac will work and itl start and run without heavy maintanace.

 

I believe station wagon would be a 4 door version of a shooting brake. I am not sure every manufacturer have made a shooting brake.

They built them for cash as a one off or handful of cars for a billionaire and not as a standard production car. Those cars although not so sporty or racy had much more exclusivity.

Almost is not the same.

No 4 doors please and no SUV please. Ferrari can make as much or more money focusing on the business they essentially invented. 2 door sporty and racy cars for the wealthy.

We simply have different opinions.

 

If Enzo wanted to sell more cars, he would have made a Corolla competitor. I don't know for sure what he'd think of everything you mentioned, but I suspect it would be something along the lines of "that adds too much weight".

The move to automated transmissions has worked because many Ferrari buyers do not care as much about the actual driving experience so long as a Ferrari portrays a high status. Not all, of course, but a recent study found that only 57% of Ferrari owners actually enjoy driving their Ferrari.

 

+1

 

I don't think it matters as much as some people do. Is the 911, Carrera GT or 918 less "special" because of the Boxster, Macan, Panamera, Cayenne? I don't necessarily agree with Ferrari building an SUV (or sedan, for that matter) from an enthusiast's perspective, but I disagree that the special Ferraris lose their pedigree as a result.

 

Porsche would be dead and buried if they hadn't built the Cayenne, and they did it right. Boy did they do it right. Opposite of opposites, Ferrari doesn't need this and boy is it going to suck, at least in everything that matters to SUV buyers, cargo, clearance, versatility, ruggedness. I'm sure they'll sell every one they build. I don't pretend to have clue one what it will do to the brand overall. All I can say is I think it's an abomination.

 

Its funny how we label suv's as one vehicle class. Is a suburban really the same type of vehicle as Macan.

Many here are pro paddle because they say its the future, future tech etc.

ill argue that the small crossover suv is THE vehicle of choice for many reasons. Fact is most drive great, they ride well, are pleasurable, and can multi task, they simply work in the modern road enviroemnt and are able to offer more performance than is useable on road. The sporty suv like a macan or I imagine stelvio give so little away to their car counterparts that for road purposes its irrelevant and in many ways they are a preferable vehicle.

How does the paper performance of a macan turbo compare to a 355? can anyone on road even use all the perfomance these vehicles offer? We're not exacty saying ferrari should be building solid axle jeeps? More like modern renditions of what the lm002 offered.

If in enzos day ferrari could build a luxury big heavy superfast and later cahnge tack from tradition and put the engine in the middle of the car it indicates to me that ferrari in period offered a wide range of vehicles to suit various niches provided those vehicles had superlative performance.
Even if you dont buy that point, consdder that many who are gainst SUVs are the same ones sayign ferrari shoudl not be stuck in the past, not be stick only, that it embarces the future. Well the future is also the performance suv. Besides being taller than a lusso is it really that different?

Sports cars used to have 2 doors because the car was mall, many didnt have a roof to save weight. Thats all history, there are no cardinal rules anymore or drawbacks in terms of road performance to having more than two doors or a certain ride height.

 

Porsche made FAR FEWER GT's in their history than Ferrari did --- and Porsche made an SUV

If Ferrari makes the best damn SUV on the planet with a 700 hp V12 -- I say go for it.

 

If Ferrari races it in rallies, desert events (Baja, Dakar) just like Porsche raced the 957-series Cayenne in TransSyberia, then it would be a consideration for me.

 

BMW tried to rename the SUV the SAV, sport activity vehicle and it didn't stick. Ferrari's might better be called a true SAV. To put the "U" in utility, you need cargo space and clearance at a minimum, even to accomplish basic soccer mom errands. Re FF, what the hell good is a car that can drive in the snow if it only has 4" of clearance? It's novelty, nothing more. The artist renderings of the Ferrari SUV imply it will be able to do...what...over the FF? Anything? Fiat Group had a decent opportunity to do what you're suggesting with the Levante. The original Kubang concept was promising. The result though is dealer lots full of uninspired, underpowered do-nothing-well SUV's that make it hard for me to even look at a Maser lot anymore. The Stelvio Quadrifoglio is very much in the spirit of what I think a word class exotic SUV should be at the lower end of the market, so maybe they have a clue now. They're certainly doing good things with the Jeep brand IMO. But a Ferrari SUV is a mistake. A great SUV starts with being an SUV and adds the flare of the marque. Ferrari's concept starts with a Ferrari sports car and adds the flare of an SUV. It looks ridiculous. So what if it ends up being 1000hp. It'll still be nothing more than a bloated, four door abomination.

 

This.

 

A friend just bought the jaguar SUV. Sporty for an SUV. If Ferrari made one it would be the ultimate mom vehicle. I think they would sell allot of them - just not to the people on this board


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I'd rather see a new Dino that is smaller, lighter, more agile, lower priced, and offer a MT as an option.

That car would sell like crazy, whilst increasing Ferrari's market share significantly.

 

Granted, the car enthusiast in all of us would like to see:
smaller, lighter, more agile, more simple, manual transmission... and lower cost

Do you really think this would sell though? I think that puts your product attributes in direct opposition to Ferrari's planners. Ferrari is in an upper part of the market and I don't think they can really go too far down market. I think a V6 would be risky for them. Its about the prestige of the engine.

I am not disagreeing on what would make a fun sports car, but I think the time for those things has come and gone in terms of what will sell. If you want those things, I think the answer is go and get a 355 stick shift. Or a Lotus.

I think the SUV will have over the FF the following:

For the customer:
Higher ride height = more commanding view of the road/ easier to see over the hood and less worry about road conditions such as potholes as the suspension should have more travel.

Back doors= easier access for rear passengers- this is a real issue if you are going to use those rear seats daily

According to the info out there, no V12. Sad for us, but good for vehicle dimensions/ efficiency.

More space

Apparently they are saying it will have full time AWD which could be useful for those who are crazy enough to drive really fast in poor conditions

For the company I think the benefit is:
New model that most likely won't tarnish the image of the other models.

Turbo hybrid V8 means less emissions. If this can account for ½ of their production, they just lowered the fleet average emissions = goal achieved.

Smooths out the product cycle - ala Porsche.

This could be really excellent. I am concerned for our beloved Ferrari as much as anyone, but the world is always changing. And Ferrari needs to stay in business. Would you rather they stuck to absolute purity- they could be where Lotus is today. I think that would have been a mistake. I think we will have to wait and see what they do- as they say the proof is in the pudding.

 

Let Ferrari make the SUV and other abortions like the FF, then dilute the brand for the 2 seaters, the owners of them can think they are cool, until a real Exotic shows up Lol.

 

We're an SUV society, so it's inevitable. Don't worry about it.

 

Yes - I do think it (Dino) would sell and still be inline with Enzo Ferrari's ideals. An SUV that carries wealthy family kids to a grocery or soccer game is not.

Regardless, with so many eager to be on a Ferrari Dealer's VIP list, they'll have no choice but to buy the SUV. So, it will sell for all the wrong reasons.

A Dino would bring us back to the era of 248 / 308 / 328; except the new car would be much more advanced, faster, and more reliable. And it will sell. Porsche has done this with the highly successful Boxster / Cayman series. Ferrari can certainly do the same, whilst maintaining its heritage.

 

Then they have to do it right. The loyal Ferrari base forgives deficiencies in materials, craftsmanship, safety, etc. because of the heritage, the sport, the beauty. Our wives won't. This all seems really dangerous for Ferrari. With the loss of Pininfarina, IMO their styling is going in the wrong direction (except 458/488). What direction will their styling trend as they round out their product line with an SUV? The new Maser styling is lousy, again just my opinion. The Murano is a far better looking SUV than the Levante. Is Ferrari going to try to tone it down and go mainstream on aesthetics as they head down this path as well? What's everyone going to think when they throw a cross plane crank in this thing to get some torque out of it? I guess we'll see.

 

Although it didn't tick all those boxes, Cayman GT4 went like hot cakes.

If Ferrari couldn't round up enough purists/enthusiasts to snap up the car your describe, well then, I think that'd be embarrassing...T

 

Im curious whats wrong with me that i simply cant get this passionate about anything I didnt literally create myself.

Ive never been able to get worked up over sports, movies, music or cars.

 

Is a hypothetical Today + SUV model range of Cali T HS, 488, GTC4Lusso, 812S + SUV better for its era than a when-Enzo-was-alive-but-not-in-charge 1981 range of 308 GTSi, Mondial 8, 400, 512BBi?
Immeasurably. And that's without the LaF.
Ok, it's not 1964 again, but sadly it never will be. We have to get over that.
The existence of a Macan doesn't make me lust after a GT2 RS any less, and probably makes the GT2 RS better, or even possible.

 

I agree. They could make more track only cars too. They need to set the rules of their game as they have historically done and not play a game they can't win. Make sports cars and sporty GT cars. Leave the SUV's to the tractor maker and the bug maker. Ferrari need to dig deeper into who they are.

They need to not do it at all. Imagine a bunch of Ferrari SUV's with sticky buttons, inoperable sunroofs etc...? Disastrous. The SUV is a different set of rules and expectations than the exotic game.

 

Leaky magnaride shocks from taking it off road. Can you imagine what'll happen to all the switches and stuff when kids start playing with them? Ferrari's are delicate. SUV's aren't supposed to be delicate.

Two other hallmarks of an SUV, even a crappy one, are torque and towing capacity. A flat plane crank isn't going to work, they'll need the maser style rework with a cross plane mated to an automatic to tow anything. Porsche doesn't built a Cayenne with a DCT for this reason. What assembly line will this thing be rolling off of? By the time they're done with this thing, there's going to be a bigger controversy whether it's a real Ferrari than there was with the California.

 

I applaud the desire to revisit the core values, but those alone won't keep Ferrari alive, and thriving. And this is the name of the game. Like I said before, Mr. Enzo Ferrari wanted to win at racing.

Aside from someone saying a new age Dino would sell, where's the proof. The business man in me says it would not do that well. Because I think the audience for such a car is limited, and thus, if this were to be a production car, it would suffer more than the typical depreciation.

I can give you some counter evidence: Ferrari's sales have never been better, with more power, more complexity, kind of the opposite of this new age Dino concept. And the Alfa 4C has not found a home at all, despite featuring a historic name, and mechanical layout most people would drool over- CF construction and mid engine?! Are you drooling yet?! I thought that car should be successful. But it has not found much.

Porsche sells a mechanically less elegant concept than light weight, simple, mid-engine in the 911. And the 911 is their best sports car sales performer. So much that they feel compelled to make every car look like a 911! How are Cayman and Boxter sales? I hear they are OK. While the Cayman GT4 is a fantastic car- I have heard over and over from people in the business that its "a $100k Cayman"- those are always the first words out of their mouths. And these are people who sell these cars all day long. I don't really follow Porsche as closely as Ferrari, so I'm not sure I can say much more. But I think we could also look to Lotus- where are they? They are barely alive.

I will grant this is just my opinion, but I simply don't see how a SUV definitely hurts Ferrari. I think so long as they manage the brand well it likely will help their business and likely won't hurt their brand.

I also don't think a ~$300k SUV has the same rules as an X5. They've done pretty well with the FF, which to my mind is already a Ferrari SUV, but not a practical one. I suspect this will be even more successful than the California in bringing in a wider clientele. No one who drives an F12tdf or a LF, or a 488, cries that the California has some how ruined Ferrari.

And this is not to even mention the merchandise, etc. While we as enthusiasts might snicker at it, has it dampened our love for the brand or the cars? I can only tell you in my case the answer is no. As long as my car doesn't make me wear Ferrari socks, I'm good.

I think it would likely be similar with a SUV. So long as they still make the Ferraris we all love, all will be fine.

 

LDM SET the business model that left Ferrari thriving and that model is perfect for Ferrari's needs. The issue is that the expectations from Uncle Sweater and Baby Elkan are insane and it will break Ferrari being expected to finance all the other leaching arms of Fiat.