NEW V8 MID ENGINED MODEL (BIG BROTHER)

Delorean?

 

They have yet to prove they can and I don't think they'll be able to.

As for accidents, well, the cars as insured. If it's totaled, it's totaled, and if it's not, it's depreciated massively anyway. I personally don't care how a car crashes other than from a safety point of view. I don't intend to wreck a car, so how easy it gets repaired/totaled is pretty irrelevant to me. I'd rather just have a higher insurance premium for the higher risk of total loss.

 

Uhhhh ok. What have you proven ? What have McLaren proven? Where the CF vs Aluminum Official report ?!?! Ohhhh god !!!!!!!

 

Just look at the evidence: Why are all the top tier, money-is-no-object cars made out of CF? Why are all the top tier race cars made out of CF? Why is Audi (who knows a thing or two about both aluminum space frame and winning LMP cars) using a hybrid CF and aluminum chassis for the R8/Huracan?

I'm pretty sure Adrian Newey, the guy who refused to use lacquer on the Valkyrie CF intake due to weight, probably wouldn't have bothered with CF if aluminum would have been the same. I'm guessing he knows a thing or two about this sort of thing.

You don't need to see the spec sheets to know the CF construction is the superior choice if money is no object.

 

ALREADY "sucked" my dealer!!!!

 

Carbon fiber is basically plastic as a lose term. Im glad they will stay on aluminium. Ild rather aluminium than some man made epoxy which WILL brittle with age and warp.

 

And that's the MOST truthful best reason.

The woven carbon fiber is very very strong . Its what holds it in shape the epoxy that is the question. It will crack, chip and deform.

Apart from that carbon fibers will cause galvanic corrosion if joined to aluminium

 

Is there any evidence of that? I don't recall Enzos or CGTs warping and becoming brittle. And even if it did, who cares? If 348s all started falling apart, would anyone really care? 99.999999% of cars in the world are destined to be scrapped and recycled. Why is it a big deal if a 40 year old Ferrari also ends up scrapped? If people want to restore them and keep them around, let them.

I'm not a huge fan of CF as a trim and I'd much rather have a high quality, nice looking paint than checkeredd plastic, but the actual properties of the material itself are good. Great for raw body panels and chassis, but less so for aesthetics. In the future, CF will probably be found on all cars anyway and the allure of the material will wear off. It's actually not even that expensive for simple shapes, especially if you're going to paint it.

 

I’m guessing you believe that CF breaks are better than steel ....? I’d rather crash and have some bent aluminum than shards of CF embedded in my skin.

 

They use CF because they don't have the coach workers FERRARI have !!!!! Easy laying preimpregnated carbon fibre to a mould. Vacuum , cook , pull out.

 

True, not all CF is created equal.

 

No idea about the brakes, but I'd suggest you take a look at some high speed crashes of cars with CF tubs/monocoques. They are insanely strong. CF shards are the least of concerns compared to preventing cabin intrusion.

 

Yes because thats my field last 35 years. I would guess you have never any carbon work have you ?

I care and probably Ferrari care also. FYI same goes ild rather get the F8 after my 488 GTB rather than the PISTA just for the aluminium bonnet.

Scrap cars yes Toyotas and the like not Ferrari's

 

Why even argue this? Not even a debate, look at the hyper cars, carbon tub... Look at Indy and formula 1. Please, it's a cost thing. I'm not impressed with the f8 but hey if I owned ferrari, I would likely do the same thing, ie if people are willing to pay for a 10yr old frame at current day prices why go through the trouble of producing new? Big brother will be a carbon tub, if it's not, Ferrari is really losing it

 

Laff.

 

I get the sense that some have never seen a Ferrari chassis in its actual true construction. Take the F12 with its dozen types of aluminum alloys. The chassis is a marvel of construction and it is light and very strong. It does not rust and it is serviceable. Its actually quite beautiful. Ferraris are not typical cars by any means. If the structure is designed to be strong as a Spider to begin with then the coup will be even stronger.

They do not have to be told what materials they should use and how to construct them. Every single car will be sold and at a much higher margin than any other manufacturer. They are only going to do full CF for those cars that are truly collectable. Get over it. I'd rather hear complaints about crappy warrantees or paint issues. If you want a full CF Ferrari it will cost you millions. And for that, your in Koenigsegg and Pagani territory. Another universe from BB.

 

Lol you’re hilarious man. I’m guessing you don’t quite get engineering or design.

 

So then why aren't they? It's not like they never know if they are going to build a Spider. It's widely known that the 458 Spider has significant flex/scuttle, as did the 430 and even still the 488. "Significant" being relative of course (I personally probably wouldn't care), but the fact remains that it flexes whereas McLarens did not.

Again, maybe you don't care about it, but that doesn't change the fact that the CF cars don't exhibit this.

 

Your not going to deny the fact that as the models have progressed they have become less flex ? Its a learning curve. Same with down force progressively more and more

As far as the Mac, really need to see its flex as it gets older. Comments are always about the new car being tested. Lets see what they are like 10 years down the track.

Some of these posts seem to imply that Ferrari has no knowledge on Engineering and design ?

 

Because Ferrari makes even more money on the Spider than they do on the coup exactly the way they are made. Real customers buy the coup just to get the Spider. All is well.

Pony up for a full CF Ferrari or quit yer bitchin.

 

CF tub is not a panacea. Having had a 650S Spyder (which I really did like) I can say it was great on the gas. Having spent quite some time in the Mac as well as the 918 in traffic its not great. Ferrari could knock a CF tub anytime they like but there are many considerations ito use of the car and rigidity is only one of them

 

I have had many convertibles and spiders. The 360 and 430 were fine. 911s, often reckoned to be excellent are not fine in my view, you can feel the flex and it does detract from the driving experience. That doesn’t mean there is no point to a 911 cab, they are a great car, but just the driving experience is a little way off the coupe. The 458 is better than the 911s and similar to the 430 but the 488 is a further step on. It just does not diminish the road-driving experience. Over a very broken road with the roof down, okay, but then you’re not having too much fun in the coupe either. For fast, sweeping roads, even with less than perfect surfaces the 488 spider is as magnificent as the coupe. I have never tracked a 488 spider but since tracks are mainly much smoother than roads I doubt there would be much difference to the fun factor. The recent Top Gear report on the Pista Spider (where they did track it) said the same and they chose it as their preferred car over the Pista for the added sonic experience and the fact that there was no detraction at all from the driving experience. I think that’s fairly impressive. Oh, and I did have a Mac spider. No doubt that car was certainly stiff, but give me the 488 spider any day against it. Not knocking the Mac but the point is that I prefer the way a Ferrari drives and the spider’s aluminium tub does not detract from that.

 

Ahahah

That was a direct translation of a french expression, maybe that sound vulgar in english

 

Jajaja, nice try... I don't play these games.

 

List of carbon fiber monocoque cars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_fiber_monocoque_cars

Think you are probably right. Ferrari does have carbon-fibre tub for its hyper cars like F50, Enzo, LaFerrari. Just not its regular line-ups.