F8 If you already had a Pista - F8 or 296 and why

Now you gotta be begging for the 'come on man' with this statement By that standard, a lot of supercars out there would be lard ***es as well, like the beloved 458 Italia and the Huracán to name a couple!

The 296GTB will edge out the Pista in power to weight ratio already. Even with that said, the Pista has too much power for full canyon driving enjoyment, and not nearly enough downforce for full track enjoyment - the power is not matched to the grip provided by the Cup 2s. I'll be trying Cup 2 Rs at the next track day.

The 296GTB carries only a little more weight than a Pista and even less so an F8. I have to believe the Ferrari wouldnt' just go out and make such bold statements about the enjoyment of driving unless they've really done their homework. According to Ferrari claims and figures, reading between the lines, 296 GTB will sound better and be faster in every possible facet than the F8. It will come down to the aesthetic preferences, price, interior, and personal preferences on driving dynamics. I don't the 296 will disappoint though.

 

Just different cars. Totally different experience in each. Im just grateful to have the opportunity to enjoy both.

 

The 812 is a completely different thing to the F12 in the driving department. I have a Pista Spider and also had an F8, recently sold, still have 812 coupe and GTS. I also love the mid engined Ferrari thing. A mid-engined car looks and drives more like my idea of what an exotic should do. It’s ‘perfect’ weight distribution and cab-forward position allow a driving experience that is very different from more normally laid out cars. If I could only have one supercar in the garage, it would be a mid-engined one. So why is the 812 the right answer? There are a few reasons. The engine, of course. It is sensational, even better than the F12, though here things are marginal. If you’ve owned an F12, you know why the Ferrari V12 is such a masterpiece. What is not marginal is the handling improvements. The 812 can put the power down brilliantly, much better than the F12, added to which, the rear-wheel-steering lends the car a nimbleness and agility that should be beyond its size and weight but isn’t. I also sold a Lusso at the same time as our F8, a car which we had had for three years. The Lusso is a great car, but a GT, and nowhere near the handling quality of the 812, despite also having rear-wheel-steering. By the time they got to the 812, they knew how to make that car so sharp and well balanced, it is simply brilliant and undoubtedly makes the best companion to a Pista in a two car garage. When you learn it and get to understand how it wants you to drive it. It’s wonderful. You can only order a GTS at the moment, so if you are looking new only, that is the one. Happily, it is the best of the two. The GPF doesn’t diminish my aural enjoyment - different sound to the coupe but wonderful in its own right - and it is remarkably stiff for an open car. Far more so than the open Pista for instance. It is one of Ferrari’s best ever cars, it’s brilliant. I honestly can/t think there is a better mate for a coupe Pista than one of these.

if you simply can’t or won’t go V12, the F8 is a different car to the Pista. It feels lighter in the hands, the steering feels really quite different. The Pista gives you a feeling of real purpose, quite different to our Speciale, which is more mobile at the rear and playful. The F8 and Speciale feel closer than the F8 and Pista, though the F8’s engine is obviously quite different and it doesn’t have the hardcore nature of the Speciale. The F8 is from the more familiar Ferrari way, lighter controls, subtle and deft in its movements. The Pista seemed to me to be a response to McLaren, maximum performance, really focused on the quickest lap time. The Speciale always gave you the feeling it was leaving a little bit on the table in terms of lap time in the name of added fun. So, you could add an F8 to a Pista and just about justify it. If it was a spider to a coupe you easily could. I have an SF90 about to arrive and I have a few friends with them, they report that that car is surprisingly good, beyond expectations. One, who has a Speciale, didn’t get on with the Pista but ordered the SF90 and loves it. Sold the Pista to a family member and is keeping the Speciale and SF, plus a couple of V12s. His comment is that the SF90 reminds him of the Speciale. I’m guessing he’s talking about the way it handles - that light, subtle, agile feeling I mentioned, as opposed to the Pista’s more ‘strictly business’ approach. I’m guessing that is going to read across to the 296 also. If I were in your shoes, my order of preference adding a car to a Pista would be; 1, GTS; 2, 296; 3, F8. And I would have a real job to be persuaded any of those places should change.

 

Ok…so maybe I overreacted. It’s not a lard ***, but it certainly ain’t svelte. In the end, the real point I am trying to make is that it’s not the car it could have been. It could have been much better. They detuned the V6 to slide the total HP in comfortably under the SF90. Surely the hybrid components weigh 200-250lbs right? So imagine a 750hp car that weighs less than 3,000lbs. Better yet, imagine that same car with a carbon tub. In any event, I understand that Ferrari’s hands are tied with the overzealous regulatory climate. I can’t help but wonder where we might have gone the next decade with just market forces dictating the direction of these cars, rather than the clumsy hand of government.

Here’s the dry weight of some of the recent cars. I found these numbers on Google, so I cannot confirm their accuracy; however, they look accurate enough. The power to weight ratio of the 296 GTB will result in strong straight line performance, but what happens in the chicanes…? Most of all, the 765lbs weighs 425lbs less despite producing more horsepower and torque (obviously everyone understands that McLaren underrated the final numbers to protect the Senna owners).

765LT - 2,709lbs
STO - 2,951lbs
Pista - 3,054lbs
296 GTB - 3,234lbs (in the Assetto Fiorano specification)
GT2 RS - 3,241lbs
SF90 - 3,461lbs (in the Assetto Fiorano specification)
SF90 - 3,527lbs
812 - 3,594lbs

 

Not agreeing here.

0.5 second to 120 mph is not that big of a deal, especially considering 720 PS vs. 830 PS. This especially considering the fact that the hybrid has a lot of torque off the line. If those two cars had such a close weight, which would mean the 296 having a much better power to weight ratio, the number would be much better.

It is what it is, and as you know, we can't trust what Ferrari says in terms of weight.

The actual number I got which makes sense seeing the numbers they claim, are more like 100 kg over the F8 and 150 kg over the Pista. Both cars are still built on an alloy chassis base, and while a V6 is slightly lighter than a V8 everything being equal, there's an electric motor which in itself is about 15 kg and then the battery with its liquid cooling etc. Look at it from this angle. It has the same acceleration stats as the Pista, which has shown to be pretty equal to the F8. So it makes sense from a power to weight standpoint that the 296 is significantly heavier, and seeing that it is not front wheel drive like the SF90, it does not have the same ability to hide the weight the SF90 has.

F8 is still what I'd pick.

 

Sounds familiar

 

I have a 488 and 812 currently and will drop the 488 for the 296 GTB which I do have a deposit on already.

 

Fair enough.
Interestingly at laguna seca the f8 was slower with the SAME driver than the 488.
Love the F8 but I think 296 will be faster.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

F8 spider, 812gts and GT3 touring incoming. Not interested in electric cars.

 

It’s not an electric car… guess u won’t get a p1,918 or laferrari


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think what Jamie is saying is that as long as there are non electric options- he is gonna get one of them. In a few years, this may not be an option.

 

I like your thinking, and I wouldn't be surprised if Ferrari also has thought of this already -- they're brilliant at getting customers wanting more, but not being so far away from attainable that customers sit around and wait. They do this through intelligent demand generation and deprecation of old models (to avoid giving people a "good enough" new car option). Customers are almost punished for not acting quickly as more desirable variants are reserved for those who committed early to production variants. This leaves the customer that waited choosing between a fairly limited used market or learning from their mistake in hesitation, and jumping into a new platform when it arrives.

With respect to thecadster edition of the 296GTB:

• I venture to bet that while they considered weight reduction, dialing down power ≠ reduced weight. With turbos on the new v6, the development and actual part costs to extract more power were likely minuscule compared to the development and part costs to reduce weight. Under that assumption, the reduction of power, while straight forward, would not necessarily mean they'd offer a lower weight car at the same price point.
  
• Shedding weight without shedding comfort and usability is hard and expensive. If it was easy, every manufacturing would do it on their base models. In daily driving, it probably comes with diminishing returns as well. Conversely, more power is marketable and sexy on paper.
  
• Even with a clear strategy for weight reduction, I would think Ferrari will want to grandstand that reduction of weight on a hybrid platform as a massive feat of engineering. Doing so means some brand-level benefits as well:
  • 1. They can charge customers should they wish to execute a VS model on the SF90 & 296 models
  • 2. They can parade it as Ferrari innovation
  • 3. They don't have to compromise the car for the customer that *thinks* they want a track car, but really wants a GT car
  • 4. They can garner renewed interest and attention to the brand with another highly coveted limited series production or truly limited model
  • 5. They can create a reward 'token' for their mid-VIP customers to make them feel special
  • 6. They can appeal to the newer generation of kids who are growing up in an era where climate change, electrification, and carbon emissions reductions are table-stakes for a dream car -- they're painting the next generation of poster cars for the modern era

​

In constrast, McLaren has no issues making incredible cars that outperform the Ferrari's on track (both in amateur HPDE and F1!). They just make really dumb product management/marketing decisions that piss off their customers and saturate the market with their cars.

 

Im just playing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Your initial summary overall makes good sense Secret and I agree with all of your points 1 - 6!

I also wish to point out I overly agree with your point 3 and, point 2!

Re your final comment about Mclaren, it appears their previous strategy has come to a grinding halt and if anything it would now appear Ferrari has picked up that mantle by introducing many new models and versions.

However,....... since driving 765 there is no question in my mind that Mclaren is clearly ahead of Ferrari's game and, in a few key areas. Therefore, I'm calling @Albert-LP out for claiming Ferrari as being the performance benchmark because from what I've personally driven, owned, and compared, I'm just not finding that to be the case at all.

Maybe 296 will change this situation? Let's wait and see if all the marketing talk stacks up in the actual drive.

 

Ferrari is the benchmark: everybody knows this, competitors included. You added the "performance" word, that I didn't write (as I'm not 100% stupid) and I know that it can happen that a competitor model has better performances. But Ferrari still is the benchmark for everybody: it's the market leader and every supersport car must compare with an F cars. You cannot simply tell "my car ties a Ferrari": your car must be better (or at least much different) in some features or by design, or you won't sell anything. So competitors, to tie Ferrari brand power, MUST sell something that has some plus, otherwise (almost) everyone would buy the "usual" Ferrari. Lamborghini has a much more aggressive shape: if you want an aggressive car that can force people to say "WOW"? the Lamborghini is perfect and much better than a Ferrari. Do you want extreme luxury, top finish also in the most concealed bolt and a bespoke car? Pagani is much better than a Ferrari there. Do you want a lighter full carbon car? McLaren there is better than Ferrari: McLaren=lightness, and lightness helps a lot some performances.

Everbody wants a Ferrari, but not everybody wants a McLaren (that actually is an excellent car indeed). A friend of mine still works at Ferrari R&D office (now as a consultant) to evaluate competitors cars: he was the former GT engines chief designer, fifty years spent at Ferrari GT engine design up to the top role. He now no more designs engines: he evaluates the competitors engines compared to the Ferrari ones. We spoke a lot about competitors engines: McLaren one is a bit lighter, but the plus stops there. And there is some minus too. His words.

ciao

 

Cant say I agree there, as there isn't anything I can see that would really support your claim unless of course you are referring to a by gone era?

You say everybody knows this? Who is "everybody" because if everybody was everybody then I wouldn't be having to call you out on this.

So I ask you "a benchmark" in what context specifically?

Are you referring to performance? Or style? Or driver engagement? Or possessing superior precision, connection and feel of the controls... as in how brakes modulate, or how steering feels and connects with the driver or, how how the throttle modulates, or how well the ergonomics accommodate for the driver, or in having the better sound, or, the better handling or, something of that nature? Please explain this benchmark you refer to?

I understand the name Ferrari is synonymous with motor racing and history and is widely recognized but then you also have Porsche with an even greater racing history with far more race wins and a wider involvement in Motorsport in general (other than F1). And of course then there is Mclaren and Lamborghini, Buggati, Pagani etc..

 

Perfect description of the 765. And I do not believe it can be accomplished more completely.

 

Comparing a Pista and 765LT, I'd say the Ferrari exhibits less turbo lag and may be more fuel efficient due to its direct injection.

However, a case can be made that McLaren's approach delivers a more exciting power delivery in trading off reduced lag for a more violent top end punch. Not every customer wants their high performance turbo engine to feel NA. Imagine if an F40 had no lag and a linear power delivery? It simply wouldn't be as thrilling.

Also, their MPI system means they are able to escape GPFs = more performance + better sound (+ flames).

 

" Everybody wants a Ferrari." A comment that categorically imputes an emotional sentiment to be universally true, is not only inaccurate but absurd. There are many owners of Mclarens, Lamborghinis, Porsches, MB, etc etc who can afford a Ferrari but chose a different brand for a variety of reasons. While some will own many marques, including Ferrari, there are others who have never wished to purchase a Ferrari. These are undeniable facts. When you refer to "benchmark", which means that everything is measured against a common standard, your assertion is that Ferrari is the standard by which all other cars are compared. As Shadow posted above, your generalized proclamation has little validity without greater specificity as to what metrics apply to support your claim. Many might believe, that Ferrari is a brand most associated with prestige, cachet, opulence, heritage, and legacy. Are those the components of the benchmark in which you refer or does it include design, performance and driving dynamics? Would be curious in having you expand on your claims.

 

While it would seem logical to compare the Pista to the 765, they could not be more divergent in their driving characteristics. Both excel in their respective design goals - Pista is a comfortable road car that is very capable on the track. The 765 is a race car that is barely street legal. Those who favor a more compliant, refined yet highly engaging driving experience will favor the Pista. Others who thirst for a raw, immersive, unfiltered thrill machine will be gobsmacked by the 765, since no currently available super car can emulate its compelling driver dynamics. Personally, I drive it daily without an issue. Others may feel differently. For lovers of super cars, both need to be experienced.

 

Unfortunately I suspect we could be in for a good dose of crickets on the benchmark claim.

Another interesting point which @Albert-LP raised was how Ferrari compared the competitors engines as per the good advice of his 50 y/0 friend working within the inner sanctums of Ferrari, for the purpose of seeing what made them tick. I imagine in the course of this particular exercise Ferrari would have also had the competitor's whole car to drive and established certain areas in the chassis, handling, controls, brakes etc which they could then improve and claim benchmark position in their cars? Or did they just buy an engine and stop there? Doesn't make much sense just buying the engine and skipping out on checking the chassis, controls and ergonomics out.

 

Tbh I haven't found the Pista to be any more comfortable as a daily than the 765. They are both pretty much line ball there in ride comfort and road noise intrusion. The Mac rides surprisingly well dare I say better in some ways than the Pista not that I would want the Pista softer. The 765 may be slightly tauter yet is a bit more compliant where you need it to be. I'm talking in comfort mode btw. Ergonomically I find the seating and overall cabin functionality superior in the 765 along with the MI, and so far as the rest of it all goes 765 is ahead in all areas of driver engagement. Pista is very good just 765 is the superior and better connected, more compelling, and exciting to drive overall. 765 has set a high bar in these areas so I would unreservedly call that a benchmark worthy of making claim over - well and truly over and above the Ferrari.

But benchmarks are there to be broken - not set and walked away from for years and years iykwim Albert I hope you are listening!

 

For those who are concerned about fuel consumption, I have not owned any car as gas hungry as the 765. As for turbo lag, in sport or track mode, keeping the revs up and quick shifting, will reduce it to a virtual non issue. In comfort mode, the 765 is more comfortable and compliant. However, I never drive it in anything but sport or track since that is when the beast is unleashed. The Pista is a great car, but the 765 simply betters it in virtually every category of performance.

 

Every car maufacture has an office where they "look at" the competitor cars: McLaren and Lamborghini too.

Some years ago Lamborghini (whose tech chief executive officer lives very close to me) tested and exhaminated "a lot and very accurately" a LaFerrari...

This said, I haven't anything else to add to the discussion, sorry


ciao

 

Agree. And to echo your comments there are certainly a large number of Porschephiles who can easily afford Ferrari’s but are devoted to the heritage, design, and driving dynamics of Porsche (not to mention their build quality and fun on track). There are a large number of Lamborghini lovers who wouldn’t dream of owning a “boring” Ferrari. And, dare I say it, there are plenty of wealthy Americans that love Corvettes and muscle cars because of these cars being around throughout their youth and thus they opt for those cars despite being able to easily afford one of those “weird eyetalliaan” cars.