LaFerrari replacement: v12, no hybrid, less power than SF90stradale?

A 6 litre V12 doesnt have a higher CoG compared to a 3 litre one. When Cosworth an Newey discussed the Valkyrie engine they came to the conclusion that a larger engine was better for both power and drivability.

 

I'd be willing to lower compression to increase RPM and increase displacement. No electric propulsion gadgets in my perfect car. Ferrari makes engines.

 

Which would necessitate rebuilds every couple thousand miles.

 

I can only think of a f50 or maybe a 512bb if it based on a mid rear V12

 

Found on the linkedin of Andrea Dall'Aglio.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Source: https://it.linkedin.com/in/andrea-dall-aglio-6085102a

 

F150? Confirming that the Icona is based on the LaFerrari


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

the t50 isn't really looking for extreme performance, just aiming to be the best usable road car ever made.

I don't think you can expect Valkyrie levels of performance from anything really as it sits on its own (when you factor corner in etc)

 

I just can't get into the T50 it looking like a dogs dinner dosn't help either. But I have to give credit Aston Martin Valhalla is looking very exciting and attractive.

 

Huh, in that first article if you squint hard, there's a racing car tucked behind that enormous turbo.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login
photo- https://www.instagram.com/p/CR1niUzqwQr/

 

I reckon the Aston is going to turn into an expensive joke, by the time it arrives the SF90 replacement probably be on the market and I simply cannot see how the Aston can justify its significant price.

 

It can justify it if it's a lot faster

 

What you are describing is the Senna, except for maybe the beautiful part.

 

Yes but the Senna is not a LaF chassis. It is a McLaren all-purpose chassis that exists in all their cars, as is the engine. It is a good car, but there is nothing in it that attracts the enthusiast the way a Ferrari does. And it is beyond ugly.
By the way the only reason I mentioned TT V8 is to make the car F40-like. Personally I would much prefer a LaF chassis with a V12 and no batteries, perhaps a new F50 [emoji4]


Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat

 

Sorry based on AM recent cars what would seem highly unlikely. Most likely completely over hyped yes.

Perhaps it will only break down once at Goodwood.

 

It's not really an AM. It is a Red Bull-Cosworth road legal race car with AM badges. Its performance seems mega, the reliability and usability not so much.

 

My understanding is this Valhalla has little in common with its delayed twin, on the basis of that cars delay I'd be surprised if Valhalla appears before 2030!

 

When I drove through maranello last week I bumped into this. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

the Valhalla is cool imo, and not *too bad* at 600k.

the problem is they really need to get these last cars out asap before electric cars make them look slow and younger people lose interest

 

what's on the back? reminds me of a drag racing cars parachute

 

Some emission testing device it seems…


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

RDE WLTP testing equipment
https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/fleet-faq/what-is-wltp

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Rear add-on looks like a world-war II gasifier maybe it's to comply with a new ecology mandate?

 

I misunderstood apparently. I was referring to the Valkyrie. Regarding the Valhalla, I am in absolute agreement with you. Its specs seem identical to those of the SF90 Stradale and Ferrari usually wins these comparisons against AM.

 

I know this is a Ferrari forum so this will be my only post on the subject for the purpose of informing but I would not be too quick to disparage the structural and packaging optimization of the Mclaren all purpose chassis. While it has been used for numerous derivatives, it is built for only one engine and layout, unlike other adaptable platforms which have to compromise for different engines and transmissions. Whether that detracts for the specialty and uniqueness of the individual cars is your opinion. For me, while I can appreciate the brutal functionality of the Senna the F40 has an elegance to its lines that the Senna lacks, though both have a shared DNA of being the most over the top while still functional designs of their time.
If we were really to pick a compromise in Mclaren's lineup (from an engineering point of view) it would actually be the P1 as the batteries are located over the fuel tank, while in the LaF they are in the correct position below (Mclaren new EV Artura does this as well). But the LaF is not without its compromises either. The hybrid system with the motor behind the transmission instead of in between the engine and transmission was a cost saving measure because it would have cost more to recast the F140 engine's crankcase to accept a motor directly. As a result they had to retain the alternator even though they already had a main motor.
Interesting tidbit, Ferrari almost used the same carbon all purpose chassis technology as Mclaren, before ATR (the original developer of the platform) went bust.

Back on topic to Ferraris. I am with you 100% on the LaF chassis with V12 with no hybrid system, but part of me wonders if that would not just be an Enzo with a dual clutch. Once you factor in the extra weight the vestiges of the hybrid system (battery mounting points, etc) of the chassis and dual clutch versus the advancement of the computer simulation and experience, would there really be a weight saving over the Enzo?
Maybe there could be some ergonomic and styling improvements but to me with its solid mount F1 engine and manual gearbox the F50 is still king .