360 The AutoCar Modena, looking back.

I have a question, but first.

For those that do not know about the Autocar Modena I will explain briefly. In 1999 Autocar magazine reviewed a Modena that performed at a level similar to an F50 instead of other Modenas, for example it did 0-100 mph in 8.8 seconds and the quarter mile in 12.3 seconds. Chris Harris was involved in the review and he said the car not only drove like a race car but sounded ‘more like Schumacher's weekend wheels than a street car’.



Obviously something was suspect about that car. Over the years some say the car probably just had a hotter tune while others say the drive train had to be heavily modified to realize such performance.



With that stated, I am wondering if we can get closer to the truth by utilizing the new knowledge obtained due to the progress that people such as @360trev and AV engineering have made when it comes to tuning the 360.



So this brings us to the question of is it possible to get this kind of performance with just a tune? I myself have no idea, absolutely none, on the subject but am very interested to see what those in the know think about the topic.



Another interesting point, while the car sounded different from other Modenas one can clearly see in the images from the Autocar article the big stock oem muffler on the car in question.



Whats up with that car?

 

Each time a post with spatial seperation between paragraphs larger than 1mm will makes me think that my China internet has blocked graphic contents in between

and um.... yea, I'd really like to know what's the setup of that modena.

As tested, my Modena's quarter mile = 14.9 seconds. And it is a euro car, lighter than the US version

 

I did a cut and paste and then just hit post, I could have been more attentive with the paragraphs. Also they weighed the car and it was 1447 KG, I have no idea what the fuel level was.

 

I guess more information; it was a right hand drive euro model with an F1 transmission.

 

As I've posted in a number of different threads now, not all 360's are built "equal" and the best blue printed engines, best cam timed, lowest weight examples are quite significantly different in performance.

The weight of options are often overlooked but it makes a significant impact to performance. Get the lowest weight options spec'd and that included a large number of the options that eventually became fitted as standard to the CS, so carbon engine bay panels, carbon air box lids (similar to those fitted to CS but with a fitment to allow regular sized AFM's), sports exhaust, carbon race seats, etc. etc. Its the equivalent of adding hp but at every point in the rev range. So get the right option's spec'd and you'll have a better performing car to begin with. Its also worth noting that some market segments didn't require or in fact have any "cats" fitted back in '99, no main or header cats, nothing! Literally no emissions kit whatsoever. Was it a "non-cat" version tested!? That would also increase hp by around 25-30hp and also lower weight.

Step forward cars which where destined for UAE. They had "hollow" cats, exactly like what was fitted to the 360 Challenge race car. So they sounded WAY louder than a normal car and where holomogated for normal road use, must have sounded insane on the roads back then. A stock Challenge car with a valveless free flowing backbox (not too dissimilar to a valved optional sports exhaust) officially made something in the region of 420hp. I'd expect a good spec'd UAE car with a "good" engine to be of similar performance to a CS.

And if you consider that a stock CS (data pulled from the official Ferrari workshop manual's) posted;

0 to 100 km/h: 4.1 sec (0-60 mph)
0 to 400 m: 12.1 sec (1/4 mile)

Then its absolutely possible yes...

Blame badly chosen specs (e.g. daytona electric seats, premium stereo, etc.) and legal regulations like noise and tailpipe emissions for blunting most cars performance.

Can you achieve better than CS performance today ? Absolutely yes...

 

... I also recall reading about a 430 Scuderia that was tested by a magazine (may have actually been Autocar too) and its tires where so "super sticky" that when they put it onto the rolling road it literally melted them into the dyno... lol.. obviously not stock tires so in years gone by some things where done to inflate (excuse the pun) the performance of their test reports

 

Thank you for the reply, I have seen this info and am very appreciative that you have spent many years compiling and curating it. However, I am talking about a specific car from a specific road test. This car had the standard muffler, weighed 1447kg, and was apparently given to the journalists directly from Ferrari. This road test didn't happen today, it happened in 1999. None of the considerations you have posted above seem to be a factor in this specific situation, with that said the car was still able to pull of CS like performance and sound like a demon. My question is how did this specific car do it with none of the performance considerations you have pain painstakingly researched? Is it just a tune for this specific car or is it more.

 

Well if you eliminate the weight thing from the equation, and if it sounded VERY loud then I consider that the car was probably one without cats, the catless core cats look identical. That's the only way you'd get such a hike in power and sound. A remap could make it louder at different rpm points and pedal positions but it would not make a stock Modena sound like a CS unless either the backbox had no sound-deading inside it (a prototype backbox perhaps?) or the car had no cats..

 

Interesting, I would assume you are correct on the catless cores and unfortunately we have no way of verifying that. I didn't think about the idea of a prototype muffler but now that seems obvious. Have you run across any prototype 360 mufflers in your long and detailed 360 research?

Now with that said, the catless cores and a prototype muffler plus a special Ferrari tune ... would that be enough to get this 1447 kg 360 to 0-60 in 4.2 seconds and 0-100 in 8.8, or do you think engine work has to be involved.

Also thanks for the reply. And if anybody knows where this car is I would be very interested ... its kind of seems like they were messing with the idea of the CS in 1999 already and this is one example.

 

Were you carrying bowling balls in the frunk or something?

 

Ferrari press cars were often fitted with much lower than production gearing to improve acceleration times for road tests. These ringers had gear ratios nowhere near what came on production models. A well-documented example is the early California Road and Track tested and for which they published all the gear ratios. Here is the test and you can compare it to what was actually produced. Needless to say, stock Californias did not accelerate this quickly.


From the OM:
1 = 2.822
2 = 2.053
3 = 1.379
4 = 1.091
5 = 0.966
6 = 0.788
7 = 0.651
R = 2.368
4.444 rear axle

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

no. and I weigh 174 lbs myself.

 

you actually inspired me.
if I want to sacrafice top speed for accleeration,
what kind of acceleration am I going to be looking at if my top speed is only 240km/h for the 360?
or, what best time can I achieve in 1/4 mile sprint if the only mod I can do is the final drive?

 

Very interesting info, thanks. I wonder if these cars are eventually sold to some unsuspecting people or if the company takes them back and disposes of them in some way.

 

Preproduction Ferraris in the olden days were taken back to the factory, brought up to production standards, and sold through friends of the factory dealers in Italy. That is what happened to the three preproduction 575Ms (123761, 123764, and 123765), so something similar might have happened to the 360, too.

 

Something is very wrong with your car if it runs 14.9s in the 1/4 mile.

It's likely Ferrari did some weight savings and stuck a highly tuned engine (similar to Challenge / N-GT spec) in the car.

 

That is extremely interesting, I had no idea that was the case. Silly question, do they reset the mileage?

 

The car was weighed by the magazine at 1447 kg. So if there was weight savings it was very little. The Autocar article actually mentioned that they had also weighed the 355 when it came out and the 355 was slightly lighter. The Autocar 355 article actually mentions that they weighed it with 1/2 tank of gas but there is no mention of the amount of gas in their 360 article.

 

Two of those 575Ms were sold as used cars with accrued mileage from testing still on the odometer. The last one was fitted with a new engine and given a new assembly number before sale. Not sure what else was done to it.

 

My 360 was delivered with 1900 miles on it in October of 99 and that always seemed odd to me but this info makes that more interesting.

 

Your brand new car had 1,900 miles on it? That's grounds for rejection, surely?

 

I've only had the car a few years and have never talked to the original owner. I have all the post delivery dealer inspection (no idea what its called) docs and that was the miles on the documentation. I'm guessing the fact that it was almost impossible to get a 360 in October of 1999 overrode the miles on the car at the time, but I'm only guessing. I actually talked to the dealership that sold the car and they had actually just opened a few months earlier and my car was actually the first new Ferrari they ever received.

 

Note that on many occasions but not always, Autocar will quote "test" weight which includes driver, fuel and any test equipment.

From having driven and tested several of them....an American specification F430 is about 465 hp instead of the 490 quoted.
Interestingly, switching to decatted Capristo headers resulted in the as 490hp originally quoted by Ferrari for the stock car.

 

I'm quite sure that the US market cars have a different calibration resulting in less power - it was a byproduct of catering for more stringent emissions limits.

 

The idea that it could be a highly tuned engine intrigues me the most. It would actually be fairly significant (in my mind) for an N/A engine in 1999 to be pumping out 129 H.P./Liter.