Wonder if they’ll call it the Segugio?
After seeing those renders a few pages ago I hope they launch it in a dark red or matte red like Rosso Oslo Opaco.
We still have ~5 months until the Miami GP right? I'm really excited for the unveiling but at the same time i'm worried how it probably will be the last of the v12 grand tourers, they sure will appreciate in value a lot until i can afford one.
Of course it is. Weight ruins most active driving experiences. I can only fantasize about a non hybrid 296 street car...... But when Ferrari doesn't have an incentive to do so; why would they!?
Nope, the reason for the thread ban by @ylshih was clearly explained https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/posts/149457454/
Except the MC20 with carbon tub is heavier than the 296 and though the Artura is 100 kg lighter, it also has 150 or so less hp (which means smaller ancillaries etc). Non carbon tub is nothing to do with Ferrari being lazy.
Correct. It's an intentional choice by Ferrari. They know their customer base, and for the tifosi, a carbon tub is just not that important. Doesn't matter what FChat thinks, as FChat does not represent even a minority of the Ferrari buying public.
This discussion is being over simplified. Another quite valid reason, and one I agree with that Ferrari uses carbon tubs on only very limited cars is potential damage assessment, damage and repair. Aluminum is a lot more forgiving than CF and easier to diagnose and work with.
If all models were to have carbon chassis, how would you then differentiate the top end models? Also, I'm most interested to hear, what kind of limitations the use of single carbon chassis presents from the space and styling point of view, when producing several rather different models.
Interesting point, but think to the Monza SP1/SP2 and Daytona SP3 > The Monza SP have the F152 (F12/812) chassis and the Daytona has a carbon tub from the F150 (LF/LFAperta). Both are super expensive and belonging to the Icona series. One in aluminum and one in carbon
Do you honestly think Ferrari care about the cost of repairs for its customers? Have you seen Ferrari's prices for parts and their options lists? And lets not forget that Ferrari will let you option carbon wheels, the worst place on a road car for carbon being damaged and failing. For Ferrari to say that carbon is not a good material for its "standard" production cars, but then use it on all of their "limited" cars and also offer it as an option for its wheels just makes their arguments look even more ridiculous. The only reason Ferrari have not gone with carbon structures for more of its model range is profit. For me its going to be very interesting going forward seeing what Ferrari do once ICE engines are banned ( or sales are very limited). Ferrari will no longer have their "engine" as their major selling point. And with more and more automotive, aerospace and marine companies investing and developing ways to mass produce carbon efficiently quickly, at what point will Ferrari have to switch to carbon structures to stay competitive. They won't be able to sell purely due to their badge forever. Mclaren a few years ago brought their chassis design and production fully inhouse.
McLaren has a different business model, their line-up are variations on the same chassis. For Ferrari it wouldn´t be easy to adapt that to front engine, rear engine, four seaters, etc...Having said that, I think their mid engine cars (those more perfomance oriented) should already been transitioning to CF chassis, even if it´s not "real carbon fiber" but that molded crap McLaren uses. The weight advantage is not that big, but with the hybrid/full electric stuff that it´s coming, every little helps. P.S: those Porsche GT3RRSSSR that the "purists" love so much are still made of steel. So it´s not only about what it´s made of, but how it´s made.
I agree. Life is just not as simple as all carbon = better than all aluminium = better than all steel. Carbon tub cars have a certain feel. A bit less organic. The hyper cars counter this with a very specific type of tub design that is not for mass production and uses properly laid carbon weave. It’s quite beautiful and for example, in the LaFerrari is used to give a very different feel to standard cars, including Macs and Lambos - at great cost. The Lambo and McLaren solution is quite different, much less time consuming to make and feels much less bespoke. In the end it’s about the overall package. The reason Ferraris are too heavy for some people has little to do with a carbon tub. Much more about heavy engines (V12), luxury (V12s), hybrid (V6 and V8) and massive power requiring bigger brakes, better cooling etc. Plus ADAS etc. Much of this is forced but much is also to suit customer preference. To make money? Yes, of course. Why not? It’s not dirty. It’s what has given us some of the best brands in the world. The ones that didn’t make any money we all forgot, more or less, because they went out of business. I’m pretty happy with the aluminium solution for SF90 and 296 and expensive (as opposed to cheap) carbon reserved for the hypers. I had a car stolen this year. Thankfully recovered. Let me just say that although there was only small damage, I’m glad of an aluminium car rather than a carbon one. There was no damage to the body but there could easily have been and if there was, it would probably have ended our ownership of the car, a car which is very sentimental and I don’t wish to sell. As for carbon wheels, just no. I bought one car with them and I have hardly used it and will likely soon sell it. Great for collectors, bad for drivers. “I don’t want to take a GT3 RS allocation because it still has steel in it.” Said no one ever.
