I don't really care for those brands. Especially Singer, with its restomods is as bad an example as it gets. Its for people living in the past, but who secretly desire new technology... Now, I get the allure of modern amenities in classic cars (I am thinking of installing an A/C and power steering to my E-Type), but what's the point of fully modern mechanicals in an old car? You either want the authentic vintage experience, or the modern car one. Anything in between is a travesty. Paganis are just kitsch inside and out and, whilst being impractical for the sake of differentiation. Spykers were also similarly gaudy. The point of a gauge/display is to confer information concisely and precisely, not to show off and be difficult to read. Bugattis are just stately, like a super fast Bentley. Nothing new or interesting there. It's no coincidence that all race cars have digital displays. Their drivers need information, not ornaments on their dash. That said, I understand those that prefer gauges and appreciate their aesthetic value. Those people should also understand the pros of a digital display though and let Ferrrari be modern and not retro. Now, we can all agree on the haptics and tear Ferrari's engineers a new one.
Which is exactly why I prefer analog gauges and why Ferrari needs to put them in road cars. Unless the first thing you do on your new Ferrari is tear out the interior and put slicks on.
Ferrari is a forward looking sports car company, with modernity as its goal. For a mansion house feeling, please visit your local Rolls Royce, or Bentley dealer, your Lordship.
There's a key point that's been missed in the discussion re: dials and switches vs. digital displays and touch interfaces: long term viability/repairability. Confronted with the war against ICE, there are those of us who regard our latest toy purchases as 'forever-cars.' There are four cars of which I'll only part paths when I draw my last breath. My intent is to make a F167 a fifth 'forever-car.' In 15 or 20 years, I will be able to have a misbehaving gauge or mechanical switch repaired. Will the same be true for digital screens and haptic controls? Although I don't have a definitive answer to this question, I'm concerned to the contrary. For this reason, I'm hoping (praying) that Ferrari equips the F167 with traditional switches and displays/gauges.
Personally, I would love it if Ferrari would produce a "restomod" version of something like the 250GTO with the 6.5l V12...an old school manual 6spd gearbox...analog gauges...but with modern performing conveniences like AC/radio/etc.. I may very well be in the minority, but I believe what we quickly label as "progress" in automotive design & features is nothing more than marketing that we have been conditioned to believe is "better." Back in the late-'90s when Ferrari introduced the paddle shifting transmission it was a modern technological "advancement." That slippery slope of technology has led us to the 296GTB. I certainly don't want to argue the merits of how a 296GTB is far better car than, for instance, an F355. However, for some, it would have been more enjoyable to continue to see minor incremental mechanical improvements in Ferrari offerings while NOT sacrificing the analog driving experience. Would a 500hp/6spd manual/analog gauge evolution of the F355...if it were produced by Ferrari today...outsell the 296GTB? It most certainly would be slower and lack those very, very important 'features' such as Apple CarPlay...so perhaps not. Would my hypothetical F355 replacement be more rewarding to drive? I think I can make a pretty good argument that it would. The fact that Ferrari/Porsche/et.al. do NOT build such cars gives rise to Singer, et.al.. Lest we forget...this entire endeavor for Ferrari is driven by the MBAs & accountants attempting to maximize profit. Ferrari is building what marketing tells them will sell...not necessarily what customers wish they would build. Analog gauges aren't going to help sell a Portofino. More importantly, most of the 20 & 30-something purchasers today would never want my hypothetical F355 evolution...is that because it is less desirable than a 296GTB...or because the Ferrari marketing machine over the last couple decades conditioned us to think that way. After all...electronic gizmos & speedier (by nano-seconds) shifting transmissions do increase the selling price of cars.
I don't see why not. These are simple electronics and Ferrari's Classiche department will surely make them available. Now, the batteries might be a different story regarding complexity/cost, but Classiche will take care of that too... Some of them might be conditioning (i.e. haptics), but some others are genuine progress. For example, a 250 GTO restomod would have 1960s aerodynamics; I wouldn't want an 800 CV car with 1960s aero instability. That would like putting a modern jet engine in a Spitfire. Who would want to fly that thing? Ferrari has already done something similar with the SP1/2, but they used modern mechanicals (i.e. a DCT - the manual is dead as far as Maranello is concerned) and honed it in the wind tunnel. Hence, an interpretation of the 250 is possible, but it would need to be a modern execution (no manual transmission or exact looks). By all accounts a great Ferrari, so I don't see the issue here. And Ferrari would have turned into an Italian Morgan, not a supercar manufacturer anymore, but a cute relic... A 355 is so 1994 and I am not talking about the gauges, but the performance and the dynamics. It was great back then, but where would the progress be? For those who want the 1994 experience in 2024, there are plenty of 355s on the second hand market. For those few who still live in the past and that's why they only sell in the hundreds. Ferrari takes pride in being a technology/performance leader. What you are proposing is the opposite of what Ferrari represents. When the 355 came out it was a state of the art supercar. Would you have liked Ferrari to have frozen the time in 1994? That would be disgraceful and make the iconic brand the laughing stock of the car world; a former leader who now produces cars from the past. Enzo would spin in his grave, as he used to say that the best Ferrari is the next one! Even Morgan uses modern BMW turbocharged engines nowadays. Morgan was never about performance though, so they can afford to be palaeolithic; actually that's their selling point. The fact that demand far exceeds supply is proof positive that that is what the majority of the clientele wants. Can you imagine many shoppers saying "I will buy the new 500 HP Ferrari, which costs the same as the 800 HP McLaren/Lamborghini, because slower is always more fun!"? Ferrari sells performance (and image, to be honest); always had, always will. What you are proposing is the opposite of Ferrari. Another of Enzo's famous sayings is that he sells engines and throws in the car for free. Can you imagine selling the same (or marginally better) engine for 30 years? What would Enzo think of that? Where is the progress and the competitiveness of Enzo's spirit in that?
There you go again... We get it. You want the latest tech in the service of performance. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I just don't get why you choose to make condescending comments about others' preferences. The idea that people are advocating for is quite simple: (1) a mechanical and analog experience, but (2) built with modern materials and manufacturing know-how. I think that's a big part of the appeal of the first Singer. It was an attempt to build a car in this spirit. Obviously there's more to their philosophy, but I believe that's what made them catch on. The appeal of an analog experience isn't difficult to understand, even if it isn't something you particularly value. It's about creating a direct connection between man and machine. No software to assist or augment or override the driver. No nannies to cover up mistakes. Of course it would be slower. Of course it's less modern. But it would be fun. It would be engaging. It would be more challenging to drive well than many faster cars, and that would make it more rewarding for some of us. If I'm stuck in the past, send me a patch. I'll sew it on my jacket.
I agree with you regarding Ferrari was/is about image. I would suggest that image was 10% of the equation in the '70s and has grown to a far higher...perhaps well over 50%...for many buyers and/or model demographics. What I am proposing with my F355 evolution hypothetical really is nothing more than what Porsche does with its GT division. I am the owner of a 992 GT3 Touring (6spd manual, of course) which has a very modest bump in horsepower over the previous generation 991.2 GT3 variant. Yet...it still finds plenty of buyers despite an elevated sticker price over the "base" model 911s and...depending how many option boxes you check...as pricey as the far quicker (and sterile) 992 Turbo S. Why doesn't Ferrari offer something similar to Porsche's GT division? Why MUST Ferrari resort to turbochargers (488 & F8) and now a hybrid system (296)? I guess the point I am attempting to make is that IMAGE has consumed the brand. Ferrari, to a large degree, is NOT catering to DRIVERS. ...and when I say DRIVERS...I mean in my 250GTO "restomod" analogy...while there would be a V12...it would NOT need 800CV...not even close...and it WOULD have a 6spd manual transmission option. The vast majority of Ferrari owners do not DRIVE their cars...they simply operate the algorithm: Accelerator Position + Steering Wheel Position = How Much The Computer Needs To Save You How many owners operate their cars with the manettino in the two upper most settings? Truth is...99% of us don't NEED 800CV because, without the computer, we cannot actually drive it. Which takes me back to image. We now live in a world where people would rather take an injection to lose X% of their bodyweight versus altering their diet & exercising. Ferrari is catering to that "everybody gets a trophy" clientele. As such, the "technology/performance leader" is measured NOT how you can make a finely tuned vehicle that caters to DRIVERS...but instead providing supercar performance that the "everyman/woman" can drive and not kill themselves. I just purchased an 812GTS so I am by no means a brand hater. Rather, my personal definition of "performance/technology leader" is more along the lines of continuing to offer at least one model that continues to push the limits of a naturally aspirated internal combustion engine with continued improvement of a manual transmission to rival that of what Porsche supplies in its GT3. I suspect the buyers of that particular car would value "image" far differently than most of the market...but if Porsche can make $$$ on a GT3 I am pretty sure Ferrari could. Neither of us can say with certainty...but I suspect Enzo would be far happier with my theoretical 500hp naturally aspirated evolution of the F355 engine than a 6-cylinder/turbocharged/hybrid.
I believe you are mistaken, dear sir. Nothing wrong with craving for the old/analogue experience. Buy an old car then. I have a 1969, Series 2 E-Type, myself. An E Type with a modern 5 litre Jaguar V8, ABS, ESP and airbags makes no sense to me, though. I would like to have an A/C (it's getting hotter and hotter every summer) and power steering (to make the rack quicker) though. Also, an old "shell" with modern mechanicals (injected engine, ABS, ESP, modern suspension and tyres) is not really analogue, is it? It is just a modern car with an old design. Having an engine with twice the power of the original one defies the purpose, plus makes it a dangerous proposition, since the chassis was never designed for that amount of power.
I so wish Ferrari had not bothered playing the horsepower game with Mclaren and the rest and had continued to evolve the 458 Speciale engine . The Speciale is almost 10 years old, but it's NA engine is still at the top of the tree for many production road car engine achievements (Bhp-per-litre, compression ratio etc). Just imagine where that engine could have got to now if Ferrari had taken the same approach as Porsche with their limited production NA GT engines. It's mind blowing that a company had something so incredible, the envy of the car world, and then they just give it up because some garagista's turn up with some turbos (on an engine that's not even theirs)! Who would not love a carbon tubbed, less than 1200kg, 650bhp+ ( 145bhp per litre+), 10'000rpm NA V8 Ferrari with some super trick 2024 suspension and aero?
Duly noted, but this is an outlier, not the basic Porsche model line up. What you are proposing is basically having another model, besides the regular 800+ HP 296. Okay, I can understand that, even though I am afraid it would have been cannibalised by the 800+ HP model. I can't speak for all of you, but a slower Ferrari would not be an enticing proposition, just for being revvy. It wouldn't be that much noisier though, due to the EU noise regulations for you and I, dear sir! Well, my friend, this is driving for some people, but not for all. It is unfair to call people, who don't care for this kind of driving "non-drivers", don't you think? Some want the exhilaration of speed/power. I guess most do, if we sit back and watch the evolution of the supercar. Other than the 911 GT3, all supercars are about power and speed. Even the 911 GT2 is, which is the GT3's bigger brother. Porsche can afford to have a slower car, since it also has the mighty powerful one. Would you take the GT3 over trhe GT2? I guess you might, perhaps even I might. But the GT2 is the big daddy, commanding the big price tag and the magazine lap times. For better or for worse, Ferrari is a performance brand. It cannot fall behind in the power/performance/speed stakes. Porsche sells a 300 HP roadster, it's not that much a problem for them to have a less "powerful" GT3 also in their range. On a final note, Porsche races the N/A GT3. Ferrari's lowest race car is the 296. How could they market a slower N/A version of it? No one knows. as you say. Enzo was always about engine power though and Pierro said that his dad would be happy with electric motors, as long as that meant winning. But this is just his guesstimate. PS: On a more personal note, I would like to thank you for the very polite, civilised and constructive discussion! It has been a pleasure and hopefully we 'll get to converse again soon. Cheers!
Hmmm…. Well all that is well and good. I still think it is silly to talk about what Enzo would think today. Anyhow, hard to believe all this is simply coming from the desire of most of us to do away with haptics and just keep regular switches, buttons or knobs. I don’t really mind screens, but I really like a physical tachometer. The 812 has screens on both sides. The 911’s have screens in both sides. I am sad to see it go.
I love classics. (EJags are wonderful, BTW, inspired choice.) And I agree that they satisfy the analog requirement. But that's only half of the equation I proposed. Anyway, who is asking for an 800bhp EJag? I think that's a strawman. I believe that @Bobby_P and others are saying that they would like to see Ferrari apply their modern manufacturing know-how to build an analog car, with one of its glorious NA engine driving the wheels. They can correct me if I'm misinterpreting them. But I think they're asking for a new analog car, not a 700bhp engine in a 348 chassis. --- Incidentally, I agree with you ABS and ESP are not analog. (Of course ESP is defeatable, and ABS would be too if I was emperor.) I'm sure some proponents of the analog experience would make those concessions in the name of safety. I don't follow why modern suspension and tires (or chassis or brakes, etc., etc.) aren't analog? Are there microchips in modern tires that I don't know about? --- Also, I agree with you that building these cars at scale probably wouldn't make commercial sense for Ferrari. Doesn't mean we can't wish that they would do it anyway! They won't, but one can dream...
Sounds nice, but I believe that that V8 had reached the end of its development road. They would have to design a new one, which of course they could have done. But we are disregarding the various laws and regulations now. Plus, power and speed sell cars, at the end of the day.
I agree with @REALZEUS on this one. Nuvolari and Max are very different drivers in very different cars and eras. But both drivers. Incomprehensibly talented drivers.
Lovely discussion and I am glad I cracked the old wine from the cellar and kept myself online to this hour. Modern suspensions are both much more evolved in terms of elasto-kinetics, but they are also microchip regulated (I am sure that you are aware of the magnetorheological dampers that Ferrari utilises). Hell, even new tyres have microchips (to relay info to the car).
I'd argue that Multimatic dampers and Michelin tires aren't really interfering in the analog experience. Agree that dampers get into a gray zone. Though I'm not sure it's productive to be black and white about it. I'd be surprised if there's a compelling argument to the contrary about tires; even if they can send information to a CPU, they can only adapt to their circumstances in real time through mechanical means.
Lambo/Audi and Porsche have kept their NA engines going (Corvette introduced a new a Mid NA V8 model, inspired by the 458), so Ferrari could have kept their NA v8's as well. They also have kept the NA v12 , and it looks like they will again for this next generation. You are right, many people buy car's based on numbers. But just look how successful Porsche has been with the 500bhp GT cars. Ferrari would have had no issues with performance with a 650bhp NA V8 if they had focused on bringing the weights down.
The thing is that Lambo is killing the V10, the new Huracan will be a TT V8 and Porsche's GT3 is being sold at a much lower price point. The N/A V12 is the best engine in the world, but I am afraid that the new "LaFerrari" will be powered by a V6 and we already know that Ferrari's current flagship (the SF90 Stradale/XX) is powered by a TT V8. The Ferrari V12 has been relegated to FUV and Icona duties...
Couldn’t agree more, especially after driving back from Houston today in my dials and buttons daily and then blasting the country roads in the weekend car. Pure cynicism in my curmudgeon quips.......life is good irrespective of what the F167 turns out to be. Stopped by FoH. No news. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Prelude to a barn find…………. Image Unavailable, Please Login Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
I hope the Miami debut would imply North American deliveries at the same time as European cars… Europe seams to always get first bites at the apple ! Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat
Agree with your points. I was going to get a 296 GTS and Purosangue but having driven both I want neither. Each car is excellent in its own way but I really dislike the haptic controls as they don’t improve anything and I don’t think they’re well executed. Having both the 812 Superfast and GTS, I found the Purosangue didn’t fit my needs and with the 296, one of the most fun cars Ferrari currently make but the controls are a problem and I’m not comfortable with where battery tech is especially if there are reasonable periods of non-use. But back to the 167, I’m open minded on this and will see what ferrari come up with if it’s smaller and lighter than the 812 that would be great but I’ve got no expectations. The deal killer for me would be the haptic controls. I don’t really care if the horsepower is the same as the 812 as that’s more than enough aanyway.
All due respect but have you driven any of Singer’s cars? Dismissing them as cars aimed at people living in the past is overly simplistic. They improve on every aspect of those older Porsches to create an experience that retains the involvement of driving an older car with improvements based on modern technology. Their DLS is one of the best sports cars ever made in my opinion The reason they sell in the hundreds is that they are very expensive, production is limited in capacity and they lack the flashiness that attracts poseurs who are unable to appreciate this sort of thing. If you haven’t driven one, make sure you do, it will change your view forever. I do not for a moment suggest that Ferrari produce a Singer, although their Icona line aims to achieve similar results, i.e. beautiful, evocative cars with modern technology, not cars that chase the last 10th in acceleration and lap times. They also sell in the hundreds and do very well in the secondhand market! Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat
