Ferrari F80

I think it cost somewhere between $50-100 million to develop the Valkyrie V12 or GMA V12s. Maybe 1.5-2x that cost for Ferrari. Then add $20-50 million to retool the V12 production line. So all in anywhere from $100-250 million to develop a new V12. I think that is a small price to pay to ensure the soul of the brand.

 

The "soul" of the brand is racing, not engine cylinder configurations.

 

If the soul of the brand was reduced to racing nobody would care about Ferrari, the soul is both racing and road cars.

That’s the magic, and we want to feel the thrill with amazing engines like we always did, not with a FWD “halo” 6 sorry cylinders when Cosworth release 2 NA v12s and A ****ING V16 !!!

The tourbillon has a V16 NA and respect the Bugatti esthetic.
It is not just 3 times more cylinder, it is 1000 times more exclusivity!!
Not by production numbers but by definition, because it is a hell of engine!!! That’s the reason!

 

Disagree. This is why Enzo Ferrari would not put his name on the 6 cylinder Dino.

 

Two examples of V6 Ferrari's not called Dino's while Enzo was alive.

Ferrari 156 V6.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_156_F1

Ferrari 156/85
Image Unavailable, Please Login
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_156/85

 

Unfortunately some people here only know about modern Ferraris. Mike Hawthorn won the 1958 Formula 1 Driver's Championship with a V6-powered Ferrari 246 F1. Three years later, in 1961, Phil Hill did the same in a 156 F1 and Ferrari won the Manufacturers' Championship with the car.

 

The context is mainly reminiscent of road Ferraris, because otherwise we will end up debating one day a legitimate production car in 4 cylinders because the 750 Monza with its 3 liters exists and was victorious at the Monza Grand Prix...

 

Ferrari website, 1996.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

F80 seems to live up to 1996 Ferrari, and no mention of number of cylinders or even sound.

 

The point about the V6 race cars is that Enzo built what was fastest for the time and the rules. That is the essence of the hyper car line. Leave the rest to Icona and everyone is happy. I don’t know what the big deal is. F80 is quick and techy. SP3 is historic and possesses a wonderful engine with the best sound. They have every base covered and F80 and SP3 are not competitors they are complementers. Well done Ferrari!

 

I think using the current V12 would not represent growth, it would be doing what they had done before. And I don’t think that is what a Ferrari supercar should be.

I love the engine, I would put it (the entire evolution from Enzo+) forward as the greatest ICE of all time….

I would have favored their developing a new V12. We’ve all imagined it. But they didn’t.

I wonder if this is one time that maybe they took the racing technology transfer a bit too literally.

A race car does not need to sound great, or even make much sound, it needs to be effective, efficient, and it needs, above all else, to win. Enzo Ferrari said the race car is neither beautiful nor ugly, until it races, and if it wins, then it’s beautiful.

But what is a Ferrari supercar, it is something that is supposed to show the maximum of what is possible for a road going Ferrari, and I think they have done that here. However, I also think there is another part of what makes a Ferrari supercar, and that is something that inspires us to dream. And I think it is with this second part that many of us are having a problem. Because this is about emotions, and to engage our emotions we need to engage our senses, one of the most important is sound. And the sound of the F80, at least on the outside, its not that exciting. Maybe it will be far more exciting on the inside.

Sometimes growth means risking making a mistake.

We will know with the passage of time if Ferrari should have done something different, or if they have this just right.

For what its worth, I find the F80 to be fascinating, but I really do wish the sound whs

 

I also think he favored reliability. He won many races by his cars simply finishing.

 

Just a bit of history. Ever since the release of the 288 GTO in 1984, during the last 40 years Ferrari has periodically released a new supercar that represented the pinnacle of cutting-edge technology and innovation of its era.

The F40 was released in 1987, 3 years after the 288 GTO, with a similar V8 twin turbo engine that delivered more 82 hp.

The F50 was released in 1995, eight years after the F40, and was the first in this series to use a naturally aspirated V12 engine which curiously, only delivered 35 hp more than the F40's twin turbo V8.

The Enzo was released in 2002, seven years after the F50, with a naturally aspirated V12 engine that delivered 139 hp more than the F50's V12.

The La Ferrari was released in 2013, 11 years after the Enzo, with a hybrid V12 engine that delivered 299 hp more than the Enzo's V12.

The F80 was released in 2024, 11 years after the La Ferrari, with a hybrid V6 engine that delivers 234 hp more than the La Ferrari's V12 hybrid.

In these six supercars released over the last 40 years, there were some brutal power increases between models. Engine wise there are for all tastes, naturally aspirated and hybrid V12s, twin turbo V8s and also a hybrid V6. The various engines and motorizations represent the most technologically advanced features of each era.

 

Both a byproduct of contemporary regulations in F1.

Which he did not transfer to the road cars.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that he would have disapproved of the F80. Only that the existence these cars doesn't prove that he would have supported it.

 

One of these is a replica.

Marcel Massini

 

Sing it louder for those at the back!

The irony of all this is that in 1995, the F50 was called ugly and slow by all the experts. Clarkson himself slated the chassis' architecture, saying it was trying to break his spine. It's funny that these same idiosyncrasies are turning the F50 into the next megamillions collector Fcar. Racing tech transferred to the road—that's Ferrari in a nutshell.

 

You ask a good question about splitting it off. It would have to be a new company that is not 100% Ferrari owned where the product is also not 100% manufactured at Ferrari. It would have to look and function as an independent company. At least in ownership by 2 companies that did not have the same shareholders. If it was just a financial balance sheet exercise, that would never pass a real legal test of it being a separate entity if it has the same shareholders. An independent new company would have to have its own board of directors making its own decisions. And making its own cars. A big issue would be technology development and engineering. That would take the company into GMA structure. Doing this just to get around EU rules could pull Ferrari into being a holding company. I doubt that Ferrari would ever go in this direction. (Also, side note, I would bet that in 10 years, GMA is acquired probably by McLaren. And not to burst and balloons, but GMA did say that a part of the GM entities would be doing an EV/hybrid next due to EU regulations..).

 

Context is street cars, not race cars. Dino is a street car. F80 is a street car.

 

I disagree. Just because FIA regs are taking racing down the mandated V6 rat hole does not necessarily follow that it represents "growth" to do so - or, that it's in Ferrari's best interest to FOLLOW. Again, quite the opposite.

Ferrari supercar without V12 is like apple pie without apples.

 

Except Apple Pie necessarily requires apples; Ferrari supercar does not really require a V12. That’s a disagreement between us. However, the agreement is that it does require a high degree of emotion. It should make the experience of those who are just experiencing its presence, weather visually, or aurally, or both, or the people lucky enough to have them, to just simply want it. Ferrari’s NA V12 does accomplish that. But I also think a nice sounding 288 or F40 also accomplish that. That the current racing regs do not accomplish this is why I say I wonder if they’ve maybe gone a bit too literal with the idea of race technology transfer.

 

On this we agree.

By and large, Ferraristi are not buying supercars purely for lap time. They are buying for emotion, of which speed is of course but one component. In which case, transfer of non-emotion-provoking race tech doesn't entirely make sense.

 

I agree 100%. Although Clarkson might be the worst driver to ever professionally make a living from reviewing cars.

 

For context, the F80 is being marketed as having the powertrain from a race car.

 

The F80's powertrain is a by-product of the current rule sets in WEC and F1.

 

Therein lies the problem.

 

This!