F80 Reportedly Having Issues Selling

Mercedes make come back to V8 so let's hope Ferrari will bring back V12

 

I disagree a little: I think you are right for most. But, if someone's expected going in price is say $4.5m, then another $1,125,000 in cost might be a big enough amount that causes at least a few people to wonder if it's worth it, and out of that group, some will conclude it isn't. A little more flavor: we've come out of a time where the upper end has done very well. It could continue, but if history has taught us anything, it's that things don't keep going one way forever.

 

seeing as these cars aren't really driven anyway can people not request to take delivery of the car in EU? $1.1m buys a hell of a lot of storage time etc

 

If you ordered it via a USA dealer, you have to take it via that dealer. If you take delivery in the EU, at some point you'd need to pay the VAT or it has to go back to the USA so what's the VAT? About the same?

 

In Europe, it’s 3.5M Euro, VAT included.

In the USA, it’s 3.75M USD before state and local taxes, and at the current tariffs.

In California, for example, it would currently be over 4.1M USD after taxes.

If there were to be 25% tariffs, then it becomes over 5.1M USD in California.

 

More electronic interference = masking the drivers experience. Johnny specifically talks about the driving aspect. Fewer electronic things = it's more up to the driver.

It'll be pretty damn easy to program a car to completely drive itself much faster than the average human can round a track or a road or whatever. It'll be quicker on the throttle, better on the brakes, more fuel efficient. All the numbers will be better.

Doesn't make it a better drivers car.

 

Is it quite sad to see what is happening among our US friends ??? today... on many levels

 

Doesn't the year the car is registered affect the regulations it is subject to? If next set of emissions standards (euro 7) comes into play before the car is registered do they now have to comply with that new standard? Or does US do it differently.

 

Nnvm US is different and based on model year.

 

I think it depends. Historically Ferrari has been very good at electronics. Think Side Slip Control, rear wheel steer on F12 TDF, turbo torque curve mapping on 488, brake by wire on 296. Maybe someone with extensive experience A/B testing can chime in but they all seem to have been integrated pretty well.

Counterpoint could be the SF90's AWD

 

Feel free to turn them off and kill yourself, at your own discretion. Modern cars are so powerful that electronics are vital in order to keep you alive. Have you seen the Chris Harris video about the 12 Cilindri? At one point he turned the ESC off and two turns later he turned it back on, as he couldn't control all the power himself. It is the same with modern fighter jets. In order for them to be so agile they are aerodynamically unstable, requiring fly-by-wire controls, as a human wouldn't be able to make the inputs required to keep the plane flying. Personally, I don't see the allure of trying to tame a recalcitrant car. A car should work in unison with the driver, not against him/her. That is not an invasion, it is progress (unless the electronics are not calibrated properly and are indeed invasive). Modern supercars and sports cars have sublime electronics though, Why would any driver want to fight against the car, other than verifying his ego? Now, think if the F40 had an advanced traction control system. How much better would that car be, objectively? The F40 didn't exactly scare me (drove it on a track, which admittedly is a safer environment), even though it was all over the place, but I was left disappointed by its crudeness. On that same track day the F430 was quicker and friendlier. Okay, progress in mechanical engineering made a difference, but I think that most progress came from the electronics. If I want to go back to the past, I still have my E-Type, for when I want to remind myself how much cars have progressed since then.

 

It's not just sophisticated ADAS like ESC or slide-slip control, but even basic ones like ABS that everyone has just sort of accepted as the norm.

How many would soon realize they don't know how to brake if they were "allowed" to turn off ABS?

 

No nannies for me for sure. I know how not to kill myself without system.

If a car seriously needs esc for it to behave, it lacks the natural balance in my view.

Again, if F80 has very poor front motor integration like SF90, my F80 will be gone after mandatory period.

 

Wow, quite a statement. Not even professional drivers say that. I guess you must be at Leclerc's level (nah, he too spins a lot, you are above him)... A certain Mr Raikkonen spun the LaFerrari when he drove it.

At 0:35:

 

That may explain why LEC was always crashing into walls last year.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You are quite right. I edited my post. LOL!!!

 

You are still thinking that outright speed is directly correlating with a better driver experience.

 

Not really. But I do think that absolute control does and electronics give to the driver control. Speed plays its tole too. I certainly do not think that a crude and unwieldy car is fun, but that is just my personal opinion.

 

rev-matched downshifts are far better than I can do it myself, and make the car faster, but they aren’t satisfying. I’m perfectly happy letting computers perform mundane tasks for me that I don’t enjoy, but I’d rather flub 9 of 10 heel-toe downshift attempts just to nail that 1 perfectly because it makes me happy, makes me feel like I accomplished something. If I were racing professionally, I’d want all the tech that helps me win races, but as I drive for my own pleasure, I want to be challenged. Some Nannie’s are good, for sure, but many feel that some of the modern tech sanitizes the experience. Others feel differently. Doesn’t make them right or wrong. But nearly every car nut who drives for fun would choose less weight and mechanical simplicity over more power and all the tech and weight that’s needed to both generate that power and reign it in.

 

You do realise that you contradict yourself, right? I consider myself to be a car enthusiast, I will drive the wheels off any can I can get my hands on. After decades of manual transmissions and heel and toeing, I now prefer the perfectly synced gear-change of a good dct/automated manual box. I had this discussion a few weeks ago with a mate of mine, who is a multiple times national rally champion. We were actually talking about the 718 GT4 RS we tested the other day and came to the conclusion that with a manual gearbox it would be a much worse car. Others might disagree, but don't try to convince people one way or the other.

 

A racer wants the machine to be completely predictable and even a little down on high power. That way it becomes an extension of you and your skill whereby the very few can even appear to tweak the laws of physics. On the street its a different story. You want to compress all that track-like brain melding excitement into public road speeds and surfaces.

I, and many others, want a car in that environment to be characteristically over the top. We want it to frighten us on occasion and keep us well entertained within the rules of the road. A fully predictable machine in road legal conditions is boring to me. These aren't race cars. Hope that makes sense.

 

Not to me, but whatever makes you happy sir.

PS: Racers always want more power.

 

Thanks. I have worked with professional motocross teams and their engines are completely modified and typically less peak power than stock.

Everything on the bike - engine, trans, clutch, suspension and brakes are tuned to the rider and continually adjusted over the season by factory specialists. Indeed, the peak power has very little to do with lap times. Its skill and guts against each other and you also need reliability. As a racer myself, I wanted everything smooth and predictable. Peak horsepower not important compared to all of the machine being predictable. The engines are faster than you can use.

 

Very interesting and I have heard that before but mainly in an off-road environment. When it comes to circuit racing they always strive for more power. Not to the detriment of drivability obviously, but more power is always beneficial. In F1 they say that 10 HP accounts for about 0.1'' around a typical circuit (more than that in Monza), which is a lot when the pole position is often a matter of less time than that.

 

If the electronics can control parts of the car or override the driver's inputs, by definition, the driver has ceded some degree of control over the machine.

You can argue that this is necessary, or that it improves the experience by allowing more performance to be wrung from the car. Fair enough.

But take this to its natural extreme. Soon, the fastest way to drive a car may be to not drive it at all. You'd just strap in and let computers chauffeur you.* I'm guessing even you would say that's too far. Or, maybe not.

I'm not suggesting that this is where modern cars are today. But we're moving in that direction. Drivers of today's cars don't need to know how to upshift quickly, how to match revs crisply on downshifts, how to threshold brake, how to manage wheelspin. Computers do this for us now. With hybrids, you don't even have to work to keep the engine in the right rev range. Not to mention how many driving sins modern stability control can paper over.

For many of us - like @CT Audi Fan - this robs us of many of the sources of satisfaction we get from driving our cars. It's why so many of us are drawn to Gordon Murray's philosophy. Give us state of the art materials and mechanical tech - but leave us to operate it.

That philosophy may not appeal to you. It doesn't, after all, optimize for performance. But you're a smart guy. I'm sure you can understand why it appeals to so many others.

_____
* I'm not sure anyone will bother to build such a car since I doubt there will be a market for it, but it will be technologically achievable.