First 100% electric Ferrari in 2025 - confirmed

Higher end cars, and especially exotics, have become so overly complex and expensive to maintain (with dealer service gouging also at epic levels), that I will absolutely welcome an interesting EV as a daily driver. I despise the golf cart front end and golf cart dashboard on the Teslas, but as a DD they are hard to beat. Practically free operating costs (fuel and maintenance), almost never need to stop to refuel (start every day on a full tank charging at home), reliable, ridiculously fast. That's everything I want in a DD. If somebody makes an interesting EV, that isn't overly complicated (maintenance/reliability/operationally), sign me up.

 

Well, it's what they still had available after shooting the "Generic Ferrari Car name" wad in 2013 on the LaFerrari.

 

I would not be interested in a ferrari with Chinese batteries or architecture

 

To be fair, you’d probably be even worse off with an Italian battery

 

Won't be shown in October. They're preparing a full 3-stage ballet show for the launch...

"On Tuesday, Vigna said Ferrari would only show the "technological heart" of its electric car in October, as part of a three-stage unveiling process culminating with its world premiere in the spring of next year.

"Deliveries ... will commence just months after that, in October 2026," Vigna told analysts in a post-earnings call."

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/FERRARI-N-V-25531423/news/Ferrari-to-start-deliveries-of-new-EV-in-October-2026-49839972/

 

This entire thread, and reality of a fcar EV is just extremely SAD!

 

It would be significantly more sad if Ferrari wasn't doing anything at all with EV's.

Technology moves on, it would be idiotic for any business to ignore that. Hopefully it doesn't distract from their ICE cars, but it would be sad if Ferrari did nothing with electric.

 

I would not be sad if they had no EV.

I am not sad that Patek does not make an analogous Apple Watch either.

 

If not for government forcing and funding there would be no EVs, it is not a modern 'technological' phenomena, after all, 100 years ago there were EVs, you do realize?

The 'forcing' is to fit a narrative that is actually a means that is highly corrupt in nature.

It would be wise for Ferrari to kick the 'EV' can down the road, forever, and stop using complex 'hybrid' cheats as well. For the world of exotics, there is no place for electric motors (a commodity that anyone with little skill can implement, witness the plethora of new energy car companies that came out of no where, at one point a vacuum cleaner company was going to make one as well as Apple...), at least in my world view. Thankfully there are a number of non-cheat exotics to enjoy.

 

Very different market segments -- the analog watch market has already been intentionally anachronistic for decades, nobody who plays in the car segment can allow itself to lag far behind on technology.

 

I agree with you on hybrids -- I'd rather exotics avoided hybrid altogether, though they'd lag on performance if they didn't incorporate hybrid, so maybe they don't have a choice.

You must not know anyone who owns an EV. The forcing of EV's is not appetizing, that's for sure -- but nobody is being forced to buy an EV today, and tons of people voluntarily bought them and love them. I don't know a single person who owns an EV who doesn't absolutely love it. Not one. Incredible performance, virtually never need to go to the gas station when they can start every day on a full tank charging at home, ridiculously cheap to operate and maintain. Most still have an ICE in the family for long tips, but they would not go back to an ICE for their daily driver in a million years.

Coming up with an EV worthy of the Ferrari name will be a trick -- that's for sure -- but it is ignoring reality not to recognize that the vast, vast, vast majority of EV owners love their EV's and aren't going back.

EV's already decimate ICE's in most respects. Once battery technology advances to reduce battery cost to a fraction of what they cost now, and reduce battery weight by 50% or so, it's going to be very, very difficult to justify any ICE. Hopefully we'll still have plenty of ICE's -- which I love -- but it will be for the same reason we still have analog watches (emotional, not logical or performance or practicality).

 

Back up a bit, if not for unachievable government 'mileage', 'CO2', 'etc' regulations (that were first revealed more than a decade ago), EVs would never have been forced upon automobile manufacturers, they simply would not have occurred, outside of government funding (i.e. Tesla, first with loans next with selling of CO2 credits), however once the timelines approached, automobile manufacturers had 'zero choice', either go out of business or try to make EVs...that's the forcing I am referring to. But, they are still going out of business (VW trying to close plants, Ford losing billions, etc) because there is not and never will be a market comparable to ICE for EVs, see below.

BTW the future of batteries, being a chemical process, it's not going to achieve an notable cost or weight reductions, ever (Lithium was the end of the road, no lighter metal exists, by Atomic weight), you cannot change the laws of physics. The 'focus' is now is making batteries less explosive, and quicker to charge, which is whole 'nother can of worms...you cannot have public chargers that can provide short recharge times (comparable to ICE), ever, each one would require an entire neighborhood's worth of power in one socket, besides the absurdity of it, the sheer amount of infrastructure required would take a century or more to build out and no one, not even governments are doing that since most present-day EV owners have their own garage (to recharge overnight), but for the 50% of so of the general population that has no such option, ...well, the point is, general acceptance of EVs regardless of anything else is 'never', completely impossible, but, that's the plan, remember, the EU's plan...are you aware?

https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/walking-cycling-and-public-transport

 

You're ignoring the point that virtually everyone who owns an EV loves them. So they are not a blight on the world, even though they are apparently to you. Financial assistance to bootstrap technology is how we advance. The other option is not develop anything new and stay stuck in the past. Maybe good for you personally, but not good for the world as a whole.

Technology always advances, usually massively. I remember paying $5000 each for 18-inch 30-pound disk drives in the 90's that held only 300Mb. Now a 4Tb drive with probably 10,000 times (complete guess) the performance is $200. Nobody in the 90's thought that would be possible.

Solid state battery prototypes, while not ready for production, have about double the capacity and about half the weight of Lithium batteries. Everything in technology gets better over time -- usually leaps and bounds better, and "fractions of the price" cheaper.

I love ICE's. Any break in cost/weight/capacity in batteries will make it very difficult to justify any ICE -- though I hope we continue to have tons of ICE options.

I'm glad Ferrari isn't make itself a relic by ignoring electric.

 

People who own EVs may love them, but as commuter cars. The handful of attempts to sell electric performance cars have failed so far. Performance cars are supposed to evoke emotion, something ICEs can do and EVs don't, at least once the novelty has worn off.

The Patek and Apple watch analogy is apt. The Patek is frivolous and impractical but beautiful to behold - much like the Ferraris we know and love.

The Apple watch is superior by every objective measure, and thus the more convenient and practical choice - much like the EV daily driver. But it's just an appliance.

Fifty years from now, nearly every Patek made this year will remain in a collection. Nearly every Apple watch made this year will be in a landfill.

 

"Everyone who owns an EV loves them."

I own an EV and they suck. I bought it because of legislation and for driving in city zones (they are trying to ban ICEs from entering cities). Most EVs I have driven just simply suck. Boring to drive, QC issues, cheap plastics, stupid big screens, "eco-friendly" interiors that mess with your hormones, and so on. Most of my friends who owns an EV, bought it for the same reason. But they never use it for something else than commuting. For bigger roadtrips and tasks, they will drive their diesel SUV or wagon. Everyone I know who replaced their one and only ICE for an EV, has ended up either selling their EV going back to diesel/petrol/hybrid, or they have bought a preowned ICE as their second car.

An electric Ferrari will, of course, be something completely different, and I'm sure it won't suck. But I don't think Ferrari can run away from the following facts:

The VW Group is having a hard time trying to sell EVs. The luxury market is struggling to sell EVs — just look at Porsche, Rimac, and Maserati. Ferrari won't be any different, and the massive depreciation could scare customers away. The Ferrari EV will be sold to new-money customers on the premise that "you can get an allocation for X if you buy this." That is not sustainable at all and could flop very fast. And remember, there is a reason why Ferrari will be selling their first EV as a crossover: to sell as many cars as possible to minimze the loss on how much they have invested into this nonsese. They know there is not a big market for EV supercars, so thats why we will be getting a stupid crossover that nobody asked for.

It is partly true that we cannot stay stuck in the past, and that moving forward and trying out different solutions is a must in order to survive. But we are, in fact, seeing the opposite effect now. European car makers are struggling big time with this EV craze, slowly killing them. Just look at whats happening in Germany! This won't be any easier for Ferrari in the long run. EVs are built because of market manipulation done by our world leaders. End of story.

 

I have a Porsche Taycan Turbo S and absolutely love it and don't use it as a commuter. None of the issues you mention, handles like a Porsche and blasts off like a rocket. I have no idea what Ferrari is going to produce, but it will be way better than the Taycan. Right now it is just a bunch of unfounded rumors like the crossover nonsense. I have seen all of the guesses but that is all they are. Ferrari has not to my knowledge come out and announced that they are building a crossover. Just because mules look like a four door is more likely Ferrari tricking everyone than any resemblance to the actual vehicle shape.

 

Perhaps they should concentrate on getting their electrics right with their standard and hybrid cars first. It’s ridiculous that cars have to be on trickle chargers all the time and their seem to be quite a few gremlins that crop up with hybrid owners. Owners excuse them but it’s just wrong at the price point of our cars. They will be doing nothing technologically that companies like BYD aren’t already doing - the Chinese are light years ahead. Anyway, will be interesting to see the take up of their EVs once they’re on sale.

 

I disagree that it is not analogous. Ferrari is an intentionally different auto maker. The brand is widely known and highly differentiated. The only comps are Lamborghini and McLaren, but neither have the same panache, IMO. And it is not just performance. Remember when the corvette guy bragged that he could out run the Ferrari and when asked if he wanted to swap said, “yeah!”?

I had an EV and may get another some day. What I liked was that it was always “filled up”, I could keep the AC going when parked and 105 degrees, and it was quiet. Yes, very quick for merging which was fun. What I did not like was the interior was cheap and range cut in half during the winter. It was a model X and the rear doors were neat for the first week, but then got on my nerves. So, I’m not unfamiliar with EV’s nor opposed to them.

I just would not be sad if Ferrari did not make one. Perhaps EV is the future, perhaps not. Currently, there is not enough infrastructure to support all the ideal electric things touted. (Pun intended).

I think at the time they decided to go was due to the false narrative of climate change being forced down everyone’s throats and legislation against ICE. Today, it is a different outlook. If Ferrari releases a beautiful high performance EV in extreme limited availability like the LaFerrari, then it might not be so bad. Kind of a one off, if you will. Then sit back and refine the hybrids and ICE for a few years and see where EV goes.

But a regular production EV that pretends to sound like a Ferrari is not something that interests me.

 

I think a much more accurate analogy is to compare mechanical watches to quartz watches, rather than the Apple watch. Mechanical and quartz watches, like ICE's and EV's, largely do the exact same thing. The Apple watch is light years different in every way, especially functionality. Quartz watches are lighter, cheaper, and far more accurate -- but as you say, they've been available for decades and there remains an emotional attachment and healthy market for mechanical watches.

I agree that Apple watches will end up in the landfill when they are obsolete. I don't think that special quartz watches will. If anything, special EV's, because of their sheer simplicity (motors battery, programmable generic computers whose hardware and software are upgradable over time), will be far, far more maintainable when they are decades old versus the current high-end ICE exotics that have a gazillion proprietary ECU's that are too low in production numbers for anybody to make spares that will be available 30 or 40 years from now.

Like every other area of technology throughout history, there will very likely be huge breakthroughs in the future that dramatically reduce the cost, weight, and charge time for batteries. When that happens, it will be very hard to make a compelling case for any ICE. There will still be people who also want ICE's, like mechanical watches, but you don't want to be the manufacturer who doesn't know how to build a compelling EV when that happens.

Where the watch analogy breaks down is that it is trivially easy for a mechanical watch manufacturer to introduce a quartz model if needed some day, but developing a competent reliable effective EV is not easy -- it will take time, internal testing, the customer dynamic living with production EV cars, for Ferrari to fully develop that skill set.

I don't care too much what Ferrari does as it's first EV, or even if it's successful -- they just need to start building that skill set because they will likely need it in the future, and it can't happen overnight without them having direct hands-on experience.

 

If Patek or AP or Rolex had embraced the quartz watch in the 1970s, they'd have lost what differentiates them from their competitors. You mention "special" quartz watches. Is there such a thing?

I view the advent of EVs as the quartz crisis of the automotive world. Much like quartz movements, electric motors outperform their mechanical counterparts. But they're clinical and homogeneous. Not what most of us are looking for in a Ferrari powerplant.

Most of Ferrari's competitors seem to agree, and have avoided, abandoned or scaled back their EV ambitions.
____
From a strategic perspective, it may nonetheless make sense for Ferrari to develop an EV today. They may have no choice in the future. I doubt that Ferrari will continue to thrive in that environment. But if it's inevitable, better to prepare.

 

Ferrari is emotion, Ferrari is a roaring sound, Ferrari is racing heritage, Ferrari is a big high revving V engine (better if 12 cylinders): everyone likes Ferrari and enthusiasts can recognize a Ferrari even without seeing it, by only hearing its sound approaching. All this will be lost with a Ferrari EV, a dish washer that you can't even understand if it's on or off. Taycan is emotional? But where? Nobody here wants a preowned Taycan, resale value is an apocalypse: it's a fast luxury car and no more. EV cars are like smartphones: there are 200 USD ones and 2000 USd ones, but they all share a zero emotion impact when you keep them in your hands. A full gold 50k USD Rolex GMT II is an emotion, even if it gains two minute every month while a 50 USD quartz watch doesn't gain or loose a second in a year. And nobody collect old smartphones, while many collect and pay a ton of money for an old very low precision vintage Rolex Daytona "Paul Newman"

Smartphones, ebike and EV cars are all disposable: very nice devices, perfectly working, but they all will finish their life among the garbage.

Ciao

 

It falls on companies like Ferrari to create the EV that is unique and has visceral value that enthusiasts want to own. Most new Ferrari buyers own several cars, all for different purposes -- it's likely EV done right can have a meaningful role in that mix.

And no auto maker should be caught flat-footed when technology advances to significantly reduce the price and weight of batteries.

 

By definition, when an enthusiast buys this BS, they will no longer be an enthusiast; the equation is, however, easy to understand.

 

No matter what happens with EV battery chemistries, it won't be due to Ferrari, they are not involved. Whatever occurs with EV batteries, even if they were weightless with unlimited range, would not make a compelling exotic car, electric motors are so common no one even cares who made them or anything about their specs...that's hows utterly boring they are (that's essentially the only thing in an EV drivetrain that has moving parts).

In my opinion, Ferrari will never have any significant business selling EVs regardless, even if the entire world only accepted EVs (which will never occur, but, pretending) Ferrari would simply go out of business. Ever see the movie 'Minority Report', see the cars...nothing special, they are all more or less identical 'pods'.

 

Everyone will decide what's right for themselves, but I would estimate that the vast, vast majority of the "enthusiast" population does not want the "enthusiast car experience" all the time, in daily life. Sometimes -- in fact often -- you just want utter simplicity. Modern exotic ICE's are ridiculously complex. Exotic hybrids are even more complex. Done right (ridiculously good performance) and kept dead simple (as all EV's should be), I think an well-done EV will be an effective Hyde to Jeckyl enthusiast cars for daily use, among even hard-core enthusiasts. How successful it will be will depend on how compelling they make it, but I don't think it's accurate that their won't be an appetite for it, for specific uses, in the enthusiast community.