Why so much Cali hate?

We are not all haters. If the Calif was drop dead gorgeous I would still be dissapointed. If you don't get why some of us don't like the Calif, then you don't get it. Ferrari is relying on a large % of Calif buyers not getting it, when it comes to cars.

If Ferrari are going to build a volume car then I want it to be special in the way that a Mini Cooper, Lotus Elan, E30 M3, Mercedes 600, Ferrari 250 SWB, Duesenberg Model J or Citroen 2CV are.

A car that is original, more than the sum of its parts with an individual character. It doesn't have to fit into any of the boxes you describe. It just has to be special - an authentic Ferrari.

The Calif is just a large heavy 2 door convertible, which to give it credit drives well, is well engineered and executed. It is not an innovative car of its time. Some genuine enthusiasts disagree.

 

The big deal about the California is so overblown as to be tired. It's a nice car that isn't to everyone's tastes. Many Ferraris are not to everyone's tastes.

Alas, looks are a matter of opinion and perception. The ethos behind building it to target women, or husbands who buy them for their wives, or for the silent crowd of men who actually like the car ---so what. It marks an innovation upon a business model.

Most people on this forum don't take their Ferraris to a track or abide by the mythical "purity" standard of whatever Ferrari used to be about. Ferrari hasn't been about that for decades. It's a giant sellout corporation that puts their logo on soap and laptop computers and beach towels. And I would wager about maybe 5% of members track their Ferraris as "true enthusiasts."

But go tell the guy in a 599 GTB, or the California, or a 308, or a 250 GTE, who commutes to work and back, that he lacks "enthusiasm" or "passion" for fine automobiles --and you would be insulting that person.

And this nonsense of the California being a fleet vehicle. Hardly. Some of you are living in a delusional realm with that. From some of the talk, you'd think this car costs as much as a Mazda Miata and is made in the hundreds of thousands of units annually. But in reality most people will never, not ever, spend the kind of money on a car that the California's price is set to.

 

This is a post that makes perfect sense where it matters. I've said it often, and it pisses people off -If you are not a customer for the car, your opinion is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. There are more than enough real buyers to buy all the cars Ferrari chooses to produce. Another recurring theme on FChat - every new Ferrari in the last 10 years has received the "omigod it's ugly/awful/a departure from tradition/overweight/not a sports car ad infinitum, probably from the same group of people who will never ever in their lifetime buy a new Ferrari from an authorized dealer. The 599 was castigated up and down for being "too" everything. I personally think the 599 is the best car Ferrari have ever produced, and I think the Cali will prove out to be just as good.

 

I tend to agree, what people done realize is the Cali is a different type of Ferrari, its not hardcore like the Scud but on paper its more the fast enough, looks, well those are subjective but like many Ferraris I am sure the Cali looks better in person than it does on paper. There is a saying that goes along the lines of "you are never going to appeal to all of the people all of the time"

 

Not all the Cali fans are silent! I eagerly await the day some years from now, that I finally slip behind the wheel of my severely depreciated but cherry as hell Ferrari California. It will be a lot easier to buy the right one being that it will be my second f-car.

I love all the so-called purists and their posing. Ferrari has not made a true street "sports" (read "fast and light in curb weight") car in years. If you want a streetable sports car, buy a Lotus, or, well, please try to be honest with yourself. Correct me if I am wrong, but even Suderias have A/C, traction control, etc., etc. I would have to look up the numbers, but I think maybe an f-40 qualifies, but even the subsequent supercars got heavier. So what? I am not ever going to take my Mondial to the track, unless it's just for fun, so all I am looking for with a Cali is a better Mondial. Faster, more predictable handling, and as fun with the top up as it is with the top down. Not as pretty to my eye as the Mondial, but somehow I'll get over it.

Plus I have a mission to attach a clutch pedal to a dsg. That will be the ultimate trans!

 

Too what? Too nice looking? Too fast? Too advanced?

 

Well, I was summarizing...

The subtle point has all been made, made again, and yet again, only to fall upon muffled ears: Time to call a spade a spade.

Just as SUV's and Pickups were marketed by US companies as personal transport to a cohort with identified and specific psychological deficits and vulnerabilities, to the long term detriment of an entire industry and a nation, so too has the Cali 2+ been aimed at a specific target psyche, to, I believe, the long term detriment of a company and a legacy.

So there, the subtle point has been made yet again, again.

 

In all due respect, that just isn't true, is far afield, sensationalist, hyperbolic.

Long term detriment to a company and a legacy? Do realize how broad-sweeping, myopic, and melodramatic that is?


There have been a few Ferraris throughout it's history that were not met with critical acclaim upon unveiling --and none of those models --none-- have sullied Ferraris "legacy" to the extent that some of you are making the California out to be guilty of.

For example, people had disdain upon the debut of the 330 GT Series I, with the dual headlamps.... did that sink Ferrrai's legacy? Upon release, people didn't much care for the 308 GT4/Dino... did that ruin Ferrari? Most didn't care for the 365 GTC/4. Did that car tarnish the precious "Ferrari" ethos?

Some people still don't care for these cars, and there are more of them unmentioned that faced chilly or lukewarm reception, even hate. Have these Ferraris somehow utterly ruined Ferrari?

get real, my friend

 

Well said!

 

Time will tell. Ferrari built additional capacity to build 5K California's a year. They said that the car is sold out for the next two years. Two years at 5K per equals 10K California's sold by this time 2011. When the flag drops the Bull**** Stops.

 

The real sad part is, what Ferrari didn't do. They had 2 choices... they wanted to add 5,000 car capacity

Ferrari could've built a fantastic 2,500 pound, 6 cylinder, $150,000 baby Dino.
Ferrari would've given sports car lovers something to celebrate. A real Ferrari experience for more serious fans. Maybe even a following like Porsche where people would customize these little cars and have some fun adding on to them and being creative or more involved. Sound like fun? And with the new capacity to build 5,000... they could have started all kinds of cool racing series, and really taken Ferrari to the ultimate sports car company. (I know too many, who can't afford to take their 430 to the track for fear of real $$$ losses if something goes wrong, so they buy a 911 for track days and keep the Ferrari in the garage. This trend will get worse with the 430 replacement if they go ahead with plans to bump-up the price significantly.)

What Ferrari chose to do instead, was bet on 5,000 cars for rich housewife's and older gentleman GT cruisers. A car that started life as Maserati, that cashes in on the Ferrari name, and satisfies a market that is already being served well by the Mercedes Benz SL600.

Ferrari had a choice ..... do we take care of the Paris Hilton fan base? or the Nigel Mansell fan base? The reason for the Cali hate might have less to do with a good car, and more to do with the way Ferrari has gone Hollywood.

So the real question is...
Will the Cali sell 5,000 cars?
Would the Baby Dino have sold 5,000 cars?

 

This is my first post on this thread, and maybe it SHOULD die. The reality is.....

There is no perfect answer. That's why there are 100's of different cars out there.

One persons perspective:
I'm an F430 driver that is considering a Cali. I fall into the "Just 50 something" category. I love the 430.....and i find i DON'T drive it the way it's meant to be. I'm not going to find a stretch of Southern California highway to do 150mph because i've worked so hard all my life to screw it up. I'm not going to pound the Canyon Roads in the Santa Monica Mountains because a) i don't trust others (i've had a couple close calls over the years) and b) i don't trust the roads. I was out last weekend doing this. One of the best corners on Decker Canyon, which has visibility, has a dip that causes the front bumper to scrape. I'm finding that I am much more tame (some would call me a wimp i guess) than many drivers out there.

So....you get the picture. Therefore, for me, the thought of having a convertible(my 430 is a coupe which i think looks best), with some of the characteristics of Ferrari (power, sound, feel, etc), yet may be somewhat tamer than a 430 is quite appealing. The looks are good, but not my favorite. Having said that i've noticed over the years many, many cars that become more appealing over time. That's been mentioned earlier relative to many F-Cars as well as others. The other options out there are less appealing.....SL, had one and don't like them. 911, have a new '09 with pdk and it's wonderful but not a Ferrari. Conti-GTS, wonderful car but lacks the sporty side. etc., etc., etc.,

 

Passed the F dealer in New York City today and there is a silver california in there. Now this was my first look at the car in the flesh and I must say I was very underwhelmed. It just didnt grab me. Take off the shields and the badging and it could be just another luxo convertible GT purely on aesthetics.

 

At a lower price level, Jaguar made the same mistake when it abandoned the F-Type and made the soft/retro S-Type. It is now a cushy luxury car competing with Lexus and Mercedes.

I agree, Ferrari could have cemented its legendary reputation by making a hardcore, lightweight two seater that you could track. I wouldn't expect a Lotus Exige, but that would have been a fertile market for Ferrari to explore at a higher price level.

I would have liked Ferrari to make a roadster, because the low center of gravity/light weight is how real sports cars are and were. (Porsche 550, original Ferrari Testarossa, Jag D-Type, Lotus Elise/Exige, etc.) No sat nav, no power seats, and for the love of Enzo please no power retractable tin roof.

The F430 is a great luxury sports car. But given that we already had a big V8 two seater from Ferrari, I would have liked to see them venture back to the track to explore their motorsport roots rather than knocking heads with the Merc SL market. We can all accept a bit more 'hardcore' for spirited weekend driving, and we all have other cars for cruising, groceries, golf, etc. I don't see what the California offers that an F430 Spider won't do better. Dial the suspension to normal mode, stick it in automatic and relax.

But, as others have said, we'll see how the California sells and re-sells. The badge should help it out considerably. It probably is good brand marketing.

 

to add, Ferrari may very well make other models of cars! ..... the ones that others have mentioned they'd like to see. The California is not the last car Ferrari is making!

 

We can only hope. But sadly, I'm not holding my breath.

 

+100
This is a great post that captures the issue precisely. Why so much Cali hate here at Fchat? Because the sports car guys are here, not Paris Hilton and the affluent housewives. Over on their sites (whatever those are) they probably love the thing and think the backend of it is 'cute'.

They absolutely could have sold 5,000 new ultralight new Dino's.

 

If Ferrari had built a $150,000 lightweight Dino with a production goal of 5,000 cars, they would have been castigated for cheapening the brand, in exactly the same way the original Dino was received.
There is no way to win with just one car, Somebody is going to hate it no matter what the business rationale that created it was.
Given the capital investment that Ferrari was already committed to invest, they decided to develop a car at an acceptable cost that should yield a higher gross profit per unit than a stripped down "Dino" would. I love Ferraris, the older ones from the 50's and 60's more so, but I applaud anything they build that allows them to survive so that the legacy continues. I also think the Cali is a marvelous car. I'm definitely going to get one

I'm also pretty sure that there will be hardly any "housewives" buying these cars....

 

I really agree with that first part about the purist deal, you can tell which owners are true automotive purist and which ones are just driving for the fashion as well. Very well said.

 

Had you followed the threads back last year or two, you'd never make such a statement. The whole idea of the Dino reissue was a total circus and hatefest. It was more hated than the F149 concept, with all the haters lined up in a giant cue, wrapping around the building twice.

Personally, I liked the idea of a new Dino, but that again was an uphill apologist's battle with the faux and hyperbolic "purist" argument, which by now has no actual meaning or relevance. If you're looking for purity then don't even bother buying a new Ferrari of any model. This isn't 1965. This is 2009 and we have long since sold out, pal.

 

Yea, you're probably right. I was thinking of consolidating a bit. I should probably keep the 430, I think i'd regret getting rid of it (I'm getting so schizophrenic on this), and also keep the 911 for the other stuff. I'm afraid that when i see the Cali in person, i'll dislike it.

 

I reserved my judgement until the unveiling last night in Miami.
Great interior as usual , but the exterior is ho-hum styling.
This was the general comment of most people there. You
now have three cars that look similar,612,599,and the Cali.
Of the three I would go with the 599.It was funny cause you
had all the salesmen and representatives looking at the crowds
reaction, and it was obvious that it was like ,oh nice car,where's
the drinks? Not the reactions I've seen before at the unveilings.
Now with Pininfarinas problems it'll be interesting to see if another
design house will do future Ferraris.In general I don't like the
"generic",for Ferrari,look the cars have been having lately.The only
section of the car I did like, was the grill opening, or "face" of the car,
if that makes sense?

 

I'm hard-pressed to find any one feature of the exterior that I can say I like on the Cali, based on pics. The hood "scoop" does hearken back to the original California, but it is just a doo-dad, being non-functional. Not trying to really knock it though. I do tend to like the exposed tail lights, but one Fchatter posted a photoshop of dual exposed tail lights in lieu of the larger single one. I thought the twin lights looked better/more interesting, which I think would have helped it's ho-hum looks. It does have a Ferrari eggcrate-type grill, but the smiling shape doesn't look sharp and aggressive enough to me. Overall, from pics, I find it boring and even eclectic (not in a good way). Without having seen one in the flesh, I'm disappointed in the design.

 

IMO I think it looks too much like a Peugeot....
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

A new Ferrari isn't supposed to make small boys sit in the corner with their head in their hands!
(pic found here for credit : http://www.automotionphoto.com)
Image Unavailable, Please Login