is it me or are Ferraris alittle unrealiable?

I have heard that the Space Shuttle sometimes fails to start when asked, is even making the Obama administration blush with shame over the deficit costs, and can even blow up just when asked for more power...

But then, as W. V. Braun said - "I reach for the stars"

 

Which part of the definition of "exotic" are you missing? Exotic cars can not be serviced at a regular auto shop, they carry a hefty premium for parts and service, they wren't designed with serviciablility in mind despite the amount of service/maintenance they require. And for the most part the manuals you can get were translated by a first-year English high school student from Milan. (Maybe this is why Honda thought that was OK all through the '80's, except their first-year English high school student was from Hiroshima.) If you could pull your car to the corner gas station and have the greasy guy work on it then it wouldn't be exotic, it would be a normal car. Exotics scare people - mechanics owners, pedestrians. That's their role in life.

 

Until your F1 pump goes bad or your windscreen cracks...

 

I guess the main thing that irks me about all these threads (with apologies to the OP here, who may just be disillusioned and doesn't need a lecture) is exactly what you're saying.

When you buy a Ferrari, you're buying into the far end of the automotive "bell curve" -- the lunatic fringe of cars. I think it's perfectly fine to stick with a Corvette, or maybe even edge further along the curve and do a Porsche 997 or BMW M6. But if you do push it all way to the edge and go Pagani, Ferrari, Lambo, etc., don't point to all the cars back at the center of the bell curve and blame Ferrari for the $4000 clutch your 360 needs again.

 

A Ferrari, like all other cars, were built to be driven not parked. They are not cheap to repair or maintain, but you should have known that before you bought it. If you are afraid to drive it for fear of having to repair something, then sell it - as Jedi said, Ferraris aren't for everyone, specifically people who are afraid of maintenance bills on them.

 

I'd agree with much of your argument, but don't think the clutch is a good part to center on. Many cars have much higher HP or torque than a 360 with clutches that last a very long time and cost relatively little to replace. I'd say is more about lazy engineering rather than being on the cutting edge. Look at the P-car 928 - not huge volume, the older 2 disc clutch isn't terribly expensive (well, looks like it has gone up - a bit under $1k for all the bits & pieces), and you can swap a clutch pack out in under an hour with the proper tools.

 

but who cares?....... it's just the 'fun' of ownership...it'll bring out the life in all of you...so enjoy it


Case in point
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138933410&postcount=27

 

Its just you...


j/k


PDG

 

Maybe, although the 928s that weren't automatics were manuals -- not a 360-style F1 system that probably does burn through clutches faster.

The argument is that if you want a Formula One-inspired gearchange system, don't expect Volvo station wagon clutch durability. To your point, Ferrari might have made them more durable. But when you have rich guys lined up around the block to buy every car before it's built...

 

Rutlands was recently selling complete clutch kits for 308/328's for under $700.

My 430 has 16K on it with no hint of the clutch being worn.

I've owned 8 Ferraris over the last 14 years ranging from a neglected 77 308 to a new 2005 430 and drove a combined 75-80K miles. A few were needy but none ever left me on the side of the road.

Dave

 

Wow. Did you just hit the nail perfectly on the head!

 

f1 pump on the 360 modena costs exactly the same as the pump in my e46 M3 from the dealer that I had..

and I see quite a few people driving around in m3's and not *****ing about it..

also the service at a ferrari dealership is about 130, service for an M class car is about 120-125..

bottom line, a new ferrari is about as expensive as a new M to maintain..

 

Several of these cars are engineered for drag racing in the clutch, tranny, differential departments. {Witness Corvette, Viper::Which when drag raced are regularly replacing clutches. But I digress}. These cars have larger clutches, larger flywheels; 1: to take the abuse, 2: to deal with the heat of this abuse. These large parts take their toll on the performance of these cars in higher rotational inertia. But then so does the weight of the crankshafts (relative to the 360/430 crank) and several other parts of the running gear.

Note, also, that the height of the centerline of the crank above ground in a F348, F355, 360, 430 would not allow for the instalation of a Vette or Viper clutch or flywheel. This is one of the downsides of the low engine position enabled by the dry sump; the upside is the low CoG, and lack of oil starvation in long high G turns (at least when engineered correctly--unlike the Z06 dry sump)

If you want to drag race a Ferrari, 1: be my guest, 2: be prepaired to eat and replace clutches.

{Aside: I have often wondered why nobody has found a way to add a fan into the bell housing of the 360/430 so that the clutch can be cooled. The figured this out for the F355 Challenge cars.....}

 

For the record I have clients that get over 50,000 miles on 360 F1 clutches. Ferrari cannot help it if not many consumers can do that because of their driving style, or lack thereof.

Putting a fan on a clutch to keep it cool is the functional equivalent of spitting on a forrest fire. 355 Challenge cars had better ducting and venting. Works great on a car going over 100 MPH, does little in stop and go traffic where street car clutches go to die.



No offense but it sounds like the OP needs a Buick.

 

Mitch,

That's a very good point. The higher you get into the performance curve, hte bigger the concessions become for marginal gains. That's the way to a maximum.

However, the clutch problem is nothing new. The BB suffered from it as well, and there was more than enough room to fit a beefier clutch.

That said, the clutch on my hard driven little 308 just lasts. Main thing though, it isn't abused.

In the end, if you want to do concessions to durability in lieu of performance, you end up with something more fragile than when you engineer for durable semi-performance. Hence the difference between a Ferrari and, for instance, a P-car. Go to a higher spec P-car, and see what your maintenace bills are like.

A Ferrari is what it is: a high performance sportscar, engineered to perform. The fact that most people use it as a commuter doesn't defer from this fact, if you drive it as it was intended, you pay the price for the fun.

 

It amazes me how many people think a Ferrari is "just a a car".

 

or a . . . . ?

 

Wow, you bought 2 Ferraris without first researching running costs for the cars. Talk about going full bore! It would be cool to see some pics... even the one with damage. Did you do any estimations on parts costs before you bought the wreaked one? Some times the damage does not look like much but can go quite deep.

 

Or a, uh, well, um...

Nice try.

 

LOL.

When the passion's gone, the passion's gone. It's nobody's fault.

 

Nope you aren't alone in this.

Anyone that asks me about buying a Ferrari I tell the same thing. "Obtaining a Ferrari isn't the hard part. The hard part is maintaining a Ferrari".

My 348 has been the most unreliable car I have ever owned. The only reason I still own it is because I can do my own work. If I had to pay someone else for everything I have had to fix on it, I would have gotten rid of it looooooong ago. But I'm in so deep now that I'll never get back what I have into it, even with me turning the wrenches. So the saga continues. The other thing is, there is just something about that car that makes me feel good when I drive it, especially when the engine is making it's music at 7500/rpm.

I tell you these cars are like being hooked on the worst drugs.

 

Look in the Ferrari add section to see the pic otherwise i can email them to you and the back is'nt pretty. You guys are missing the point. No one is saying a ferrari is a Honda Accord or a Camry but what i am saying is that i'd expect them to be alittle less problamatic, there are plenty of high horse power sports cars out there that seem to do the daily comute fine without having to spend 3 -6 k every years give or take.
having said that the car is a beautiful machine but like i said i guess this must just be how i feel....
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

To quote a guy on a 60 minutes episode quoting Hemmingway "Lamborghini driving is like pheasant hunting, It is worth whatever you have to pay". I think the same can be said for Ferrari driving. 3 to 6 grand a year does not seem excessive for what you get in return, at least for me, but I guess everyone is different. Thanks for the pic.

 

There are tons of cars that make more horsepower, perform better on the track, etc, etc. However, and I think you know this, there is nothing like a Ferrari. There just isn't. Its the way all the pieces come together. The steering, the balance, the glorious engine note, the beauty. Whatever secret ingredient Ferrari uses, I have never been in one that does not have that magic, and I have never been in another marque that has it. Their approach and special sauce may not yield the most reliable car, or most service friendly, but it does yield one spectacular automobile. Ferrari doesn't have near the R&D for its production cars that Honda, GM. BMW and others have for theirs. I often joke that Ferrari's entire R&D budget is probably equal to what Honda spends to make their doors close BETTER.

The fact that a small manufacturer can build world class automobiles is astounding by itself. With their small production numbers and limited budget it is unrealistic to expect them to have the reliability of a Honda, they just don't have the volume of cars on the road and high mileage of the cars out there to work out all the gremlins. When you have 20K porsche 911 driving 15K a year, a manufacturer learns pretty quickly what works and adjusts. Ferrari makes a fraction of those cars, most of which are hardly driven. Combine all of these factors, and it is amazing and a testament to their engineering that they are as reliable as they are.

All this being said, Ferrari is an addiction that requires more cash than I imagine a solid coke addiction does. If you are not getting the rush out of it, or find yourself having an honest objective conversation about the car, it just may not be for you. Ferraris are hopeless addictions and they just don't make sense to the unafflicted. Its not a bad thing to find out the cars are not for you its just a lifestyle choice. My wife and our banker both wish I could pick up another hobby!

 

Wow, that's an ugly impact.

I don't think Ferraris have ever been the best car for the daily commute. That's why you see a dozen Corvettes every time you take a drive during the summer.

I have an Audi for the daily commute, and it's quite fast relative to normal traffic. The purpose of the Ferrari, for me, is to have something really special to drive on the weekends -- rare, loud, fun to drive, classic. Horsepower is nice, but if that's the whole reason you bought one then I can see how you'd think a Ferrari wasn't the best car.

FWIW, if something breaks on my Ferrari, I get it fixed. Unlike Ernie or Rifledriver, I'm a walking disaster with a wrench (would probably hurt myself and any bystanders within a 1000-ft radius), so I usually take it to Bobileff or Symbolic -- both of which are exciting car places to visit, and learn stuff, and see other people's cars and meet other owners. So, the whole experience has been a net positive, IMHO. I suppose I view it as a hobby and circle of friends, not so much as transportation.