Anyone else think the F12 should have FF?

Some interesting arguments. For me, purely subjectively, I wouldn't want an AWD sports car. Its just not the same sensations. I don't want the steering and braking tires also providing the thrust. Part of enjoying these cars is respecting the power. HOWEVER, I have to say you all have made some very good arguments for AWD. In the end, for me, maybe I'd change my mind after trying it, but for now, Im glad Ferrari is keeping AWD in the GT line up and not the sports car line up. Thats just one man's opinion. (And BTW- I do think the FF's 4RM system is excellent).

 

Yes Ive driven the FF. Im not going to say the system is excellent without having driven it first. IMHO a sports car should be RWD. The 599 doesn't spin its tires unless its too cold out or the road is bad quality. This is partly about what I mean when I say respect the power. How Ferrari can deal with this is their challenge, but my general thoughts are things like this are dealt with tire compounds and gear ratios.

 

Power is increasing at a higher ratio than tyre quality. I think that there is an easy way of solving this problem without AWD: reduce power and reduce weight accordingly.

Problem is that a weight reduction can be more expensive than a power boost, and let´s admit it: it´s less marketeable.

 

Agreed, but where does it end? Throughout the economic downturn the world has experienced over the last 10 years, power just keeps going up and up. Yes, some companies have "downsized" from V10s to V8s and from natural 8s to forced 6s, but horsepower simply continues to rise, for the most part. What will be interesting, though a completely different demographic, is how sales of the new Audi S6 compare to the previous version. New version is a forced V8, old was a natural V10. New car has LESS horsepower than the outgoing car, but is nearly 2 seconds quicker 0 - 60 if you believe the recent Car & Driver test. How? Reduced weight, for one, greater efficiency in other areas. But will anyone care or will they just see that it has less HP? I mention this because it's the only example I can think of in recent memory where the new version of the same car has LESS HP.

Realistically, will cars in ten years regularly have 1,000 HP? Can tire manufacturer's keep up? Or have we finally reached the point where R&D will go in to making the car 200 or 300 pounds less as opposed to an engine that develops 50 or 60 more HP?

It will certainly be fun to watch.

 

I agree with you guys and as tempting as it is to say when they make their sports cars with some kind of AWD system then I'll get off the train, maybe I won't. Maybe it will be that good. But for now, I am in the old school of RWD rules camp. I'm not so sure I think tire compounds are not progressing quickly. I think they are and remember, the brakes can make more power than the motor (even when multiplied by gears).

 

A sportscar that cannot over power it's tires and require the driver to be able to drive is not a sportscar, it is but an appliance.

Again sportscars should be built to require FULL driver involvement. That is their point and how they satisfy.
Pete

 

Before the FF, I had never driven an AWD that 'felt right.' The FF feels right because it's RRD unless wheel slip is detected. Most of the time you are just toting the hardware around.

I assume Ferrari discussed the pros and cons of F12 AWD and came down against it, potential track advantages notwithstanding. For its intended use predominantly as a road car, I think they were right.

 

And I believe I have been proved 100% right, which I am very happy about as there is a future for automobiles as fun devices after all! Not everybody wants the car to do the driving!

Pete

 

I think you may have missed my point .

I'll just say I think Ferrari is going in the wrong direction adding all this "computer does the driving" stuff to their cars.
Pete

 

Neither here nor there in terms of pertinency to the argument, but given Audi's recent history in Le Mans, Audi could fit three drunken Oompa Loompas blowing on pinwheels that drive the front portion of the AWD and they'd still win.

Passing scrutineering, however, would be a different matter.

 

Hey, you always can turn the computers OFF.

Maybe the problem is that not everybody has the guts to drive hard a +700bhp car without some help from our friend the computer.

 

You actually think stick shifting is difficult? Wow.

 

If you want a car without any nannies, buy a Caterham Seven: No ABS, no ASR, no power steering, no power brakes but around 200 HP (the car I drove) and about 600 kg.

I drove two Caterhams last weekend and am really impressed! Very raw, fast and lots of fun. Even a lot of fun when you just drive only 30 km/h. I think this car would really complement my 575M!

Markus
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Agree, I love those little bastards. Lots of fun at low speeds. Lots of fear at high speeds. Although 200 bhp in a Seven are too many horses for me, too dangerous for my taste.

In any case, a Caterham is NOT what a Ferrari should be.

 

Agreed. Completely different car complementing the Ferrari.

A car must have a sharp profile. The profile of the Caterham is to be a raw and very puristic car. The profile of a Ferrari is to be a fast, elegant and somewhat comfortable car (for the GTs / 12 cylinders).

When I went back in my Audi A4 after driving the Caterham I really had problems handling the clutch (very light, long way to press) and thought that all cars should feel like a Caterham. But some hours later when I drove home at night on the higway I was very happy to sit in the Audi with a roof and cruse control.

Bottom line: It is nice to have a dedicated car for every purpose. And sometimes it is nice to have AWD, even in a Ferrari.

Markus

 

Personally, no. I prefer it. My point was that for MY kid, just learning to drive is hard enough. As a parent, I'd rather his full attention be on the road and feel that the stick shift makes it more difficult for someone just learning the rules of the road. Others feel that a manual transmission forces the driver to pay more attention because he is more involved in the operation of the vehicle. He has done well so far, but frankly I am horrified to think that when I was his age, I took a 4-hour class, got a license and was driving (a stick, no less) the same day, with no restrictions. Things are different today, and while my kid gets bent out of shape over all the restrictions placed on him by the DMV, as a parent I don't think they've gone far enough!

 

I would, otherwise why buy the car in the first place?. If a 700 hp car does not scare the fnck out of you then I can not see any point to the car at all. Ideally most of the time you should be close to out of control ... what an adrenalin rush.

And yes big fan of Caterhams. That is driving!

CT Audi Fan, learning with a "stick shift" actually teaches you about physics because you are more involved in the process of moving. It is not jsut about go, stop and turning, it really is about understand the physics of a 2 tonne metal object being under your control.
Pete

 

Fair point, Pete. It's also harder to text and drive when you also have to shift, so that would be an added bonus! Likely, though, the bonehead would still try to do both and the result would not be pretty.

 

I actually think that without the stick and the clutch pedal, you have more time to concentrate on the physics of the car, i.e. under and oversteering, weight transfer under braking, etc... That´s one of the reasons because the pros do not race manual cars anymore. That makes road cars safer too.

What´s more entertaining as a hobbie is a different question.

 

Me too. Though, I think it'd be cool to have it as an option. I doubt it would be a very popular option, however.

 

+1

I love stick shift- but to me driving is managing the mass of the vehicle as it relates to the grip available. Shifting is part of the power strategy. Making it automated makes you more consistent. Maybe its more fun on the street to dive stick- I think so- but for a new driver, there are so many things to know.