Test Drove the 488 Today. Cancelled my Order, Sticking to my 458

You don't need rocket science to make an engine able to handle a turbo. And so far, I have never heard anybody who custom modified their car with turbo to add 300hp having engine blown up. There is a VW Golf with 700 hp and still drag racing around after 1 year.
And 488 with over 700 hp is already available. It's just too easy for a turbocharged. I know you'd say that the engine will blow up after short while, but so far the GTRs have no problem.

 

Stop-sale order for 488!
Ferrari issues stop-sale order on 488 GTB for fire risk

 

I can't see why. Care to enlighten us?

 

My opinion is that it is technically more limiting to get additional performance out of an NA motor. This being that the NA motor has negative pressure in the intake manifold from the draw of the pistons and you have only the oxygen available to fill the cylinders that is available as suction. You mix that with fuel (atomized to perfection) and you get the power. To get more bang, you need more fuel and air. So without going to bigger cylinder volume and massive compression, you must be more clever with what you have to combust.

With forced induction, much easier. Plenum is in positive pressure that a computer can increase to ultimately mix more fuel with and then more bang.

A simplistic explanation but its my way of explaining why some folks say the NA motor needs a higher state of "tune". That and a cheap Asian car with a diminutive motor can be boosted beyond stupid to make crazy HP out of cylinders the size of tiny tomatoe paste cans.

 

You've described the natural limitation of NA and how designers need to be clever to overcome this limitation. What clever solutions were implemented in the 458 and how difficult are these solutions compared to tuning the turbo engine in the 488 to eliminate lag and deliver linear power?

Unless the 458 had exotic tech like variable length trumpets or pneumatic valve actuation to complement the high revs, then it's all about induction path tuning which is not all that different to tuning the exhaust path of a turbo motor.

 

everytime i read somthing about the 488 in these fourm i consider to cancel my order, from now on i will not read anything about the 488 and how does it sound, i test drive the car 4 times and everytime i feel that i get to attached to the car more, its is better than the 458 from every corner, and anyone says that the car dosent sound loud should here the car in person, its not louder than the 458 but it still really loud, i can say that the 458 is louder only on the top end.

 

To squeeze huge hp out from an NA engine, you need to rev it higher. Means you'd need special stronger and lighter materials to handle the high compression ratio, and high precision in building the engine.
As for turbo engine, if the displacement is limited and the power wanted is maximum, then it's a different story. Like in F1, it has to be maximum 1.6L, so the engines are highly tuned then added turbocharged. But for road cars, also the 488, the idea is to reduce emissions, increase mpg, make the tree happy.
Every brand claims that they have eliminated the turbo lag and increased throttle response. In fact, turbo lag is always there, it's just massive or little. Ferrari said that 488's throttle was 0.1s slower than 458. That 0.1s is the turbo lag.
Another easier part for turbocharged is when a new model is launched. Under 100 hp will be a laptop stuff, zero investment.

 

Here's my opinion as well. The recent Ferrari NA V8 has won many awards. It is beloved for its power, ultra high revs, balance and responsiveness (and I guess you can throw in relatively low emissions). I believe designers got there by turning up the revs with the proper balance and precision control of intake and exhaust combined with high compression (Speciale is 14:1). The 488 has simulated low lag because the boost to the cylinders is limited at the low end so it appears to be NA-like until the turbos are pushing enough air at the high end to get a lot of air to mix with fuel into the smaller volume. The boost is fed in for a more linear effect. However, lag is inevitable because you must first have exhaust before you have boost. But it is not as noticeable in the 488 compared to other turbo motors that don't use the technique. Some critics report that you can accentuate the lag by manipulating the throttle out of sequence with the way the control system expects.

I think its everything on the NA motor - induction, exhaust, fuel atomization, spark timing and advance, cam profile, cooling, drag, balance and tolerances for the target rev band, etc. No variable length trumpets since the intake is designed to strike a balance between low and top end.

For the boosted motor, its all pretty much the same story but with the additional complexity of the turbocharging and making sure the bits that take the additional torque are still reliable. A lot of design went into it including choosing materials that can spin at enormous rates and withstand exhaust temps of somewhere around 1,400 to 1,800 degrees. The caveat is it does not have to spin as high to get more bang - not entirely unlike a modern turbo diesel engine.

Which is harder to accomplish? I would think matching the HP and torque of the turbo motor on the NA motor would not be possible in the same size block with today's technology. And for several reasons, it would not be attempted. So, much harder to increase power in the NA design. However, you can be certain that they designed in a reasonable amount of future power in the turbo motor that will make follow-on models much cheaper to offer than if they stayed NA.

I prefer my cylinders by the dozen so I grudgingly accept the V8 turbo or even a V6 turbo as long as they use the fleet average to keep the NA V12 unassisted in the flagship car!

 

I'd be afraid that the TT movement will be applied to the V12 platform of Fcars as well. I'm not certain they will be immune. TT or smaller N/A with KERS might just be the future.

 

If that ever becomes a serious thought then I change my mind:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

NA engines are considerably harder to extract more power from because the technology is reaching the end of the flag pole. Turbo charging still has plenty of room to improve. Removing lag by introducing a 3rd electric turbo, etc... The fact that it's harder to extract more from a NA block should never be mistaken for its sophistication. Electromechanical valve train is a technology I have been waiting on, but seems it will never see the light. That would have breathed new life into NA engines by considerably improving fuel economy.

 

"Zero investment"; for me it is clear, you are not able to understand it.

And here is your error in reasoning.

If a NA engine has reached its technical and conceptual limits, yes, then it is hard to gain more power and torque. Then it will be very (!!!) expensive; even the use of all the R&D budgets on this planet will be useless. But, and unfortunately this is a bitter truth for a few people in this forum, this applies to every engine which is on its limits regardless of which engine concept and technology it is. Then it means back to the start, a new engine must be developed.

And now finally please open your eyes, the F136 NA engine family in its sharpest expansion stage (F136 FL, Speciale, 4,499 cc and 605 hp, direct injection and dry sump) REACHED ITS LIMITS!!!

Again additional 500 engine revolutions? For what? For a few additional horsepower at the upper end of the engine speed scale, without additional torque over the entire speed range and an idle speed of 3'000 revs like a racing engine? Stupid for a streetcar! More displacement? That would be great, but unfortunately not possible, with 4.7l like used in different Maserati’s (this specification had already a negative impact on high rev speeds) also the displacement limits were reached with a negative impact on the revving capabilities (!!!).

So, and now let's talk about the so often mentioned hyper expensive R&D cost in a NA engine family like the F136 is.

The first F136 engine was launched as F136 R in 2002 in the Maserati Spider and Coupe, 4,244cc, 390 hp, dry sump.

Then a first expansion stage as F136 RB 2004 in the Maserati GranSport, 4,244cc with 400 hp Additional 10 hp. UHHHHH - this must have been definitely an extremely expensive step!

A further expansion stage came as F136 S in the Maserati Quattroporte DuoSelect, 400 hp.

Then in 2007 with the F136 U the expansion stage with a change to wet sump.
- F136 UC, 2007–2009, Maserati Quattroporte Automatica, 400 hp.
- F136 UD, 2007–2009, Maserati GranTurismo, 405 hp.
- F136 UE, 2010–present, Maserati GranTurismo (2010&#8211 and Maserati Quattroporte Automatica (2010–2012), 405 hp.

In 2008 the launch of the F136 Y expansion stage.
- F136 YE, 2008–2011, Maserati GranTurismo S MC-shift, 440 hp.
- F136 YG, 2008–2011, Maserati Quattroporte S, 430 hp.
- F136 YH, 2009–2012, Maserati GranTurismo S Automatic and Maserati Quattroporte GT S, 440 hp.
- F136 YI, 2010–2012, Maserati GranCabrio 440 hp.
- F136 YK, 2011–present, Maserati GranTurismo S (2011–2012), Maserati GranTurismo MC, Stradale (2011–2013), Maserati GranCabrio Sport (2011–2012), Maserati Quattroporte Sport, GT S (2011–2012), Maserati GranCabrio (2013&#8211, 450 hp.

Last fine tuning on Maserati: 2012–present, Maserati GranTurismo Sport, Maserati GranTurismo, MC (2013&#8211, Maserati GranCabrio Sport (2012&#8211, Maserati GranCabrio MC (2013&#8211, 460 hp.

We can recognize it, around ten expansion stages at Maserati, done without really large investments.

The same story on Ferrari side.

First launch with the F136: F136 E, 4,308 cc (263 cu in), 2004–2009, Ferrari F430 and Ferrari F430 Spider, 490 hp, dry sump.
First expansion stage: F136 ED, 2007–2009, Ferrari 430 Scuderia, Ferrari Scuderia Spider 16M, 510 hp.
Then the Cali expansion stage, the F136 I: 4,297 cc (262 cu in), F136 IB, 2009–2012, Ferrari California, 460 hp with direct injection and wet sump.

In parallel to the Cali spec tor the 458 the F136 F expansion step: 4,499 cc (275 cu in), F136 FB, 2009–present, Ferrari 458 Italia, Ferrari 458 Spider, 570 hp, also with direct injection and dry sump.

Then the last expansion step with the F136 FL, 2013–present, for the Ferrari 458 Speciale, 605 hp.

Then there were expansion stages for racing:
- F136 EA, 4,308 cc (263 cu in), 2007–2010, Ferrari F430 Challenge, 490 hp.
- F136 GT, 3,997 cc (244 cu in), 2006–2010, Ferrari GTC, 445 hp, with restrictor plates
- F136 GT, 4,497 cc (274 cu in), 2011–present, Ferrari 458 Italia GT2, 465 hp, with restrictor plates and with 4,497 cc (274 cu in), 2011–present for the Ferrari 458 Italia GT3, 550 hp, also with restrictor plates.

Oh, there was also a use in the Alfa Romeo: F136 YC, 4,691 cc (286 cu in), 2007–2011, Alfa Romeo 8C Competition and Alfa Romeo 8C Spider, 450 hp.

Let me summarize, the Ferrari/Maserati NA V8 engine was built in x-any expansion stages and please excuse the following remark: considered over the entire life cycle of this engine the R & D costs remained under control, were absolute manageable. Also a NA engine has plenty of reserves at the beginning of its life cycle, expansion stages are very easy to implement.

As already mentioned a thousand times, analyze the effort between the Cali T engine ant the 488 turbo engine. You will find at least as many changes as between the F430 and 458 engine or as between the Scuderia and the Speciale engine. The current Ferrari turbo engine is hyper complex. With its turbocharger system once again significantly more complex than the old NA engine family.

 

Of course not. People used to think that about internal combustion engines in general 100 years ago... There is always room for improvement.

 

Hence everything you claim as fact, that follows from this assumption, is wrong.

Presumably, though, every technology reaches its limit and, while we may not yet have reach the limit of NA gains, we are surely getting somewhere close.

 

Until the electric turbo makes the scene l still prefer Superchargers.

No lag.
High torque.
Good sound.
Enhanced performance at altitude...used on planes before jets.

Only downside is they run ALL THE TIME. Turbos only come on when you accelerate. This gives better gas mileage. But there is price to pay. Turbo lag and mediocre sound.

We have a supercharged Audi S4...and love it.

 

Have you ever in your life modified a turbo car? You have to replace a lot of parts in say a VW to make it run 700 hp with a turbo and make it reliable enough to not blow up. Will the engine last 200,000 miles? I think not. A GTR is a wel built engine, just like the old supras engines were very strong and able to handle alot of power. But alot of components are replaced to make it handle the power. A 458 running a twin turbo set up I gaurantee is not as reliable as the 488 or the 488 tuned to 700hp. This theory of turbo cars being detuned is being backed by no facts from you. Just you throwing around your opinion. Show us all proof. That is all you need to do to prove us all wrong. Proof my friend.

 

I'm basically also a supercharger fan, I had two of them.

Unfortunately there are a few disadvantages; they "eat" a lot of power and the charging is done linearly to the engine speed (fixed mechanical connection from the charger with the crankshaft). A free from the engine speed rotating turbo system offers more possibilities of variation, especially when it comes to high-revving engines.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Without naming names.

 

Cars:

2013 Ferrari 458 Spider (Daily Driver)

Ordered: 2017 Lotus Evora 400

 

Very interesting thread. I enjoyed reading all the responses. Thank you!

All I can say for absolutely certainty is if you are thinking about a 488, you should drive it. Then you will know. Everyone has different tastes. Ferrari has done a masterful job with the 488 motor. That said, its not for me, I don't need the high speed punch it gives because of my local driving conditions and I prefer the sound, response and other sensations of the NA motor. But this doesn't mean the 488 is a bad car at all. You should try it for yourself. Its very impressive!

As to V12 going turbo. I'm pretty sure we will see it in a few years. They simply can't average the emissions/ consumption by leaving the V12 as is.

 

More displacement has always been an option until governments got into the business of dictating emissions. Imagine a 488 NA (4.9 L) with 625 hp at 9000 RPM. No one cancels an order.

 

NA + Battery, like LaF.

 

How often do you have to replace the batteries? Cost?

My understanding is that Toyota Prius batteries have to be replaced about every five years and cost $5k.

 

I personally think standard 458 has enough power. But looks like we are in a drag race forum. From 0 to 120mph is a matter of life here.

 

Once again you demonstrate how shallow is your understanding of performance.