End of Ferrari as we know it........?

Ferrari's have had quality issues (interior and electrical) since the mid 70's onwards: Earthing faults, interiors coming loose, sticky interior parts, heating system failures, switches failing etc., etc., etc., so that's nothing new.

As for the McLaren being similar to the Ferrari - That's not really surprising as it's a Ferrari wannabe at the end of the day!

For many a year I've said that if you want to build the best car possible, get the Italians to design it, the Germans to build it, the Japanese to do the electrics and British to trim it!

 

Again, i have to agree with you. We did the Ducati tour/museum when we were there in 2010 and really enjoyed it. With the Ferrari factory tour including Corsa Clienti and the F1 shop, The Galleria, the Enzo Ferrari museum in Modena and Lamborghini in Santa D'Agata, it is not a question of should one go to Emilia Romagna but for how long (spouse's patience allowing). Don't forget to rent a Ferrari to drive in the hills above Maranello as well, I rented a 458 this September and will never forget the fun I had. Forza Ferrari!

 

I hear you. I also know LDM used to pop in on the workers- say hello, etc. I could be wrong but I don't see SM ever doing that. He is a shrewd businessman and I think he has good attributes too- its just going to be different and more straight to business.

 

Luca was a shrewd businessman too. He really turned the company around and gave it the direction that was lacking after Enzo passed away. If memory serves me correct, I think there were two(?) presidents/directors after Enzo passed... I can't remember what their names are (shows what an impact they made on the history of Ferrari, eh? ). But Luca was under Enzo's wing in the '70s and was a part of that old-school world and did carry that forward under his tenureship. As much as the product line was advanced for the time (carbon fiber brakes, intro of the F1 gearbox, etc), it was also traditional too (return to flagship, front-mounted V-12s, returning the supercar model back to normally-aspirated V-12s, etc).

He did very well in my opinion and I believe if he didn't take over in the '90s, Ferrari probably wouldn't be around today (or maybe not as successful/as independent).

 

Yes, sadly I believe your correct


Sure there has been some sharing, but that was just practice for what's to come.


The new rolls phantom and Drophead (the flagship Rolls-might be renamed) will100000% share the same platform of the Rolls SUV. With Rollls doing that and the consolidation of the car manufacturers, why wouldn't Ferrari follow suit?? Do I really want to spend 500-600k on a SUV platform car to drive the "flagship" model??? Hell no!!! But what's my choice??? If I want to stay in new cars??

I hate it!!!!

 

The curious thing about this thread is that the "platform sharing" idea is being talked about very negatively, as though Ferrari's are suddenly going to become just re-bodied Alfa Romeo's/Maserati's, with a Ferrari engine shoe horned under the bonnet (hood), and no longer being special.

I simply can't see that happening as it makes no logical business sense for all Marques involved.

I see this situation as being more a case of Alfa Romeo and Maserati inheriting an excellent Ferrari chassis for their platforms - making both Marques far more attractive to buyers in relation to their competition, rather than Ferrari having to accept some sort of compromised/sub-standard chassis for their basis!

That way, all three Marques can reap massive benefits from the platform sharing concept, and Alfa Romeo and Maserati can become serious "players" again, rather than being the "kooky" alternative to the usual main stream options.

 

To me Porsche died in the mid 1990's when they hired a Japanese consulting firm to show how to build cars more efficiently. The 95' 911 Carrera cost 10% less than the model it replaced how? With the death of the front engine cars and the new Boxster selling like hotcakes, Porsche became just another mass production car manufacturer.

To date, the doors on my 21 year old Porsche still slams closed with a solid metallic whamp that can not be reproduced by any inventory at my local Porsche dealer.


IMHO

 

Weird, as most consider the 993 to be the last "real" Porsche. Built quality, largely hand assembled, aircooled engine.
Or did you mean 1998 the year the "real" Porsche died?

With that I would agree!

 

If Sergio could pump the numbers selling Calis to Hertz and Avis, he'd do it. Ferrari is indeed now American.

 

But that could be a problem. If an entire platform is being shared with a "lesser" and more plentiful marque, then it downgrades the exclusiveness and rarity. Sticking Dino V-6s into the old Fiat Coupes/Spiders and the 308 into Lancia Themas gave those cars some appeal in their time, but ended up being dead-ends and probably cost the Fiat Group a lot of money to develop and market (the consumer paid a hefty premium for those versions when new!). These cars were essentially worthless all the way up until only recently (and even then, the best Thema 8.32s are going for 18K Euros. High milers only in the four figures!).

This is why I love the Alfa 4C. You have a car that features all of the latest hypercar tech, completely dedicated to this model alone and for less than $70K USD. Why buy the other exotics and take a massive depreciation hit when you can pick one of those up, get the same kind of jollies, and be out WAY less. If I had the money, I wouldn't waste it on a new Ferrari, but would get an Alfa 4C. Ferrari just lost a sale

 

Remember this is Sweater's idea ... so why do you think there is logic and good business sense involved? Every step he has made has devalued Ferrari ... to I guess potentially make money from Chysler. Sells the family jewels to purchase a cheap plastic toy ...
Pete

 

Were Ferrari's any less exclusive or revered due to those cars having "Ferrari" engines?

Was Ferrari damaged by it's association to those any of those cars?

(In the case of the Lancia Thema 8.32, the reworked Ferrari engine was noted as being the cars best feature!)

Shoe-horning the Dino V6 into the Lancia Stratos didn't seem to do that car too much harm!

The Maserati's with Ferrari designed/built engines don't seem to be making Ferrari's any less revered or exclusive!

Do you honestly think that the depreciation on an Alfa Romeo is going to be better than the depreciation on a Ferrari in the long term? (The 4C stands a better chance than most Alfa's but still, better long term depreciation than a Ferrari? - Really! )

As for the 4C's "Hypercar tech", due to poor packaging they had to compromise on the rear suspension set up and use a compromised strut suspension rather than the more preferred double wishbone set up!

And in the road tests that I've seen, good as the Alfa Romeo is, it still gets its arse handed to it by Porsche's Caymen S - So why take the Alfa depreciation when you can have a better car with less depreciation?

If you had the money to buy a new or a second hand Ferrari, and instead decided to spend a lot less on an Alfa Romeo then I'd have to say that you simply never really wanted the Ferrari in the first place!

If you really want a Ferrari and can afford it, then you don't buy buy an Alfa Romeo!



Now think about this (NOTE: All figures are completely fictional and are used purely to give an idea of how the concept would work):

Ferrari design a platform that they, Alfa Romeo and Maserati all use.

The Alfa uses a 2.0 litre straight 4 turbo engine with @ 300 bhp which can hit 100kph in @ 4 seconds and tops out at 170mph for @ $89K - That would be fun!

The Maserati uses a 3.0 litre V6 twin turbo engine with 480 bhp which can hit 100kph in @ 3.4 seconds and tops out at @ 190mph for @ $150K - That would be great!

The Ferrari uses a 3.6 litre twin turbo V8 engine with 650 bhp which can hit 100 kph in 2.8 seconds and tops out at @ 215 mph for @ $230K- That would be incredible!

None tread on the toes of the others, and there is enough differentiation in performance and price and character to keep them separate too.

 

They have already lost the uniqueness. Everybody builds cookie-cutter cars. Everything is electronic. Quite a few 'sports' cars do not even have a third pedal. Platform sharing increases profits.

 

Without electronics we will not have:
Adaptive steering
Adaptive suspention
Powerful yet environmentally friendly (-er) cars
Airbags
ABS
Fuel injection that works
Superfast automatic gearboxes ( let's face it - the majority wants them!)
and so on..

 

FIAT can also use the same platform, maybe with a 2.5 litre engine.
Would make sense, as it would increase the profits even more.
But do we want a platform sharing like that? I am not so sure about it.

Extensive sharing of components results in a lower production costs, but I doubt they would sell them cheaper.

 

I absolutely agree. I didn't mean to imply LDM isn't a shrewd businessman. I just interpret his vision of the Fiat / Ferrari relationship as Ferrari being the crown jewel that gets backing from the big Fiat. As compares to how I see SM's vision- Ferrari is an important part of the financing to grow FCA. I will grant you my following statement is a gross oversimplification, but I think truth remains so I will write it: It seems backwards to me to underwrite production of ~1m units on the back of ~7-10k units.

As to platform sharing, you all can probably tell I am skeptical of SM's plan, but, under LDM they did some more limited platform sharing and I think if its done carefully and thoughtfully, it can work. I'm trying to be critical of what I see as SM's plans, but on the other hand I think its prudent and fair to grant he must be pretty talented to occupy his current position. Its easy to be a critic, and so hard to create. I am curious to see if he can carry the day. I am, however, very skeptical.

 

Of course not, but these cars used only their engines. If we're talking about a complete platform share that includes suspension components, chassis members, complete powertrains, then why bother with the Ferrari, when you could buy the "lesser" car? I'm sure there must have been a few sales of 400/412s lost to the Thema 8.32...

I'm talking about a literal amount of depreciation, not a percentage. Percentage, sure, the Alfa would take a bigger hit, but dollar wise, you're losing more on the Ferrari. From my perspective, a 488 in Canadian dollars, with a typical selection of options is going to set me back $300,000. Let's say I keep the car for ten years. I'd be lucky to get half of what I paid for it (so, $150,000). The Alfa would be closer to $80,000 CAD new and in that same time frame of ownership, I'd be kissing the guys boots if he gave me $30,000 for it in 10 years. I lost $150K with the Ferrari purchase, but if I bought the Alfa, I'd only lose $50K. I just kept $100K in my pocket by buying the Alfa (actually, $250K if I had the greater amount to buy a 488 in the first place).

Yes, the Porsche out-does the Alfa in every respect. I've driven the Cayman and it's a way better car than the 911. But it's a PORSCHE. They are EVERYWHERE here in Vancouver. These are not rare around here. The price for one is around the same as the Alfa. The Alfa has been on sale for almost a year. I have not seen a SINGLE one driving on any road. That $80K went towards a more exclusive and rare car. Depreciation on the Porsche would be just as bad. Like I said, there are thousands of them around (not joking).

I suppose then I'm looking at this with too much bias, because as much as I love Ferrari, even if I have the money, I'm not interested in their current product line-up. As for used, it would have to be a pretty special car to warrant that kind of expenditure.

Every single one of those performance figures are completely useless in everday life. The Alfa alone could get me into jail. It's been posted in this forum before, but a couple of years ago, there was a 430 Scud confiscated by the local police for "street racing" (permanently, was sold off by the dealer a few months afterwards)... Couple of other cars too were confiscated (but those were returned to their owners afterwards). You're from England, you guys have it just as bad for speeding. Unless you take yours to a track everyday, it really is useless in respect to getting the most out of them for performance reasons. With that kind of logic, I should have never bought my 308 because even your theoretical Alfa example up above would whoop it into oblivion. Really, cars like the 488 and other exotics are purely for status symbols...

I'll just leave this that I'll have fun with the 4C. For what it is and what you get, I think it's worth it.

Cheers,

 

I agree. I think the older Ferrari's are by far the best. For me the line in the sand is late eighties just after fuel injection which I really think is a plus. Even if its effect on engine sound is a slight negative. I would add 355's, possibly the best looking car ever, if it weren't for CEL's being a part of the ownership experience. All other electronic gizmos detract from the experience. You can always go faster, but in the video where the Camry beat the 308 in the quarter mile, the speed excitement on public roads is gone forever. Modern mass produced cars are just way too competent at speed. And most speed limits are still in the 60-75 MPH range, a thrill which is over in just a few seconds these days with almost any car. For me, no airbags, no ABS, no air shocks, no power steering, no CEL's....is the ticket. The styling was different and much better before everything began looking the same. Why pop up headlights were a problem for example I will never understand. They're gone forever. Cars today are basically modern human protectors with wheels.

 

I seriously doubt that people looking to buy a Ferrari 400/412 were tempted away by the Thema 8.32!

In fact the bigger threat to the Thema 8.32 was the Thema Turbo which (say it quietly), was actually a better car!

The Turbo was cheaper than the 8.32, it had better performance than the 8.32, and it handled better than the 8.32 due to having a better chassis balance (the 8.32 suffered far more under-steer than the turbo due to the weight of the V8 engine up front).



Why is it automatically assumed that this platform sharing concept means that Ferrari's are simply going to be re-bodied Alfa Romeo's?, or that Alfa Romeo's are going to become bargain basement re-bodied Ferrari's?, all having the exact same suspension components, chassis members and complete power-trains?

In all honesty, I think you're over simplifying what modern platform sharing is!

You seem to be trying to make a case that this platform sharing idea is the modern equivalent of what the American car industry did for decades: Make the exact same chassis' and bodies and then just fitting different badges, engine and trim pieces and claiming they were all different cars!

Whilst that can still be the case today (especially with companies such as VW), it's not the case with all modern day platform sharing.

Audi's R8 shares the same platform as the Lamborghini Gallardo, but it's not just a Lamborghini with a different body bolted on top, so why should Ferrari platform sharing with Alfa Romeo and Maserati be any different?

On that basis, why suffer the inevitable depreciation that the Alfa Romeo will also suffer?

If your concern is depreciation (be it percentage wise or monetary wise), then buy yourself an old Lotus Elise or a second hand corvette where the major depreciation has already happened!

So after a year of the Alfa being on sale, based on the numbers seen on the road, the Porsche is still very popular indeed, and no one is buying the Alfa Romeo it seems!

That doesn't fill Me with confidence when it eventually comes to re-sale time!

With the Porsche, whilst there will be a lot of others also for sale, there will also be a a lot of people looking to buy.

With the Alfa, whilst there will be very few others for sale, there will also be very few buyers for it, and many prospective buyers will be put off by the fact that the car didn't sell too well in the first place.

So your whole "Ferrari have just lost a sale" statement is completely incorrect as there would never be a "Ferrari sale" in the first place!

However, if Ferrari designed a chassis/platform for Alfa Romeo to make use of, and it turned out to be an excellent platform, with Ferrari-esque traits but for less money than a Ferrari (which you admit you wouldn't buy anyway as you do not see them as being value for money), then they would have encouraged you to buy the Alfa rather than one of Alfa's rivals! So Ferrari would have generated a sale for another Italian company, if not for themselves!

Any car that can exceed a speed limit can get you in trouble with the Law - So Why would you buy any car if your concern is getting arrested for speeding or your driving?

Just because a car can exceed a speed limit doesn't mean that it has too when you drive it!

Why did you buy your 308? - I mean, for the same money as you spent on your 308, there are plenty of other cars available that are more comfortable, more practical, cheaper to run, better equipped and do not appear to be a status symbol to others. And let's be honest here, your 308 is still capable of getting you in trouble with the Law if you drive it to it's limits!

I suspect you bought it because you just like it - So why should it not be the same for someone buying a 488 or such like?

You say the sort of performance figures I have quoted are not usable on the public road, which in itself is true (to a degree), but the figures I have stated are just the "headline" figures and only tell one half of the performance story.

Let Me put it this way, an F1 car can hit 100mph in @ 3 seconds and do a top speed of @ 230 mph, but standing starts and top speed is not what an F1 car is really about! The reality is, F1 is actually about the cars performance once on the move and it's handling abilities.

And that's the thing about all of the modern day super/hyper cars, the magazines and websites like to quote the headline figures as it's the easiest way to give a direct comparison between rivals, but it's how they actually drive on the road that really matters, and how they make the driver feel - The headline performance figures are just a by-product of their abilities in reality.

And it's not really accurate to say that performance figures of the type that I have quoted cannot be used on the open road - If you're stuck behind a slow moving truck on a twisty section of road and suddenly a short, clear straight section of road creates an overtaking opportunity, having those sort of performance figures under your right foot can be the difference between more miles of slow misery and getting on with your enjoyable drive, as well as being the difference between a safe overtake and a dangerous one (as far as I'm concerned, the less time you have to spend on the wrong side of the road whilst overtaking, the better!)

AS for driving in the UK, there are plenty of public roads here where you could take a 458/488 at the right time of the day and fully enjoy it's performance (including some where if your brave/stupid enough you could even hit the cars top speed!), and your chances of being caught for speeding would be negligible! (You would be in deep s:censored:t if you did get caught mind!)

 

Are you talking about full speed, or exploiting full cornering speed capabilities on the public road ?

 

Agree with this first part, although most high end sports cars now do without a third pedal.

 

Yes, and the key part is in bold. I was new car shopping recently, and honestly it's pointless to compare brakes, shift speeds, lateral grip, etc., because any mid- to -higher priced performance car on the market is vastly better than anyone can use on public roads. You can also get Countach-level acceleration in most entry-level luxury cars these days, without the $10,000 clutch job.

Pop-ups weren't a problem, by the way -- they were a solution for better aero before we had anything better than sealed beam incandescent bulbs and laws against headlamp covers (as on the E-Type series 1). They're a relatively heavy and complicated solution considering the alternatives available now, though.

 

If the F12's successor isn't a V12, people will say "Ferrari as we know it is over." I suppose it depends who 'we' is. There will be (and already is) a younger crowd that prefers the 488 to the 458 and won't care about gated manuals or naturally aspirated engines (let alone carburetors).

 

Actually the Alfa v6 powered was the best.

You are ignoring the fact that Alfisti prefer their cars to be 100% Alfa Romeo for the better or worst. The idea that new Alfa's have a Ferrari designed platform does not fill me with joy at all. No different than them currently using FIAT platforms.

You see proper Alfisti's don't see Ferraris as the ultimate of everything automotive; Alfa Romeo's are the ultimate!, end of story
Pete

 

The Thema Turbo 16V had a top speed of 225Km/H and did 0-100Km/H in 7.0 sec. Thema 8.32 had a top speed of 240Km/H and 0-100Km/H in 6.8 sec... On paper, the stats lean towards the 8.32. I've never driven one and seeing also that the 8.32 was 115Kg heavier (yes, probably biased towards the front!) than the 16V Turbo, sure, probably handled better. You win

The R8 to Gallardo comparison is a same-tier, apples-to-apples one. Same type of car. Of course it's not a literal drop-a-body-onto-the-same-chassis, but come on, what's the real difference between the two? The Alfa/Maserati/Ferrari platform share would be multi-tier and are more-or-less different types of cars (economical sports/luxury/outright sports respectively).

Sure. It'll also be out of warranty and probably be bagged-on. That's not to say that the potential 4C I would buy would be out of warranty after ten years and depending how I drive it, will need repairs. So will the 488 as well...

I can't explain the low numbers of Alfa sales. The display at 2015's car show gathered a lot of attention from spectators, but the reps at the booth were not informative. There are only SIX dealers allocated for Alfa here in Canada (one here in Vancouver, two in Quebec, three in Ontario)! FCA wants to break into the North American market with Alfa Romeo, but they're not off to a good start with a small dealer network. With the upcoming Giulia, hopefully they'll set-up more dealers. In the meantime, the enthusiasts out there that know about the 4C, as far few as they are, will and are probably getting them. The rest are probably waiting for said depreciation to get one for cheap! In the meantime, I would have enjoyed one for many years, from brand-new.

But I would still not be buying a Ferrari! Maybe the same tech, the same parts, but Alfa is not Ferrari. It's not a direct sale for Ferrari, they're only making a partial profit on the shared components (not a complete car). But at least with a partial profit, that's money in their pockets, not Porsche's! Okay, you win here

And, I can go to jail too with even my Fiat 500. 308, no problem. And yes, I bought my 308 because it was affordable, cool, distinct and fulfilled a dream of mine. And this doesn't stop someone else for buying their dream car too, be it a 488, even at full sticker price. The extreme performance capabilities just seem to be a waste if they're not being used near full of their potential, for most of the time. The Alfa is still a quick car and would get you out of the same situation just as well as the 488. Or a Porsche. Or a...