Maserati Alfieri became the Ferrari Roma

Yes, I see Ferrari did take over managing the rest of Maserati but I see you are also treating the "purchase" in tongue-in-cheek manner, because as we all know, Ferrari itself was also owned by FIAT at the time. So it was essentially only a juggling of FIAT brands, by FIAT, to save the rapidly sinking Maserati brand.

Maserati was about to completely implode in 1997. Its total shipment of cars in 1998 was 518. That's 5 hundred 18 cars TOTAL. FIAT wanted to rub some of Ferrari cachet onto Maserati to rescue the brand, by placing Maserati cars in Ferrari dealerships in the US, its biggest potential market. Otherwise, FIAT would have had to write off a lot of jobs and assets if sales had continued to plummet. FIAT did not have any other brand in its stable, to lift the fortunes of Maserati. Your Forbes article from 2001 questioned LdM's decision to make Maserati "...one of the top luxury car brands in the U.S...." during "...the worst possible time to relaunch a luxury car brand in the U.S.—even if the name is Maserati...".

However, FIAT were already paying off since by 1999, Maserati shipments had tripled to 1,538 and continued to rise when in 2005, shipments were then at 5,568, which amounted to 10-fold within 8 years. Ferrari also helped Maserati raise its profile with the MC12 in 2004, another instance of Ferrari sharing a platform with Maserati.

As for the 4200 replacement, the introduction of the GranTurismo as the 4200 replacement used the same M139 on the Quattroporte, introduced in 2003. So the M139 platform would have had already existed in 2002, well before Maserati left the Ferrari stable in 2007. I would not be surprised if Ferrari was developing another new platform, for an entry-level GT that had also been designated to be used for a new Maserati sports car. It would be equally unsurprising if Ferrari had decided to keep that platform for the California since it would have been a much more clever idea to sell the California using Ferrari DNA in order to bring in new customers to the Ferrari brand, rather than for the Maserati brand, using Maserati DNA.

People familiar with Maserati and Ferrari will note Ferrari also made engines for Maserati, and Ferraris share many parts with Maserati. However, with the exception of the Enzo/MC12 example, Ferrari doesn't share other core features with Maserati. Maseratis do not come with flat-plane V8 engines, DCTs, carbon ceramic brakes, hardtop retractable roofs or Ferrari interiors. All you have to do is drive Maseratis and Ferraris back-to-back to realize their differences. Cars designed to perform better using Ferrari features are what you are paying Ferrari prices for.

People who knowingly spin half-truths to look clever are either naïve, quite blind or just want you to be blind.

 

...oh, I always forget, Ferraris also have the Manettino and optionally, MagneRide. Maseratis do not have these but I guess you assume people would overlook all of these Ferrari features and that Maseratis and Ferraris are the same... because they could possibly share the same, Ferrari-designed, platform.

 

I know how to settle this. Vox populi:
https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/threads/was-the-california-originally-meant-to-be-a-maserati.612707/

 

Alfieri and Roma look crazy similar but if u have owner a Maserati or a Ferrari u know they are nothing alike.

 

**UPDATE: Ferrari North America has issued this statement in regards to this article: "The car is 100% the product of the Ferrari Centro Stile and Flavio Manzoni’s team."**

Wonder why they felt the need to intervene

 

The similariti

From a different angle the similarities to the Aston Martin DB10 are also striking but the truth about the Roma design is that it has clearly superseded the Aston and the Maserati concepts.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The Maserati looks better. And Maserati is all about GT «Cruiser» cars. I don’t want Ferrari to be a car for the mass. But I agree that the Roma will be a great car for everyday life. Like alot of others.

 

My friend, the Alfieri was the replacement of the M145 in Maserati BP 2018, as today is the M189, in the revisited BP2019. Clearly the M189 is a new project in comparison to the Alfieri concept (five years old). Chassis and powertrain are completely different (es BEV version planned) but the Alfieri concept will be clearly intuitive in the design


Image Unavailable, Please Login

Ciao
Luque

 

The Alfieri was never meant to replace the GranTurismo, it was originally meant to be an additional model slotted below the GranTurismo as a roughly 100kish car. It was meant to be a challenge to a 911, Aston, top end F-Type etc. The biggest issue at the time was which model would be built as a convertible the Alfieri or the new GranTurismo as there wasn’t enough funding for 2 convertibles.

However things changed when Marchionne replaced Wester with first Bigland, (I was sitting down the hall at SpA when that happened) then Kuniskis and the launch of the Levante didn’t go exactly as planned. Sales have been in a downward spiral drying up funds for new products. The GranTurismo was given a minor facelift and kept in production a few years longer than originally planned. As far as the new GranTurismo getting styling cues from the Alfieri, Maserati has been using styling cues from the Alfieri since the introduction of the Levante (grill) that has been incorporated into the Ghibli and QP.

 

What it really comes down to is Montezemolo vision of Ferrari and Maserati as one company. In that vision the California, Portofino and Roma would probably be strictly Maseratis.

Under Marchionne’s vision Ferrari and Maserati are separate companies with much higher volumes over more market segments. The Ferrari portion of the vision has been highly successful and very profitable. The Maserati portion while volume has increased it has not been as profitable as envisioned.

 

italiancars, I don't know who you claim to be but your "ideas" about the role of the California platform for Ferrari and LdM make ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.

When LdM took over the helm at Ferrari in 1991, Ferrari itself was in bad shape. Don't talk about Maserati - Ferrari itself was in bad shape. It had old platforms that were problematic to build as well as to maintain and their performance lagged the competition. One aspect of LdM's broad achievements was the introduction of successful modern construction facilities and successful modern car designs.

So here are some other points where your story completely breaks down. Aside from the success of the SF in Formula 1 racing, Ferrari's fortunes at the dawn of the 21st Century depended on the following:

- association with F1 racing
- successful adoption of the 7-speed DCT,
- successful adoption of port fuel injection,
- successful adoption of MagneRide,
- increased sales volume​

The Ferrari California acted as the forerunner, or a safe test platform for all of these, and accomplished all of the above paving the way for the 458, F12, FF,...etc. None of those, except for increased sales volume, made it to the Maserati product line. If there were no Ferrari California, some other new Ferrari model would have been necessary to assume the technical roles of the California.

So how does "...Montezemolo vision of ... the California, Portofino and Roma would probably be strictly Maseratis..." accomplish any of that? It was LdM who ultimately introduced the California, 458, F12, FF,...LaF. It was his plan.

People who think the California looks like a Maserati either don't realize or overlook the fact that the California and the GranTurismo were both designed under the direction of Ken Okuyama at Pininfarina. BTW, the California also looks like the Ferrari 599, which was also designed by Ken Okuyama, under LdM's management.

 

https://uk.motor1.com/news/383510/maserati-new-car-spy-shots/

 

You do realize that Ferrari “owned” Maserati from 1997 to 2005 under the direction of LdM? Are you aware that the 4200 and QP V, were developed by Ferrari? Are you also aware that most of the Level 1 personnel at Maserati were transferred in from Ferrari? LdM wanted Maserati to be the entry level scale enabling Ferrari production to remain low retaining exclusivity.

This was all before Elkann brought Marchionne on board whose vision for both Maserati and Ferrari were a much larger volume. The clash between the two was inevitable, LdM lost.

 

Not sure why you are just repeating what I stated and confirmed about Maserati being managed under Ferrari during that period but was actually still owned by FIAT because FIAT still owned both Ferrari and Maserati. FIAT basically juggled management of 2 of its brands, to help Maserati gain legitimacy from being associated with Ferrari. In the Forbes article you referenced earlier, LdM stated his goal was to make Maserati one of the leading LUXURY brands. You seem to be trying to confuse historical facts.

LdM and Marchionne clashed on a number of issues but LdM was ousted in 2014 after the LaF came out and well after the Cali came out in 2008. Marchionne was not running Ferrari when the Cali was being developed before 2008. The Cali was developed under LdM and LdM ran Maserati as a luxury brand, not as a technology-based brand employing technologies associated with Ferrari’s F1 racing team. LdM even enlisted Michael Schumacher from early in the car’s development to be consulted on the Cali’s design.

You haven’t been able to account for the fact that the Cali was the technology testbed for new Ferrari performance technologies that were then utilized afterwards for ALL of Ferrari’s ensuing performance models. NONE of those performance features have been used in Maseratis even 11 years after the Cali was introduced so how could the Cali have been a Maserati design? Are you still apparently insisting that LdM was trying to make Maserati a technically more advanced, more modern and higher performing brand than Ferrari, because if you insist the Cali was actually a Maserati design that’s what you would be implying. That’s utter nonsense and everyone can see it.

While I have not ruled out the possibility of the Cali platform having been considered for a Maserati model that was not ultimately built, a platform is not a car model, it is basically just the design of the structural underpinnings that define the locations and possible dimensions for engine and passenger compartments, choices of suspension and powertrain layout. That’s why the A4 and Urus can share the same VW platform. There is very little resemblance between the A4 and Urus.

As for the Roma being the Alfieri, look at the wheelbase length differences I posted earlier. The Roma uses the same wheelbase as the Cali which is significantly shorter than the Alfieri’s. Do you have a basic understanding about platforms and wheelbases? The Alfieri is based on a different platform. The Roma is not some derivative of the Alfieri... it wouldn’t have worked and would have required a redesigned new platform which, crazy enough, would have the same wheelbase as the Cali platform. More utter nonsense.

 

You are apparently confusing Fiat Group and Fiat Auto. Fiat Group is the parent company controlled by Exor. Within FIAT Group (SpA) were various separate companies such as Case New Holland, Magnetti Marelli, Iveco, Ferrari, FIAT Auto etc.

Within FIAT Auto were the brands Alfa Romeo, Lancia, Fiat, Abarth, Innocenti, Maserati etc. All separate companies, Ferrari was not part of FIAT Auto. Maserati was purchased from DeTomaso in 2 phases in the early 90s by FIAT Auto. Maserati was literally “Sold” to Ferrari, not simply moving it from one column to another.

In addition to running Ferrari, in 2004 LdM became Chairman of FIAT SpA until he was replaced by Marchionne, (the first clash) reducing his role to strictly Ferrari/Maserati (he reported to Marchionne). Then Marchionne forced the “Sale” of Maserati back to FIAT Auto to be paired with Alfa. Under development at that time was the replacement for 4200, this project was retained by Ferrari and was converted into the California. Marchionne wanted a larger more luxurious replacement to compete with the big Mercedes and BMW coupes, which gave birth to the GranTurismo on a shortened QP V platform.

You seem to have a bit of a chip on your shoulder concerning the pedigree of the California? Where did I say that LdM wanted to make Maserati more technically advanced, more modern and a higher performing brand than Ferrari? LdM wanted to and was using Maserati as an entry level steppingstone to Ferrari, a “Dino” level brand. A more usable everyday car, to serve as that testbed, remember the 4200 was the first Ferrari built chain drive motor since the 412. A modified flat plane version of that motor was then introduced into the 430.

‘what you are trying to refer to is called Sloanism, which was an evolution of Fordism. Today it is modular platforms such as the “Giorgio” develop by Maserati/Alfa under Wester. The Alfieri was a concept when it debuted in 2014 in celebration of Maserati’s Centennial, it was not a fixed platform model as shown. It was intended to be built on Giorgio which was still under development. The engine used in the concept was the 4.7 V8 from the GranTurismo that they announced would not be in a production version, it would use the Ferrari built twin turbo engines used in the Ghibli lll and QP Vl.

The fact of the matter is that there is a lot of animosity right now between Ferrari and Maserati. A lot of it centers around quality issues related to items Maserati receives from Ferrari. Specifically the paint on the GranTurismo and engine issues with the V6TT where the blocks are cast in Indiana, then machined and assembled in Maranello. The fact that Maserati is now developing it’s own engines and as part of its retooling is expanding Via Ciro Menotti plant in Modena to include paint facilities.

If you look at Ferrari’s quarterly reports, the only area they are dropping revenue is in sales of engines to Maserati. Also The powers that be in Maranello are not exactly happy that Maserati will be producing a mid engine carbon car with probably in excess of 600 HP (the imposed limit on power Ferrari deemed it would provide Maserati), with a projected price of under 200k. While Ferrari is operating on a level far above every other car company and they feel their products don’t have competitors, they don’t like any other company it thinks could be a competitor.

If you know anything about Italy, politics and melodrama is an inherent trait. Remember Machiavelli was Italian.

 

You are trying much too hard by discussing facts that have no bearing, seemingly to support and spin "a story" that Ferrari was apparently acting independently of FIAT management when it took over management of Maserati. Ferrari and Maserati are both brands managed under FIAT so FIAT has a say in Maserati coming under Ferrari management.

Actually, I just mostly dislike lies or disinformation.

You appear to avoid the discussion of the actual cars, and prefer to discuss FIAT corporate history. You claim the Cali used a platform that was originally intended for a Maserati sports car. I did not rule out possibility that the Cali used that platform. I also pointed out a platform is not actually a car, and can be used on multiple cars of various contrasting designs, something which you conveniently avoided clarifying. Were you being disingenuous?

I had to point out to you the Cali was designed as a technology testbed for all subsequent Ferrari models. And even after LdM left and Marchionne took over, none of these technologies or even closing of performance gaps have made it to current Maserati models, 11 years after the first Cali shipped. Ferrari never designed or intended those technologies for a Maserati.

The simple reason is the Maserati was re-imagined as a luxury brand under Ferrari's managment, as declared by LdM. Your mindset appears so narrow that it's apparently escaped your awareness, that it wouldn't have made sense for LdM to market TWO supercar brands, designed a Maserati sports car with groundbreaking technical features that would supercede all existing Ferrari models. Such a Maserati would have seriously underminded the Ferrari brand. You also apparently forget LdM's biggest responsibility was to run the F1 race team, which is called Scuderia FERRARI, not Scuderia Maserati.

LdM wanted to market ONE supercar brand along with ONE premium luxury brand... not 2 competing supercar brands. Why would Ferrari take over a failing Maserati and then destroy the Ferrari brand in favour of Maserati?

The entertaining gossip you outlined adds to the point I am making, that LdM had no intentions of making a Maserati "California" which would leapfrog all the Ferraris at the time.

I have also discussed the rivalry with locals who know the brands. Maserati was a racing marque like Ferrari and many die-hard Maserati fans may feel LdM "stole their car" but Maserati got itself into the sad state it was in and LdM was not about to develop and give away Ferrari technical advantages, sabotage the Ferrari brand. Maserati is lucky to have been rescued by FIAT and LdM.

Hopefully, Maserati will flourish again in the future in whatever form they find themselves best suited for, but they do not (and cannot afford to) field a racing team so that has to be a factor.

Yes, I've read The Prince a couple of times, and keep a copy in my library. It's a great book(let) but maybe you haven't read it or understood it although you seem to like the part about politics. As for the Italian penchant for melodrama, it has its redeeming qualities. However The Prince was not about melodrama at all. In fact, it was a grim lesson about the opposite.

 

I appreciate the input by both of you and I think that maybe it is possible that you are both right, with just a difference in the point of view?
Maybe an idea for a project on a platform that was abandoned by Maserati and was taken over (the general idea) by Ferrari and was developed into a totally different end product?

 

Perhaps. But you will also have other Ferrari owners saying the same about the Roma vs. the rest of the lineup. If a Roma owner goes up to an 812 owner and say "Hey I get the 812. Our cars almost the same, we are in the same boat.". I suspect you will get a questioning gaze and a forgiving smile.

Judging by the marketing B.S so far, including all about how the car is easier to live with, less scary than other Ferraris and all the rest of it, I suspect it could in fact feel incredibly much like a GranCoupé. Still sounds to me like they have tried to make it as little like a Ferrari they could possibly get away with. So, I stick to my guns on my initial verdict until I've experienced it. It's the Maserati Roma and not a real Ferrari.

 

I guess it’s a matter of who you ask and their particular history with the brand. A car like a Maranello would qualify as an antique in many states. Many people consider the Testarossa a turning point when Ferraris became Americanized. Fellow Ferrari Historian Mike Sheehan breaks Ferraris down into eras Enzo era, FIAT era, Montezemolo era, Marchionne era. I suppose currently it is the IPO era?

Enzo supposedly once said that Real Ferraris have 12 cylinders, then everything else are Dinos? I tend to learn towards the Hairy Chest Prancing Dinosaurs, when GTOs were 12 cylinders, Mondials were 4 cylinders and Testa Rossa was 2 words!

 

Hi Luque,
Can you please tell more about the project M189? Front or rear engine etc.. Only if you want to tell of course. I would be very grateful to you. Thanks

 

front engine awd EV capable large 2+2 Grand touring car.