NEW MID ENGINED V6 (LITTLE BROTHER)

Please see the post above yours by Joe. He owns a Mclaren and Ferrari and is telling you there is a marked difference. I own a Mclaren and a Ferrari and am telling you there is a marked difference. @Gh21631 owns a Mclaren and Ferrari and he will tell you there is a marked difference. Ill let @Coincid , @Thecadster , @Shadowfax chime in as I dont want to speak for them but they all own both an Mclaren and a Ferrari.

At some point, we can do all the mental masturbation on the benefits of carbon but when actual owners are telling you otherwise, maybe give that ownership experience a little bit of credibility? otherwise everyone starts to sound like Noone2.

 

Of course a new car is not useless, because the lack of a carbon tub. I agree, that Ferrari shouldn't go for the molded Carbon like McLaren. Not saying the McLaren way is bad, but considering Ferrari is somewhat late to the carbon party I expect it would not be "enough" by the time then. I think we all share the same love and passion for the brand and the cars, but we can also agree that we would like them even better when making use of a carbon tub.

 

I am convinced that eventually Ferrari will adopt carbon tubs for their mid-engine production cars. The question is just when? As I posted already in an other thread there is a new story in the TOFM about the SF90's chassis:

"The SF90 Stradale’s ‘body-in-white’ is the first of a new spaceframe family. Over time, there will be three Ferrari sharing some of the SF90 Stradale’s modular hardware [...]" The beauty within (ferrari.com)

So after the the SF90 and the Little Brother there will be one more model based on that platform (maybe the Icona (F40), F167 (mid-engine V12), other ...?). Perhaps then the time for a carbon tub will come.

I remember somewhere in 2012 Ferrari mentioned in an article that the most critical part in carbon technology would be the resins and those wouldn't be where the they need them until 2020...

 

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1068406_others-embrace-carbon-fiber-but-ferrari-sticking-with-aluminum

According to the supercar gospel scripted by Lamborghini and McLaren, “thou shalt use carbon fiber in thine automobiles.” Ferrari, on the other hand, is going down a different path: it’s sticking with tried-and-true aluminum for both bodywork and components.

Despite using carbon fiber to build such supercars as the F50 and Enzo, Ferrari has a long history in working with aluminum. As far back as the 1940s, Ferraris were built using aluminum body panels supported by a steel frame.

Ferrari engineer Patrizio Moruzzi tells Popular Mechanics that aluminum is a “multimaterial technology,” ideally suited for a wide range of applications. The Ferrari 458 Italia, for example, uses various aluminum alloys in castings, extrusions and stamped sheet metal to form both body and suspension components.

Aluminum is strong, as light as carbon fiber when properly designed, and much easier to work with on a mass-production basis. Cars like the Ferrari Enzo, with its carbon fiber monocoque construction, could only be built at the rate of one per day.

Aluminum-bodied cars, like the 458 Italia, can be produced at the relative high volume of 30 units per day, reducing production cost and complexity.

That’s not to say Ferrari isn’t looking towards the future in regards to material science. The automaker is beginning to use metal matrix components, which consist of aluminum reinforced with ceramic fibers and can potentially reduce a car’s weight by up to 20 percent.

Future construction techniques may allow the use of even lighter aluminum alloys. Material that can’t effectively be welded can be bonded using high-tech epoxies, a process that’s already been embraced by the aerospace industry.

While even mainstream automakers, such as BMW, are gravitating towards carbon fiber, Ferrari will stick with what it knows best: creating automotive masterpieces, rendered in aluminum.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a7234/is-aluminum-not-carbon-fiber-the-car-material-of-the-future-ferrari-says-yes/

 

On the front page of the New York Times- Ferrari reverts to using aluminum chassis for their F1 cars. LeClerc not amused.

 

As we move to the heavier hybrid and electric cars finding ways to lighten, stiffen and better balance will be key. Carbon will provide for a better solution than aluminum. The challenge will be to produce the number of cars that Ferrari builds and plans to build so they will have to figure something out down the road. Carbon is very much a manual process, it goes against all of the tech they've invested in to produce cars at these numbers. I doubt they would scrap the factory they've invested so much in. Mclaren being a much younger company set out to do things different from the start so they didnt have these investments that they needed to leverage so they could start fresh. We can make excuses all we want and pretend there are no performance differences but that's not being honest. This all comes down to money and what they need to do vs. have to do.

 

Two things that come to my mind: 1. I think the we have to differentiate between the sports and GT cars. I don't see the need for the front-mid-engine GT cars to go carbon and that is especially the are where they see a lot potential for growth in future. So I would conclude the numbers are manageable. 2. The alu parts are not really produced by Ferrari itself but come from an external supplier called OMR, so I guess there is a good amount of flexibility when it comes to their alu "lock-in".

 

OMG!!!! Ferrari doesn't make their own aluminum!!!! The horror!!!!

 

It is beyond dispute that all things being equal, a properly designed CF tub will offer greater torsional rigidity and lower mass compared to metals like aluminum. The further stategic use of CF over aluminum will also result in an overall weight reduction of the car. This is confirmed by the weight of the 765 ( 3025 lbs) vs the Pista ( 3400 lbs.). Evidence of the elevated rigidity of a CF tub vs aluminum is presented by comparing topless models. Drive the 458 , 488 and F8 spyder and compare it to the 720S , for example. The Ferraris are characterized by tangible cowl shake yet the 720 is as rigid as its comparable coupe. Even Huracan spyders are more rigid than Ferraris. If the Pista was fabricated with a carbon tube and was a couple of hundred pounds lighter as part of the overall design, it would undoubtedly be a more accomplished performer.

As for the Mclaren tubs making getting in and out of the car less than convenient, which is possibly ascerbated by the dihedral doors, a case can be made for this. However, for most super car enthusiasts, it is on balance a minor issue. Personally, not only is this of no consequence, I believe all super cars should have these doors as they add a nice touch in making the car feel special. I love the doors.

The models from Ferrari, Lamborghini and Mclaren are all stellar examples of what a super car should be, but they offer differing design approaches and driving dynamics. Personal preferences and priorities will determine which car enters your garage. Being fanatically whetted to a particular brand to the exclusion of even experiencing others, only deprives one of the opportunity to enter a wide world of pleasure and joy. I have owned Lamborghis, Ferraris and Mclaren in the last 3 years. I have enjoyed all of them for differing reasons. Do I have a favorite? Absolutely. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful psychological tool to deal with conflicting ideas or actions. People have a need to make them consistent. If you are long time Ferrari devotee, it is not uncommon to dismiss other brands as inferior coupled with fervent intent to never experience a Mclaren or Lamborghini. Many will be dismissive of these marques so as to maintain their loyalty to Ferrari. My advice is to become more open minded as you are depriving yourself of immense gratification.

 

I thought that was a fair comparison, given their equal power output, but I do understand your point of view and I appreciate your comment as a owner of both cars.

 

I agree with everything you say but product design (whichever product it may be) is always about making choices and tradeoffs. Just because Ferrari does not use carbon tub does not necessarily make them greedy or arrogant with a POV that their "dumb" fans will just buy and support whatever.
Ferrari made a no compromise car with a carbon tub and it cost close to $2mm.
Would a Ferrari engineer want to put a carbon tub in every car they push out, yes of course.
Also, its not like Ferrari is not moving in that direction. They have added a carbon fiber bulkhead for the SF90S and from all the reviews what I hear is that this car behaves much better than previous Ferraris. Maybe we wait a bit and see if the chassis flex in the SF90Spider is much better than previous V8s. This is not about covering Ferrari's faults but trying to understand why Ferrari makes the product decisions it makes rather than just calling them greedy.

 

I would like to hear some of the examples!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Due to its highly passionate, devoted and dedicated clientele, there has been in the last decade, minimal incentive for Ferrari to break new ground and leap over the competition with innovative technology and paradigm inspiring performance. Ferrari enthusiasts are more than satisfied with incremental aesthetic and capability enhancements.

McLaren is new to the game who cannot rest on established laurels to win over the super car enthusiast. Their cars must be differentiated from the established brands by offering unique stellar performance and a striking design aesthetic. Their achievement in establishing the brand as a genuine competitor in such a short time frame is nothing short of remarkable. So much so that it has caused Ferrari to up its game. Who benefits ? All of us who are on this forum except noone.

 

The parts come from elsewhere but the assembly is what I am referring to. I do agree the SUV and front engine cars won't matter but certainly the mid engine sports cars would.

 

Pretty funny. I logged into the fashion show on Instagram...only 450 people worldwide were watching.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

By your admission, adding a carbon fiber bulkhead to the SF90 makes the car behave much better. Imagine what a full carbon substructure would do.

Forget Mclaren for a second as that brand here is polarizing. Maserati has managed to put a carbon structure in a 250k car. There is no excuse for Ferrari to not do the same. The claim that they will only do the best carbon and it will cost 2 million plus is just nonsense.

We all agree why Ferrari wont invest in carbon technology- they dont need to because they sell every car possible, they have too many investments in their current metal technology and it appears that their interests lie more in being a brand than putting out the highest performance cars.

How else do you explain why when they released the F8 they put out the exact same hp as their competitor had in the 720? I mean exact same. Why would they not add 10-15 hp more? I want them to build better cars because in the end Im a consumer and will purchase what is the best for me regardless of which badge is on the car. There are many others like that.

 

I 100% agree that a carbon tub car will be better but that does not automatically mean that Ferrari should immediately switch to a carbon tub, nor does it imply that the lack of switching is only because of greed (in my book running a business profitably is not greed its good business, something which is rather rare in this class of manufacturers). Just because Maserati put a carbon tub in a $250k car does not mean they are doing this profitably. What margin are they selling the MC20 at? My guess is this is probably a loss leader to "relaunch" the brand....again .
I shall reiterate my point above, every product is a result of many choices and tradeoffs. Its rarely about stuffing everything one can in a product.
Honestly a Ferrari is very similar to an iPhone. It does not have the latest and the best of everything (at least for the longest time it did not) but overall its the best and every year it innovates and gets better at things where it is (was) not a leader.

 

And not to mention I LOVE Ferrari. The cars absolutely have a place in this market. Mclaren has made top performance a higher priority than Ferrari. Ferrari is a luxury product. The market values each company accordingly, I think, with Ferrari being the more valuable entity and brand by some way.

I'd love to step out of an F8 in a tailored suit with my fiancé and head into our favorite city club. I can imagine it. I could even have a cocktail or two (over the course of a few hours of course no drunk driving) and drive off into the evening looking and feeling great. Ferrari has replaced Aston Martin in my mind in making beautiful luxury cars with a performance edge. I've said since it came out that the F8 is like Ferrari meets what Aston should be.

I don't think of the 765LT in this way. It's just too intense. Too full on. Too immersive. It requires a higher level of attention, hell it demands it. It's not a car to just drive around in and be seen. The performance, speed, lightness, reactivity (is that a word?) is a level beyond any Ferrari I've driven and I've driven a lot. That doesn't make it better, per se. It's just a different experience.

 

Good post and I agree. But to clarify, this is not a discussion about stuffing everything one can in a product. On that we agree completely. Companies have to make trade offs for sure. The discussion is simply is a car with a carbon tub superior to one without one? I would say yes. Everything else is just noise. Cheers.

 

I agree with your carbon tub point. Cheers.

 

First of all, stepping out of a Camry with your ravishingly gorgeous fiance would be more impressive. Getting a girl like her without money. WOW. You da man.

As a side note- My Corsa Rossa F8 received very little attention by other drivers or the general public, which was somewhat puzzling. The 765 is a crowd attraction. Everywhere I go, people are taking photos, giving me thumbs up while driving, sticking heads through sunroofs to video. No comparison

 

sell more hats and scarves and snacks in the restaurant, maybe fund carbon tub?

 

All that carbon would clash with Ferrari's new fashion esthetic.

https://www.linkedin.com/video/live/urn:li:ugcPost:6809876365781843968/

 

They are similar in that neither are the best tech but they have great marketing and a cult following. Ferrari's tech until the Roma and the Sf90 is way behind. Now they have so much tech its overboard. Some will love it, some wont.