LaFerrari replacement: v12, no hybrid, less power than SF90stradale?

I know. But there's always hope

 

Allow me to disagree.
Enzo had a "racer" mentality, but with passion and romance. Because, at the time, racing was very passionate and artisanal.
So much so that the Commendatore had not only phrases about winning, but also beautiful sayings about passion and how his cars were dreams that would transcend time.
And something that is a dream, that transcends time, has more than numbers, but carries with it spirit, passion, art.
LCDM succeeded Enzo with exactly this mentality, seeking to win, seeking the success of the company, but always bringing the intrinsic elements of the brand: passion, art, quality engineering, purity. Every detail was important.
With LCDM, Ferrari produced cars that everyone wanted, was immensely successful in F1, and also, yes, profitable, but without squeezing the lemon to the max.
Passion has always been an Italian way of doing things. Look, the 996 Turbo, for example, accelerated faster and had better numbers, but everyone wanted a 360 because, in addition to being fast, it evoked all the emotions of the senses.
Today's management has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Enzo's mentality. Their goal today is to maximize profits to please shareholders, squeeze the most out of the lemon, and to achieve absolute numbers, in detriment of the sensorial experience.
Today's racing has nothing to do with the racing of Enzo years. Today, racing is suffocated by regulations and ideologies, and is serving to legitimize the decisions made today by this management. For example, the F163 will never be an F130, no matter how much they try to legitimize it.

I respectfully disagree with this point.
Can the loss of important characteristics, in favor of max profit and absolute numbers, be called "progress"? I don't think so.
Progress, IMO, is when you bring the best of what was once available, with even more attributes/changes/technologies to the products.
An example of genuine progress? The change from the F430 to the 458. The 458 was much more advanced and modern than the F430, but without losing any of the brand attributes compared to the F430.

 

Developing the new racing seats cost 8 millions.
Why do you want them to spend hundreds of millions to develop a new engine when everyone is fighting to buy a V6 that is not expensive to recycle...
All the money is in the e-factory

 

Progress isn’t always linear. I’m in agreement with you though, this “progress” isn’t making necessarily more enjoyable cars, but certainly more efficient, faster, and far more complicated. Perhaps the next gen will be the performance of this and the enjoyment of the last.

 

Well they are doing 1 billion profit/year.
I guess developing a brand new V12 wouldn’t not be so dramatic for their long term profits..

 

Come on guys, history repeats: 1985 super car Testarossa (12 cylinder) vs. hyper car 288 GTO (Turbo v8). The hyper cars were always the most technologically advanced, but never „retro“.
Ferrari has such a long history in building n/a v12s, there is not much they could proof. What should a new v12 bring to the table? 11000 instead of 9500rpm? Would this be a big step?
The AMG One or the F250 powertrains are immensely complicated and it‘s a proof of excellence to master this tech and building a usable car with it.

 

Bingo.

 

Some new members in this forum it’s very mature and mature in history, unfortunately some teenagers or instragrameurs want engine V3000 and 1 millions of hp and sold cars like 60 years ago. Congratulations for remembering some true history of Ferrari. World change but humans never change

 

Next to the V12 of the Valkyrie, they are a gimmick...

 

Get real, it doesn't take hundreds of millions to develop a stupid engine.
Cosworth, who is a puny company in comparison to Ferrari, has recently created some of the best engines ever, naturally aspirated V12's and V16's.
If a piss poor company like Cosworth can do it and Ferrari can't, then they better close up shop cause they're ****.

 

Brilliant post.
Ferrari needed to create a modern hyperar that has great performance but also retains the key characteristics that has made countless of us into fans: great aesthetics, great NA engine and driving feedback/pleasure.

 

Exactly.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The V12 in the 12 Cylinder was substantially redesigned.


Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat

 

It's hard to belive that on free market people pay for this car more than for laFerrari Aperta

 

Totally comparing apples and pears here. Ferrari and their customers would never accept the in-market standards Cosworth will work to. As I said, I have direct experience of this so I know what I’m talking about. Cosworth will develop good engines but for a very specific application, like a race team would. And they will want to continue development during production! Imagine that. Ferrari simply cannot do that. The expectation of them is far higher by the customers and their overhead is designed to produce larger-scale, higher quality engine production so a new engine has to be able to handle varying and multiple applications, and meet much more stringent standards for both quality, servicing in those multiple applications and reliability. To deploy their finite (but still costly) overhead resource to develop an engine, there is a cost and an opportunity cost. When it costs people like ford something like $1bn+ to develop an engine family for a much more basic engine, Ferrari will not get away with the same costs as Cosworth.

 

Completely agree. But hard to explain to some people. Ferrari made 14000 cars per year and developed everything in house. Cosworth made juste engine and produced some 100 of this. Compare to Ferrari Cosworth it’s startup

 

Well said

 

I’ve driven two of our older cars this week. First, the Speciale on my first trip to Spa, and secondly our F512M, recently taxed and back on the road again. Opportunity for a gratuitous picture of the Speciale at Spa…. What a good looking car it is. I was a bit apprehensive taking such a valuable car to that beast of a track, with no experience! But it reminded me of what people said about it at launch; too electronic, not raw enough et al.

We drove the 500 or so miles the day before, did the track day, then drove straight back home that evening. Would never have done that if I didn’t believe it was reliable enough to take the punishment. Full disclosure, our 3RS didn’t arrive in time otherwise I would have taken that. Why? I worked out that Porsches are a little more ‘vanilla’ on track. In other words, they represent a standard which makes it easier to gauge yourself. And they seem bulletproof and very ready to take the punishment. With the Ferrari, there is more of symbiosis with both you and the car. The Ferrari dances and rewards you taking care of it and taking fewer liberties. “Drive me properly, man!” The Porsches are more like “c,mon, let’s see what you got then”. We had a fantastic day, too much traffic and always things much faster - Radicals, other slick-shod race machinery - that you had to be aware of but my best lap time was around 2.53, which I felt was not too bad for a first timer trying to not stick the car he had to drive 500 miles home that night in a gravel trap. Car was faultless. I worried a little about the big braking zones but needn’t have, the brakes were great. Not as consistent as a GT3 RS would have been but as I said, vanilla versus something more complex and exotic. The balance in the car was great, I know it very well and have driven many fast miles in it. In short we had an absolute blast. And my point?

Haven’t mentioned the engine format once. Nor was it really relevant to me.

I’ve also tracked our Pista at Donington. That too, was a great experience. Did it bother me that it has a turbo V8 instead of the Speciale’s n/a motor? Nope. Being able to deploy the exact amount of shove through the throttle can be achieved in both cars and stands as something significantly important to enjoying myself on track.

I simply cannot believe that Enzo would prefer Ferrari to make a nostalgic car as the marque’s ultimate statement of drama and speed. He wanted to be the quickest. It was in him until the day he departed I reckon. His last car, the F40, also sharing the same layout as the base car, was so far ahead of the competition in terms of drama and speed. It really set a performance benchmark until about 2002, ironically with a car named after the man himself. Everyone who bought one bought into only one thing; this was the fastest road car around a track you could buy. A lack of V12 was irrelevant. In those days, F1 fans all knew the V12 was slower anyhow. Too much weight and packaging compromise.

The other car I drove, our Testarossa (F512M), was also a great drive. It was faster than I remember it and sounds fantastic, probably better than anything else ever made. But it is a product of its time. Do I always pick up its keys when it is available? No chance. Right day, right journey and it is great. But sometimes, I hanker after the unique thrill one of our SF90’s would serve up. And when that seems too much effort, it may be the Pista keys I pick up. More than the Speciale? These days, yes. Seems funny the Speciale got criticised for not being raw enough. I was deaf after I returned home in the small hours from Spa and the full throttle change from 3rd to 4th was so brutal, it had me questioning if there was an issue.

My own argument for why I want advancement and the new way of doing things is because we already have the old. I simply do not want to buy new cars that feel like our old ones. What on earth could be the point of that? It’s laughable to think people argue for that! The F250 needs to have mega aero, interesting and ground-breaking new ideas to enhance performance, to have technology transfer and ideas gained from campaigning successfully the 499P. If it doesn’t have that, why is it any different to an Icona? The car they look to have produced seems to me to fit exactly the brief Enzo started with the 288GTO and really got right with the F40.

And as for this “all the board care about is money” line. Purr-lease. It’s a company. It makes money. That’s what it has to do to survive. And just in case you forgot what capitalism is all about, you provide something that people want to buy and you make money. Stop doing that and you don’t. It’s always been the law of the jungle. Simple. It makes no sense to conclude that because they want to make money they can therefore do a bad job for customers.

As most of you know, if you float on the stock market to raise money, necessary for a brand like Ferrari to go to the next level and meet the regulatory problems posed to them by people over which they have no control, then no pensioner is going to say “happy to delay dividends so Ferrari can develop a car for the so-called purists”. It is what it is. It was not wrong to raise money via the stock market in my view, the alternative being to have someone like the VW group, or Geely, step in and provide the cash. Sure don’t think people would be happy then. Unless you want a Purosangue sharing its architecture with the Urus and the Cayenne, or the 296 sharing with the R8 or whatever. And as for that 1.2t, 5.0 n/a V12, mid-engined, manual gearbox car? No, it wouldn't have any more chance of being produced than it does now.

The arguments on this forum remind me of that book “Who stole the cheese”. Or something like that. Google it if you don’t know it.
Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Correction: The 812C engine was revised, the 12c is the same engine, presented as being new yet it was already 3 years old at the 12c launch. Remember, the entire V12 design team was disbanded with the public firing of Leiters...

 

Nope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_F140_engine. The only substantially redesign in recent years was for the Ferrari Purosangue.
The core engine design is over 20 plus year now (Ferrari F140 engine)

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Reminds me of Jaguar XJ220

 

We may not like it but the V6 has a F1 and Le Mans pedigree that the V12 hasn´t. That´s the times we´re living.

Honestly, I´d be more worried about the "conservative" aero and packaging this car has compared to, for example, a Valkyrie. They have the Le Mans engine and the Le Mans hybrid stuff, but it´s not in a Le Mans body. But I suppose the rich people who buys these don´t want something too cramped.

 

I love idea of V6