Did you see Ferrari managed to mess up the front end on the Roma(new version, renamed for some reason). They are going back to buttons again, instead of the touch screens. So at least we get classic sticky buttons again
When I saw the first 3/4 front photo, I thought Toyota was updating the Supra in the style of the newest Prius...
I think it's because they took one of the best Ferrari's lately, the Roma and made it not as good. With the exception of the interior. People really like the Roma from the outside. This redesign makes it more bland and mainstream. Still a Roma, so still nice.
John Id love to hear your design analysis (fully understanding seeing it in person may change things)
Not keen on the dark bar across the nose that makes it look like an EV. The exterior of the Roma is much better, but the interior of the Amalfi is an improvement. It's really not like the Almalfi is a bad exterior, it's just not as beautiful as the Roma - it's chunkier and somehow heavier to the eye. Still objectively beautiful but relatively not as stunning as the Roma. If I was going to buy a GT though, it would be the Bentley Continental GT, which looks more luxurious and stately while still having some athletic credentials. Both the Roma and Almalfi look too hard and sporty as GT cars. All the best, Andrew.
OK Jerry, now your'e putting me on the spot! And you're correct in saying one needs to see the actual car in the metal to make an educated assessment. However, since I have so much respect for you and your talent I'll go out on a limb and make a few comments in spite of not having seen the car yet. Rather than go into a detailed analysis of the design, I'll give you the "executive summery" of my opinion ,which is just that, an old man's opinion. My design philosophy was formed in the 1960's for better or worse. Ferraris were beautiful AND exotic, as well as exclusive. The important caveat first: the following comments are solely my own and as such are just my opinion. Not having the benefit of seeing the car in the metal I make my judgement with a degree of caution, and as a matter of professionalism I usually don't publicly criticize the work of other designers. It's easy to be a critic. If car design were easy, anyone could do it. It's not and they can't. I don't know what the design brief said, and I don't know the cost or engineering criteria, etc.,etc. What did the Ferrari Design Team set out to do? The car is a "facelift" in car industry parlance, and as such not sure why they thought a name change was in order as most car companies do regular facelifts without changing the name of the vehicle. They kept the overall theme of the Roma which is not a bad place to start. All the haters will take issue with my comments. Great. What ever. Overall grade: B+ / A- They continued the Roma execution of reintroducing/maintaining beauty in automotive design which IMO has been MIA for so long. The car is "pretty" like its predecessor. For the most part, it's an entry aimed at first time Ferrari buyers. People who probably have no concept of Ferrari history or its DNA; and they probably don't care. I have to remove my own personal biases as the design is not aimed at me, but it is beautiful in the Aston Martin, Jaguar sense of form/surface development. It borders on what I would term "feminine" and as such It eschews the brutal design sense of Lamborghini and other cars in the Ferrari portfolio. That in and of itself is not a negative, just an observation. I give them kudos for striving for beauty. Every observer will be rewarded with a beautiful car vs the many angry, misshapen abominations polluting our eyeballs on today's highways. I was never a real fan of the Roma front with its body color grille texture, but it was fresh and I appreciated they were trying something new. The Amalfi went in a different direction by hanging that surfboard from the air intake. It's a cleaner resolution than the Roma. Is it better? Worse? Once again, everyone will have their own opinions. The overall theme of the car is once again "traditional beauty". Jerry, you stated that today's buyers opinions were: "It's far too boring for today's audience. They want Transformers styling." Maybe, maybe not. The target market with the cash will decide. I believe they nailed the rear, but the Roma was equally well done IMO. The interior is an improvement, and if they eliminated those hateful haptic controls like those in my 296, hallelujah. It's a tasteful execution of the GT, Touring car vocabulary. Andrew said he preferred the Bently execution, and i'm not sure I can argue against his assertion. I've been an admirer of the Bently GT since its debut years ago. The Ferrari hints at performance where in my eye the Bently screams $$$. No right and wrong answer, different customers, different images. The Bently says to me "I'm older, and have impeccable taste" where the Ferrari says to me, " I'm hip and I appreciate performance along with beauty" Which statement do you want to make as we all know "you are what you drive"
Thank you! "Facelift" was term I was quietly grasping for. In layman's terms: sort of like when the 1962 Impala coupe went to the 1963 Impala coupe to the 1964 Impala coupe. Sometimes the best design was the first try and sometimes the last. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Generally we used to believe the dictum that the first version was usually the best. Not always true but more often than not.
On the new Roma re design, maybe they should have just gone with a regular egg crate grill in the same place. Now it does look like an EV Toyota. The new front light cover is them trying to make the line look the same as the SUV and the new 12, but Ferrari does not need to do that. In fact it makes them look even more generic. The front tongue makes it look like a Disney cartoon. The original Roma designs came from the SP1 and SP2, and of course the Mazda vision show car
And for some other unknown financial reason, the first and last versions of a car design run are generally valued higher than ones in the middle.
For me, some notable exceptions would be '61/'62 GM full size, & '67 C2 Corvette, which got better each time they deleted a scoop! I think it normally come down to periods where excess has become just too great (tri-tones & and fins!) and simplicity is the new .shocking
Dig body-color Roma grille in a pre-merger AMG/1990 Street Nats Pro-Fairground sort of way - and smaller grille openings sleeker than egg crate, which can go a little Sausage dog grin on larger face of more recent models - whereas Amalfi (where current market vacations?) is more Daytona/8Cilindri. So both at least a little cool - facelift a bit more rooted in Ferrari?
For me the sweet spot was in the middle with the 1965 Impala with a 396 big block. Image Unavailable, Please Login No question the rush job to redesign the 1967 Corvette resulted in the cleanest version. The first design for 1963 had too much gingerbread. Image Unavailable, Please Login However the 1968 Corvette for me held true to the 'first is best' with the new Mako Shark look. Image Unavailable, Please Login Each model year could be chosen as a favorite based on the options available for that particular model year but the basic design details got watered down as time passed in many cases.
