SC 40 One Off

Disagree. This cars styling has little to do with downforce. A great amount of aero can be unseen and completed on the underside of a car. E.G. current F1, remember what porpoising is ??

 

Yea but to have maximum aero you need a large flat surface too, which is seemingly why some many of these cars have that look.

 

Or, just bland/untalented designers, and the committees that "refine" them.

 

In part that too!

 

why has ferrari gone away from traditional curvaceous beautiful style towards this angular, industrial, brutalist, look? this is more in the lambo tradition than ferrari. between this new style direction and f1 disappointments, its becoming hard to stay a tifosi. thanks goodness for lemans program.

 

F1 cars are aero cars. These street legal cars are not. Their aero is low.

 

Agreed but when you look at the claimed aero numbers for the F80 and 849 it seems aero targets have dictated particular styling.

 

They haven’t and Ferrari designers have stated that they can do all the aero they need without wings and using mostly underbody aero. This car and the new TR etc are mostly aesthetics only.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I dont agree with this, Ferraris designs are way more rounded than the angular designs of the 1980s. All you have to do is look at the 360.

 

The car pictured above looks like the Vector, that failure from many years ago.

 

I might have already said this, I could care less about whatever Ferrari comes out with now . I do like the F8 , 488 , 458 .

 

This statement is correct beyond a reasonable doubt , by a million astronomical units .

 

360 was designed 25 years ago so yes it has the rounded ethos of traditional Ferraris. My point is that this generation Ferrari has abandoned that traditional style