Hey Ferrari....Use More Cubic Inches!!!!

With Ferrari being the worldwide leader of hp/litre, why don't they just kick up their eight cylinder motors up to 5+ litres?? That way they would be able to compete on the world stage with their closest competitors. I like to say that the new Lambo isn't the same class car (due to displacement) but if that car goes flying past me on the track, that's not what I'm thinking. I'm thinking 'that car just flew past me'. Not cool.

Why doesn't Ferrari use larger motors for their eight cylinder cars??

 

To me, the appeal of Ferraris are small dispalacement engines that rev high. That keeps weight down and makes for better handling. American muscle is big engines that rev low and don't handle worth crap. Big engines that rev high is Lamborghini and they handle as bad as American muscle (sorry Allan).

Ken

 

I'm sorry...I should have mentioned 'normally aspirated', when talking about their leadership role in hp/litre. Please take this into account when coming up with your response.

 

IMHO Ferrari is getting too cozy and comfy in their initial 8 and 12 2-seater offerings. Leave the major comfort for whatever 4-seater Ferrari and in their Maserati line that is specifically aimed for comfort.

Allow the Ferrari branded 2-seater 8 and 12 cylinder cars to be LIGHT and have virtually ZERO extra weight. Yes, it is hard to precisely define what is "extra" and "not necessary". The Stradale should be a good guide here. Small, high rev engine and ultra-light weight allow for true performance IMHO.

If i wanted something that performed like a Hummer or was as comfortable as a Cadillac...

Enjoy the Drive,

Steven R. Rochlin

 

Yes, that's what Lotus is all about. My Europa weighs only 1550 pounds (in theory) and it's reasonably comfortable. Power windows, okay looking interior if small and spartan. It has very little weight in the backbone chassis and a fiberglass body, but the amazing aspect of the car is how one part does more than one function. The more I've torn into it, the more amazed I am by the engineering shortcuts to keep it light.

The downside is reliability. I'll be the first to say that a Ferrari is WAY more reliable because they engineer some redundency into it. This adds weight though. So you can use titanium and carbon fiber, but now you're adding cost. You can't have everything....there's a trade off. My car is at one end of the scale, an Aston Martin is at the other (high weight, high comfort).

It would be great for Ferrari to make a 300 HP, mid engine 8 cylindar car at 2.5 liters or less, and make it weigh no more than 2000 pounds. And PLEASE make it look cool!

 

I agree... Ferrari should continue to build the sportscars with comparable HP, but better-by-being-lighter. After Ferrari, the next most appealing cars to me are Lotus (the Elise, in particular)... they focus on really, really light... but a bit HP deficient... and a bit "sophistication" deficient. Other than Ferrari and Lotus and Mazda, most marques put fairly low priority on weight when making compromises.

If anything, I think Ferrari needs to put a bit *more* focus on light weight... I'd like to see every model shaved by 150 pounds... that would make the weight difference between it and its competitors very differentiating.

However, I don't think that means going "Stradale" in all cases... many people will prefer carpets, sound insulation, creature comforts, etc. I'd just like to see them innovate first and foremost on weight reduction.

JMHO.

 

As much as I hate to side with Allan, the Gallardo and Murci definitely do not handle "as bad as American muscle". On the contrary, they are 2 of the best handling cars produced by any manufacturer.

To comment on this topic, I voted for more cubic inches. This will provide more HP, but more importantly, more torque. Furthermore, if done properly, it shouldn't impact weight in any significant fashion. If Ferrari is to compete effectively with companies that are producing high-HP exotics, they absolutely need to add cubic inches. And if Ferrari wants to annihilate the competition, produce a mid-engine 12 cylinder Spider. It would be in a class of it's own.

 

actually, honda has this title. The S2000 has 120 hp/liter, at least through the '03 models they do. for 04 they upped displacement to find more torque.

 

No !

6.0 is already enough.

High revving engines are what make Ferrari stand appart.

Edit : Didnt see it was for the V8 F CARS. Well Ferrari usually add more CU every nnew car.

 

But why not storke the 3.6 liter out to 4 liters or bigger? wieght will be the same. Revs might have to be dropped, but so what? you wont need to rev as high to find the power and torque. with the lower revs comes more reliability. IMO ferrari is stupid for keeping their engines small and high revving. The street is not a formula one racetrack. Stuff tht works in F1 doesnt always carry over to the street.

 

F has made 7 liter high reving engines. The 7 liter in my Ford revs to 7500. 5 liter Chevy motors rev to 9,000+. Bring it on!
Drop the Enzo engine into a 360!

 

Ferrari is known for their low displacement high reving engines. A transition to large displacement engines with low end torque would be a complete brand killer. Torquey engines are American muscle cars (now German too) and are for heavier cars that need to move a lot of weight off the line. AS stated above, Ferrari should stick with the ligh weight, high reving engine configuration. Ferrari is set apart more for their engine noise then anything else IMHO. While I love the sonud of a big block with an overlapping cam, this does not fit in a F car.

 

Light weight?
My TR was a truck.
The 360 CS weighs 1500lbs more than my P4.
Street legal supercars today aren't getting down to 1800 lbs.
They need Ft/lbs.

 

But why not have light weight and power? Ferrari has such a hard on for high revving engines, and they cant even get them right. they should call up honda for advice on how to do it properly. Service every 15k miles? come on, give me a break. I think we are now at the time where people arent going to bend over backwards just to own a ferrari since there are alternatives which make more sense to own. Im sure many of you will argue "you buy a ferrari with your heart not with your mind". that is almost as stupid as ferrari sticking with small engines with zero torque. Torque is what makes cars feel fun to drive, period. If you can get off on just the sound of the engine, rather than how much it shoves you into the seat, then your priorities might be off. What race do you know is won by the sound of the cars engine?

 

Ferrari competes against itself.
Everybody else competes against Ferrari.

 

I know Honda has not only the Highest output per liter, but don't they run a high revving engine with more reliability? We have a few S2000 fans here? How do they do it? I know you can tune a lot out of those cars.

Also saving weight. Honda got as much from their 6 cylinder as Ferrari got from the 8. That's got to save some weight?

Might not be a Ferrari, but it just shows the engineering is possible.

 

7 liter to 7500 RPMS??? What do you have, a GT40??

Ken

 

That's why they are going to run the Enzo under the Maserati name. Can't break the myth. Ferrari works very hard not to compete against anyone but Ferrari. Challenge series was another good way to keep their street cars from having to run against other makes.

Lets hope the Olive Garden's 550 success changes this. Its been dull not seeing Ferrari street cars run against the others.

 

i think that its important to retain marque identity. if everyone made their engines with the same philosophy, then everything would blend together and there would be no differences between companies.
ferrari uses small disp. high reving engines, while american companies use large displacement torquey engines... both accomplish the same task of making fast cars.

but in any case, it looks like they are moving to a larger displacement engine for the 360 replacement, about 4.2L is the rumor. this engine should create a decent upgrade in torque over the 3.6L they are using now.

 

Why should Ferrari build bigger displacement V8's when they offer the 550/575 and the 456 with big V12's already?? They already have a relatively complete model range for most high end sports car enthusiasts.. Building a 5 litre V8 neither makes marketing sense when you already have 5.5 litre V12's in the lineup nor is Ferrari trying to compete with the likes of Corvettes, Ford GT40's, and other american muscle with this kind of displacement in their V8's...

 

I don't agree with the statement that a larger motor will weigh all that much more, or not be able to rev as high. And we're talking about a 5 litre motor, not an 8.1 litre motor. As far as saving weight...that would be nice as well...but not exactly what I'm trying to address.

 

But why not storke the 3.6 liter out to 4 liters or bigger? wieght will be the same.

NO, it won't. The pistons will be bigger or the stroke will be longer, or both. Ferrari in the 1950's had a 12 cylindar engine that was 3.0 liters. Think about that. You have 12 tiny pistons that rev up to high RPMs in no time flat. With a short stroke, this gets you in the power band right away, not to mention an incredable sound! Moving weight was at a minimum in these engines.

Revs might have to be dropped, but so what?

See above.

you wont need to rev as high to find the power and torque.

That's a Lamborghini, which is a different animal than what Ferrari is. A Ferrari gets the HP in the upper rev band and the fun for the driver is to keep it there. A Ferrari is a DRIVERS car, at least it ised to be! These days they're much more like a Lexus.



with the lower revs comes more reliability.

Not true. Higher revs mean more frequent tune ups, overhauls, etc. but that doesn't mean they are fragile. Hondas are reliable not just because they rev low; in fact the 2000 revs to 8000?

IMO ferrari is stupid for keeping their engines small and high revving.

Then buy something else. That's the Ferrari trademark.

The street is not a formula one racetrack.

No, but Ferrari owners like a taste of what a racecar is. So do Lotus owners. I'm not sure about Porsche owners but they have different requirements for their cars than we do.


Stuff tht works in F1 doesnt always carry over to the street.

Correct. That's why street cars don't rev to 18,000 RPMs. There IS a compromise and Ferrari tries to meet it by giving the driver something to play with.

 

MK-IV