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

Guys I think you all need to think about your posts before posting a bit more.

What is so small about a 6 litre v12 in the Enzo, 612 and the 5.7 (?) litre v12 in the 575, etc.

Ferrari used to make small efficient engines (yes I am aware that the F360 has a very good hp per cc rating, but the 575 and Enzo can't have surely(?)), now they make big unimpressive ones, ie. the Enzo has 600 something hp out of a 6 litre v12 ... whoopy, I could make any 6 litre engine have that power.

I personally think Ferrari should return to making really highly efficient engines and make them SMALLER, ie. a 2 litre v6 in the F360 replacement and a 3 litre v12 in the rest. Ferraris should not be about easy driving and easy hill starts, and electric windows and air conditioning they should be about involving driving. A small engine that takes more driving skill to get the best out of it is what Ferrari used to be about, and should be about. You should feel some accomplishment getting out of a success drive in a Ferrari. Making more cars IS reducing the driving enjoyment I believe.

Think of how more satisfied Jim is going to feel after a good lap in his P4 compared to a okay lap in an Enzo (while you are talking on the mobile at the same time, or whatever) which just about any d!ckhead driver could accomplish. Same goes with the F1 gear shift ... removing the skill required to master a Ferrari! Is this really what we want. Big lazy engines so even your Mum could accelerate fast, instead of having to execute the perfect launch by matching revs and clutch slipage, etc.

Next they will come out with pushrods, or even a side valve motor ... or maybe even a diesel Ferrari ... ye ha!!!

Pete

 

Pete
You can't go home again. Somethings are gone forever except in the garages of dinosaurs such as us. Ferrari street cars, if they don't want to be smoked by a Ford GT, or comp. $ Lambo need more power. As for AC, power windows, and Cd changers it may not be what you care about but it is what their customers care about and that's how they build them. Even the 360cs has AC. They can't even get the "stripped "
360cs below 3000lbs. A V10 F1 engine has NO relavence to the street. Matt's sugestion IMHO is a good one and the only one that going to happen. I believe we're going to see displacement increase and power windows stay.
Best
Jim

 

Owe well Jim, I definitely will never buy a new Ferrari then. Always thought that would be the case once I had the cash, now I know it for sure.

I agree that driver enjoyment/involvement comes second now. Many will disagree with me on this ... but the best period for the automobile has past, and I intend to stay there (not because I am an old fool ...) but because I do not care how fast the car is, but how much fun I have driving it, and getting the most out of the car and myself. I can see no fun in pulling a lever to change up or down, I can see no fun in having traction control removing the need for excellence with throttle control ... and the same goes for ABS. I do not want to be a passenger to all this technology. Colin Chapman had it right all thoughs years ago with his minimalist Lotus's, and so did Enzo with his you have to learn to drive my cars attitude.

I have been thinking of buying a Ducati for a while, I think it will make a great replacement to a Ferrari, as thankfully you still ride a bike and have to be good at it to get that quick lap time.

Disallusioned
Pete
ps: I read an atticle comparing the F40 to the Enzo and the writer still found the F40 more demanding and thus more rewarding ... I'm not the only one that thinks that we are going backwards, and that new Ferrari owners/customers are poofers for wanting all this crap!

 

No less weight better handleing with better fuel consumption.

 

I fail to see why electric windows have to be heavier than pull. Motors do not have to weigh 100lbs! I know of several ~1 HORSEpower electric motors that could fit on three of my fingers, and don't weigh any more than said fingers.


I've been in an Exige, and it's bloody awesome. Feels like the Ferraris of old. With 190hp, it's near 360 level of performance. Imagine what it'd be like with 350hp, and even another 100lbs or so.

The 1800lb car may not be 'the safest' car on the planet, but it's not particularily dangerous either.

I would love an Exige type car from Ferrari, with all the Ferrari trimmings (gated shifter, attention to detail, cool little touches, oh, and a 2.7litre 180* flat crank V8 that revs to 10,000rpm and HAS THAT SOUND!


James- take the 5 plate 4" carbon clutch, and replace it with a 2 plate 7.5" carbon clutch, and I'll take my chances on the streets of SF with the V10 3 litre that makes nothing below 5grand. It's really not that hard, I drive a standard there all the time, and don't roll back an inch.

 

PSK- drive an Exige or Elise to restore your faith in the future of automobilia. The spirit is not dead, far from it.


I too don't like traction control (AKA the 'fun limiter') but as long as it can be defeated (and wired to come on automatically defeated by me!) I'm fine.

 

of recent relavence, the carrera GT stands out for a number of reasons: 1., carbon monocoque chasis, total weight 220lbs; 2., 5.7l v10 make 600+hp; 3. even though it's a targa, it's stiffer than the 996 gt2/gt3 chassis 4., the "stripped" version hits ~ 2999lbs. by the sum of it's parts, it's the closest we've come to a perfect car. by the way, all the niceties of the modern car aren't really what weight them down, it's all the crash reinforcements/airbags that are mandated by the DOT. (pull apart your door cards, and have a look at just how beefy your side impact beams are, not to mention the frunt bumper supports, etc., etc etc -- when we retire those formalities, we'll once again be allowed a return to "pure motoring.")

 

Artherd
Matt
Pete
Hugh
Matt is right we are on the same page and love the same cars. It's just that that 3 liter V10 does take 5 men 3hours to start and on the street a bespoke enviroment is the way to go on the Cross Bronx during rush hour. The Carrera Gt may be some car. For me the Enzo is a sunday driver/track car as the one I drove was too low and had too much overhang for NY roads.
Best
James

 

I have a dream - unlikely to be realised in my lifetime, but thought I would share it as it is relevant to this thread
21st Century Ferrari Dino
3 litre F1 V10 severely detuned to about 330bhp mounted transversely
As close to 2000 lbs as possible
5 sp manual - no tricks!
No - ABS, Traction control, electric everything
Great wheels, tyres, brakes.
Georgeous body by Pininfarina, evocative of the Dino but current aero.
Would it sell?
You bet your sweet bippy it would!
JMHO
John

 

I'd venture that those decrying Ferrari's apparent inability to compete with Merc/P./Lambo-VW-Audi are barking up the wrong tree entirely. There's really no need to be the fastest anymore; and if we're not going to start using forced induction, then there's no competition anyway.
I know it's important to some of you that you're not left behind by the opposition, but on the street it doesn't mean a thing.

Ferrari are the best. They have been since they began, and the traffic light grand prix has no bearing on the situation whatsoever. Sensation is the key, Gentlemen.

 

This is turning into a great discussion, and yes I think alot of us are on the same page.

I think Castex hit the nail on the head though, ie: Does Ferrari really have to be the fastest. When Enzo made the cars all he was interested in was that the driver **** himself when he hit the throttle (Jim's quote, which I like) ... but he probably wanted his road cars to be the fastest.

In the end this supercar battle is killing what Ferrari stand for. The most important thing about the driving experience of any Ferrari should be total involvement and YOU should have to know what you are doing as a driver. If you cannot drive it properly then get out of the drivers seat and buy something else. Todays Ferraris are made for all drivers types, plus technology has made it possible to have a soft clutch that can handle the high hp, etc.

This means that modern Ferraris are getting closer and closer to the same driving experience as a very fast Toyota Corolla ... er, is that a good thing, surely NO.

Thus Ferrari needs IMO to give buyers the single middle finger and:
1. Ignore the supercar BS about being the fastest kid on the block ... because in the end there is always somebody faster anyway!
2. Stop making pansy cars for all driver types, if the clutch needs to be a ceramic thing to handle a real race, then put one in, don't stop making cars that cannot handle the race track and real races (not just circuit/track play days). If they cannot meet up to driving a Ferrari ... they will go and learn and this will actually increase the demand, ie. I own and can drive a Ferrari thus I must be a good driver. This was Enzo's marketing trick.

I agree with Jim that the car has to have a level of drivability so a F1 engine is impossible, but that does not mean that we have to keep making huge lazy engines. Again driver involvement should come first NOT whether it can beat the latest Ford/Lambo/Porsche ... who fncken cares (only Allan ). Thus a around 3 litre v12 with say 400 hp at 9000 rpm would be great fun ... in as light as possible (due to safety crap) car.

Get rid of all driver aids, that unskill the driver and enable a monkey to drive the car and thus lets relearn the great feeling of mastering a new skill

Now that is a car I would buy and that is a true Ferrari, ie. I need to be one heck of a driver to be able to master the beast. And boy I would love every minute of learning and the satisfaction from executing a perfect late braking drift into a corner with the v12 screaming at perfect revs and traction in the background would make my day. Not pulling on a lever for the computer to change down, while the abs cuts in to fix up the balls up I made with my braking distance, and then the traction control cuts in to again fix a balls up with applying the traction ... wheres the fun in that!

Pete

 

4 liter V12 450hp at 8200 sounds like we're both suck in 1967. That said you're right about a weird thing happening. I recently tried to drive my Maser in the snow. You practically have to have your lawyer contact Italy to figure how to switch off the traction control. I could not get the car to move until I did. For a few hours I was in heaven. blasting up snow covered hills, catching the tail with opposite lock. Now if I could just figure how to shut off the fuc king ABS.
Best
Jim

 

Hmmm, yes I can understand the frustration. Used to have that problem when I used to club race because I raced small engined cars.

A lot of that was solved by entering proper race series and thus you are racing in your class and if your car is right on the limit of the rules and you have the lap record ... then nobody racing in the series should pass you!!!

That is why track days are depressing, because you might be on the track at the same time a F1 car tests (for example).

The other problem is that some cars are fast in different places ... I say block 'em

Pete

 

I guess my 5.5 l should be bigger like the 575M. You are right. Kept it small like a 550 and it will still handle well.

 

Hell no. And larger displacement doesn't mean that you need to lengthen the stroke and lower the redline either. Engines from the 70's have been producing cars with 7000+ rpm redlines that can go 200k miles on a fraction of the cost of a Ferrari V8.

Yes.

At that point there's no reason to buy a Ferrari? Hold on there.

Would you rather have a high revving low displacement unreliable engine powering your exotic...

or,

Would you rather have a high revving big displacement reliable low maintenance engine without drastically increasing the weight?

The point I'm trying to make, along with Jim, is that other manufacturers have been doing it better and some of you are taking that for granted because they are used in non-sports car applications. But what if they were? Its a less far fetched than the concept of a "reliable" Ferrari.

The higher you climb the torque ladder, the harder it is to climb down.

For those who voted for low displacement secure in the faith that this brings high revs, glorious sounds, and high output, good luck to you. May you live happily in your life in search of revs to build torque and may you keep an ever watchful eye in your rear view mirror for me (makes sign of the cross). Amen.

Sunny

 

No problems Sunny, I'm good at watching my mirrors . In the end high torque means less effort required from the driver to keep it humming ... and yes that is addictive, but I want to have to work my guts out to keep the Ferrari singing ...

Pete