"Ambitions no lower than to out-Enzo Ferrari"

It's an interesting car. I like it. Might wind up as a Dodge if it goes to production. Nothing wrong with trying to outdo the benchmark.

 

Can you "out-Enzo Ferrari"? It may have more HP, go faster (who cares over 200 MPH?), and have more goodies, but it will not be a Ferrari.

A corvette is a "better" car then my 328, but is there really a choice? Whould you rather have a DODGE Viper or a FERRARI 550?

Ferrari is mystique, history, racing, Italian, status, unique. You can't build those things into a car. The Mclaren F1 was the "best" supercar ever built, but it doesn't have the passion of a Ferrari.

Anyone heard of ChryslerChat.com?

 

Wow. But who's going to pay that kind of money for a Chrysler? Know what I mean?

 

the same kind of people who pay that kind of money for vipers, corvettes, and such things as the replica kit car F40 shown on this site lately... some people are just diehard fans of a certain brand of car, or perhaps they just really like the kind of performance a certain car has. some will look past the brand and see what the car really has to offer. hell, lamborghini started out as a tractor company if it runs with the same type of "spirit" as a viper, i would think it would sell. personal experience with a warmed over viper, the car scares the hell outta me. I love it. leaves you shaky, sorta like you just got off a carnival ride. i think that there will be buyers if they decide to sell it.

 

Ill take the Viper and the extra $200,000 please! But then again, I am biased!

There are HUNDREDS of Mopar related websites and web boards.

Personally, I am partial to turbododge.com which mainly talks about the mid 80's to early 90's force inducted Mopars.

 

This car is too ugly. Ugh . I wonder what the quality will be like ...considering they get it wrong on the Mercedes ..cant imagine on a Chrysler...

 

not bad

maybe it will be better than the Enzo....but i think it's a really hard thing to do....

they says this just to make us talknig about that car....it's marketing....

 

the enzo has already been out done ; i.e., carrera GT.

 

Do you have any back up ? Any face to face tests ? I dont. Havent seen any , just read that Walter Rohrl said the CGT was 1 sec faster than the Enzo around the ring ..but then his paycheck comes from Stuttgart.

 

Can't disagree with you. We can't say what's faster without testing both....

they are both great cars....I obviously prefer the Enzo....

 

i think the cGT is a better, overall, pkg than the enzo; i.e., no $60/qt oil, a carbon fiber tub that wont rot, ceramic 6 inch clutch w/ no flywheel (imagine the throttle response alone!!! no flywheel!! built off the gt1 race car; etc etc. I'm not arguing numbers at all , i don't care about 0-60, 0-140 etc., and even if the cGT is 1sec faster around the ring, i don't care about that either. i think there was more care taken with the cGT, more ingenuity, and, underneath it all, it still has it's history staring you in the face; the shifter up high and in the middle , just like the 917!!! like i've said before, the cGT is the closest we've come to building the perfect car -- it think it'll even win over a lot of the mclaren f1 fans.i think the enzo is beautiful, but something about the cGT captivates me me like no other car i've come across. (it also happens to be 220k less than it's nearest rival).

 

Even my wife (who is not really into cars) rolled her eyes at this one. Her response to it was "Yeah so? Who is going to pony up that kind of money for a Chrysler when they could have a Ferrari or Porsche?" I have to agree. With as much trouble as their company is in right now, I would think they would pour all of their engineering into building cars that will carry the company. A supercar is nice, but it won't save the company. It certainly won't turn my opinion of them around to the point where I say "Gee, that minivan is starting to look like a good deal. After all, it must be related to that supercar!"

 

they didnt say they were gonna build it for sure. I honestly don't think they will...nobody is paying 200K for this, to go to a chrysler dealer for service

 

you read my mind as i agree 100%

 

Wow. For the first time I am going to chastize some of the members of this board -- especially "Mule", who is practicing some of the most hideous brand snobbery I have seen on these boards to date. Shame on you.

I am a huge Ferrari fan, and always will be -- but if Chrysler really got their act together and hired the right people to make the right parts, the car could easily be bigger, badder, and faster than an Enzo.

As it stands we know this car has an 850hp Mercedes-AMG engine and the biggest engine cooling system of any supercar. (both stated in the article). Bernhard goes on to describe the development process for the car, and it seems as if they really know what they are doing -- building the car from inside to out. Maybe some of you are forgetting that Bernhard himself managed AMG for years...he isn't exactly unaccustomed to building fast cars.

I have become acutely aware by reading threads such as this that certain members of this forum need to grow up and become more comfortable/self confident in their investments (i.e. cars). I know it might be a hard concept to grasp, but just because you have a Ferrari doesn't mean there aren't nicer cars available in any respect. So what if Chrysler makes a faster car than Ferrari? If it has none of the same character or characteristics of a typical Chrysler, then what's with the shallow and ill-concieved insults? The car is obviously going to have an awesome sounding engine and exhaust -- AMG doesn't screw around. So then why are you being an utter jerk and saying things like "oh, it's a XXXX...I don't think so." Give it a chance, stop trying to be so defensive! You don't even know what kind of times it turns, or how it handles! You are making uneducated and idiotic inferences based on your own belligerence.

Again, this is not a queue for someone to rattle off a couple of paragraphs about "the spirit of Ferrari" or the "feel of the car". Heaven forbid some other company should make a car that is better than an f-car in every respect. No one here should speak on this account until there are real written driver reviews of the car that is being judged. Otherwise, you are openly admitting you have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

My 2¢...

 

It's hideous and the entire idea of Chrysler or MB out-Enzoing Ferrari is borderline insanity. They should stick with their collaboration with someone who knows F-1-- McLaren.

Besides, VW has already outgunned everyone with the slightly less hideous new, 1000HP, quad-turbo Bugatti. It's equally absurd.

Why is Chrysler wasting so much time and money on a wet dream, when they and their suppliers can't figure out how to make a transmission for a minivan that lasts for 100,000 miles? When their market share and profitability, outside of trucks, is being devoured by everyone? Perhaps if they planned to build a sports car line from this all the way down, so that the lessons and platforms could be used vertically and laterally, a la BMW, Honda, Toyota, Aston and Ferrari.

Moreover, why would MB trample on it's own feet, i.e. the SLR? Audi is about to do the same with its LeMans trampling on the Gallardo and possibly even the Murci? Do these manufacturers truly think there is that much of a demand for $300,000+ autos? I'll asssume they have access to market research that I do not.

Otherwise, this entire episode is like a SNL skit. Were it not so ugly it might not be such a ridiculous idea.

 

Also....there is no way the price will be anywhere near 200,000 if Chrysler wants to replicate build quality even close to an Enzo -- unless, of course, they plan on selling huge quantities.

My guess is that they will sell a few thousand at most and that the car will cost somewhere around (or a bit north of) 300,000.

 

Ah, yet another fine example of brand snobbery.

Why are you shooting this down when it isn't even a finished product? Are you really that narrow minded?

 

Since someone mentioned MB, I thought this caption to be riveting:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Richard,
Maybe not brand snobbery, but the reason I bought a Ferrari was for the tangible and intangible qualities. Jaguar, Bentley, Aston Martin, Maserati all possess those intangibles. Even Ford has international racing heritage. (Chrysler may too, but I don't know about it). For other than basic transportation, I want something more than the car, I want to wear a Ferrari shirt, follow an F1 team, go to Italy and see the factory, learn about the history of Enzo Ferrari. To me, Chrysler does not have those. I just dont get fired up over Chrysler.

Chrysler can build great cars and will continue to do so. I think Chrysler should focus on being the best car, period, which they might achieve. Their work will speak for itself, and someday people will say, "This is going to out-Chrysler the market". I like their new car, but I don't think you should base your objectives on the other guy. When asked if he was the next Greg LaMonde, Lance Armstrong said, "No, I am the first Lance Armstrong."

Brand pride, but if I came across as brand snobbery, you have misread me. There are many cars better than Ferrari (certainly my 328), but as a casual driver who top speeds and track times don't apply to and a limited budget, this time I chose Ferrari. When I can afford more, there will be many brands in my garage.

 

OK I'm convinced. It looks like everyone here says the ENZO is the ride to have. Now where did I put that shoe box with the 650K? I must have hidden it in the trunk of my 62 Vespa scooter.

 

Thanks for the clarification. I still feel like there are quite a few uninformed statements being made, though.

Sort of like how the majority of the populace doesn't realize exactly how affordable some Ferrari models really are.

 

No, all Ferraris cost $200,000, go 200MPH, and the 328 is a 2004 model. At least that is what the people in the SUV's think who paid twice as much as me.

I saw the new Chrysler on CNN today. Looks good, hopefully it will be built and not just a tease.

 

I've said it before:
Ferrari competes against itself.
Everybody else competes against Ferrari.

I like it. There are numerous companies taking the basic Enzo design and treating it as if it were their own. In so doing, this validates Ferrari as the Gold Standard. In Chrysler's case, they're looking at the upsides and downsides as stated in the article;
...this past year has been something like the year of the supercar, with magazines road testing such exotics as the Zonda, Koenigsegg CC, Enzo, Carrera GT and so on. "Every time we read one of these things, I'd find some criticism and call Bernhard up and say, 'Our car isn't going to do that, is it' laughs Creed. [Magazine testers] really wrote our spec book."

Above all else, what's heartening is that it wasn't so long ago that Lee Iacocca took a crumbling company and turned it around with K cars which, ugly as they were, served their purpose. In so doing, helped not only a car company's - but a nation's economy. These designs and his creeds put into action are proof positive that imaginations have been fueled for those who've seen this through to this stage of development:
"If I had to sum up in one word what makes a good manager, I'd say decisiveness. You can use the fanciest computers to gather the numbers, but in the end you have to set a timetable and act."
and
"The speed of the boss is the speed of the team."
Fittingly, the head of the design team's name is Creed.