The CS becomes a $250,000 wall painting compared to the 911 GT3 touring
...hehe, I can see your highly passionate about your choice in the Scud and thats great. They are fantastic cars just as the 458 that followed and the Speciale that followed that... I'm merely pointing out that the decision for many purchasers isn't as clear cut as the one you present. There are many areas of Ferrari ownership experience which aren't all about outright performance stats with things such as residuals, sonics, styling, the way the car makes you feel plus a lot of subjectivity, personality traits creeping in. Indeed the CS is much less polished than the Scud and with its more crude electronics more of a challenge to drive quickly. I'd go so far to say that the Scud does feel more premium, more luxury, quieter cabin, more comfortable, less like a street racer with its switchable driving modes and luxuries like tyre pressure monitors it is much more modern feeling and ofcourse its 20% quicker, so sometimes perhaps even indulging in peoples fantasies of being a racing driver is that what does it on the CS. It really doesn't matter that there are faster Ferrari's than it, its how it makes you "feels" doing its thing, plus a hell of a lot of intangables along the way like the stones clipping the underside of the car (lol). Pretty much everything that follows is quicker... no suprises there then.
The 430Scud is more powerful and faster - given as its more modern and the evolution!!! But I'll have a CS above any any Scud/16m for the reasons stated above (myself and Trev)...or the 458Speciale. Between those two it would be a difficult choice. All personal, no Scud for me, one for someone else...keeps RichardCH and other Scud potential purchasers happy, less competition ahahah! And I couldn't care less if they are faster than me, maybe they get caught quicker than me by the plods racing at the red lights (humour)
I've never driven a Scud, but own a CS. Last week I took my 328GTB on a fast drive down a, rare in my area, country road. I had a ball at 60 to 75 mph. You'd have to be doing at least 100mph to feel what I was feeling in a more modern car. That's the beauty of old analog equipment. You get the same amazing sensations at a fraction of the speed necessary with the newer cars (CS included). I have no desire to explore physics at speeds any higher than a CS is capable of. Besides, you'd need all the electronic nannies Maranello could throw at you to make it out alive on the referenced road.
Oh boy, this looks like a lot of, "My car is faster than yours". I've been a track instructor for 20+ years and (usually) the guys that show up with the latest and greatest, biggest hp cars should really be driving an old Fiat X1/9 until they develop some skills. But many of these guys (in the Ferrari world) have egos as big as an elephant and don't believe they can learn anything new. The CS is the first of the modern "racers for the road", and they hit a home run on looks, balance, performance and more importantly.... experience. I DD'd an F40 in the '90's and the CS is the closest experience to that car. I've instructed during Ferrari track days (which is a bit ridiculous since getting most of these guys away from the valet stand is a battle) and had no problem running away from Scuds. Does that make my car better, nope. All it means is that I've taken the time to improve the variable that sits behind the wheel (and maybe tweaked the set up), rather than select gold jewelry and cologne. ALL of these cars are sufficiently fast enough to do great harm to your license and the scenery (without all the electronic nannies). It's a matter of what you like. The HP wars will continue, but with more and more computers keeping the average guy from plowing through the living room. But as long as there are jewelry stores, valet stands and car shows to brag at, there will be more hp with more computing power to save the owners and the public. If values and speed equated to worth, a 250 GTO would be nothing more than a 300hp old car, that sounds great with no go.
The typical boring and arrogant speeches of an instructor. Drive your Renault Clio RS day by day and be happy with it. For sure enough car for your training rides.
Why all the anger and hate? Maybe not all of this applies to your personal circumstances but it is very common amonst many fast car owners (Ferrari owners are no different) that they haven't spent the requisite time to learn properly how to drive their car with all the electronic aids disabled before moving on to even faster cars yet not actually going any faster. Some don't even understand basics like understeer and oversteer and what impact their irratic driving has on weight distribution. Dino is pointing out very valid points that for most circumstances on most roads a well peddled CS can be as a quick as a Scud driven badly. No arguments in that since I've seen it with my own eyes...
Would someone mind giving me an objective breakdown of why the CS is rawer than the Scud? The only area I am aware of that may be different is engine NVH: the CS has the Challenge engine mounts (harder). £88 per side from Eurospares and can be fitted to the 430. P.S. I am aware it is loud. Exhausts are easy to change to taste so I’m not so interested in this area.
Hello Mark, Suspension, Ride height and Calibrations 1. Suspension calibration is harder. 2. Suspension ecu has less sophisticated electronics control on CS so you feel more NVH. 3. Factory Suspension ride height on CS is lower than on the Scud. Sound deadening and interior quality 4. CS has less sound deadening than Scud 5. CS has very spartan interior which feels more like the 360 Challenge than the Scud's feels like the 430 Challenge, the Scud interior feel more luxurious and refined with nicer door panel addendum such as storage nets, etc. 6. The CS had some race car options that the Scud didn't get such as Lexan side windows which is about as basic as it gets and not very nice on the road! Exhaust Note 5. Exhaust sytem bypasses the backbox on valves so is a lot louder (something which the EU noise regulations caught up by the time the Scud came out). 6. It also sounds quite a bit different due to engine design (see next section) Engine Design 7. The 360's engine had 5 valves per cylinder vs 4 on the F430 series (useful at very high rpm to get the gases out quicker) as its party piece, it also deployed expensive ultra lightweight titanium conrods and a blueprinted engine, all this was junked sadly on the F430 series because the engineers simply used higher capacity to make up the power deficit and based the F430's engine on the common project with Maserati at the time. So sonics some people believe are argueably better on the 360 and in theory its engine should rev freer/quicker (less reciprocal rotating masses), especially if combined with a lighter flywheel. Ofcourse sonics are asbjective but the 360 does wail more at higher rpm than the Scud, that is certain. Electronic Assistance 8. Driving the CS fast feels more knife edged since the older Bosch ABS is very basic and only had EBD (electronic brake force distribution), it even lacks basic ESP so you get it wrong and you will spin, the Scud is much more forgiving so easier to drive, Scud also has digital electronic differential vs the analogue mechanical LSD fitted to the 360, the Scud also has steering angle sensors to allow its ecu to know direction of intended travel vs estimation with the 360. In other words the ability of the CS to get you out of your own self made mess on the road is very much reduced compared to the Scud in its race mode settings. Sure there are more things I've forgotton too...
Great summary I could not have given all these technical points but I completely agree that the totality of all these bits create the unique driving experience of the CS. That is the reason I bought a CS. At the same time, I also helped one of my best friends buy a Scud. We have both driven them on the road and track. The CS feels more raw and on the edge full stop and most people on this and other forums have the same feedback so if someone feels otherwise, they are the outlier. My friend for example would never buy the CS because it feels too much on the edge. I like them both, but the CS is my bag, exactly for its rawness (albeit I still don't like paddles). If I could, I'd have a scud too BTW but sadly I could not part with my 355 and/or my 308 to get one as I like to do my own heal-and-toe and drive with no/or as few electronics as possible. If ever I got some extra cash and another parking space, a scud would be high on the list (although I may be tempted with a 997 GT3 RS instead as its manual) Mark, I have read a lot of your technical posts with a lot of interest and clearly you know your stuff, but you cannot block out how most people "feel" and perceive the CS as being more raw by trying to explain that "this bit is nearly the same as that bit" etc etc I think it is a question of logic trying to suppress feeling.
These kinds of car are all race inspired stripped out for the road variety so if your really enjoy driving they should be your thing. If you enjoy driving the Scud or CS you'll probably also love the Speciale, 675LT, GT3 RS, etc. "style" of cars.. Even if you love your Scud/CS and think the CS/Scud [tick as appropriate] isn't even in the same ballpark when deciding over one vs another , chances are you probably still admire quite a few attributes of the other car. Lets face it these kinds of cars really are very similar since they all come from the same core concept but they all feel quite different. Back to back driving the Scud some may dislike the apparent comparative lack of torque on the CS but if you stop trying to drive it like a Scud (on torque) and keep the engine on the boil, e.g. over 5k you can really begin to enjoy it and its still a lot of fun. The CS drives different enough to the Scud to warrant having both in the stable if funds allow
My biggest issue with the CS is not the lack of torque but rather the gearbox. Its fine for spirited driving, but not pleasant on normal roads and at normal speeds. The scud gearbox on the other hand performs remarkably well in almost all conditions and is unlike anything else at WOT.
The key to the CS box is to manually rev match on downshifts by blipping the throttle while simultaneously pulling the paddle. The gear then falls into place seamlessly just like a manual box. Same goes for the 355. The people that bemoan these early F1 systems aren't doing this "engaging" process and therefore aren't understanding the joy that can be derived from F1.
Trev has the tech aspects of the car's package down that help create the 'experience'. All these cars are about that experience. It really is a matter of personal preference. The CS package puts a smile on MY face and that's all that counts. I love when ego driven folks put down accurate observations made over decades of experience with hundreds of students. That statement made my point. The ego for those folks is usually taken away when they turn off the nannies and are facing the wrong way. I just hope they do it on a track rather than in their neighbor's fence.
Thanks for that. I've added some comments above, but to me it comes down to looks and: CS + Louder and sounds sweeter in standard form + CS has harder engine mounts i.e. more NVH in the cabin - Slower/older F1 tech 430 + Sharper handling (specific rack and settings) + That gearbox - 430 has more evolved electronic systems and E-Diff - may be a negative if driving with them on
Completely agree with that. Especially in traffic and at red lights its archaic to say the least ... but still better that the original 355 and 360 F1's This is the only part that I don't like. On track it is OK and it suits the car but i think F1's suit the newer cars better as newer engines with F1 gearboxes seem to have better matched characteristics. The Scud F1 is Epic and I love it more that the seamless 488. [QUOTE="The key to the CS box is to manually rev match on downshifts by blipping the throttle while simultaneously pulling the paddle. The gear then falls into place seamlessly just like a manual box. Same goes for the 355. The people that bemoan these early F1 systems aren't doing this "engaging" process and therefore aren't understanding the joy that can be derived from F1.[/QUOTE] I need to try this ....
As I said don't buy one if you don't plan to track it cos you will just experience most of the CS Negatives
I need to try this ....[/QUOTE] Definitely give it a try. With some practice, it's a night and day difference and a lot of fun. This can also be done at low speed. Without doing this, the early boxes are clunky. But not, if you do this.
Total BS. I've never had mine on track (although I've done extensive track days in Porsches), and the CS is a ton of fun on country roads, freeway exit ramps, and anywhere else enthusiasts drive with spirit. I'm sure the same can be said of the Scud, and I'd buy one of those too if I wanted more cars, bit to post nonsense like this is ridiculous !
To add. 430 + Those looks! Ok, the CS lines are more balanced but (personally) I think the Scud has a beautifully aggressive stance that sits well with those violent 60ms up-shifts. Also feel it's shape is ageing extremely well and doesn't look dated - always an indication of good design.
WTF do I know, I only owned one for 4 years, but you can be 110% sure that there are more CS owners who upgraded to a SCUD than have gone back, so that kinda speaks for the majority, not your personal thoughts.....
