News

812 VS Rumors

Discussion in 'FF/GTC4Lusso/F12/812S' started by Frenzisko, Feb 10, 2018.

  1. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Having both for extended times I cant see why anyone would say this. It is unfounded. There is ZERO vibration in the 720s. ZERO
     
  2. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Please explain your experience and the differences in what Ferrai is using in F1. This should he entertaining. Mind you I had ownership in a carbon fiber plant in Manchester England so before you go to far please think about your response. We specifically focused on FRPs for structural reinforcement. I learned quite a bit about the various uses, materials and process. I'm no expert but I have a fair amount of experience. Pleae fill us in on your technical background and experience, perhaps you know more than me.



    Yes there is a savings in manufacturing in higher quantities but the rest of what you are claiming is off base. Please explain why the carbon McLaren is using is inferior.
     
  3. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Like what? The properties of metal have some advantages such as bending before breaking but otherwise carbon with the appropriate resins for a given application are ideal. I'm sure there are other differences, pros and cons each way but in general lighter, stronger is ideal in motorsport which is why carbon is widely used. Cost is generally the biggest inhibitor.
     
  4. j09333

    j09333 Formula Junior
    Silver Subscribed

    May 7, 2004
    647
    Had both. Sold M. Not just because of vibration but with many other reasons. Maybe they improved with 720s.

    Oh and lambo... they should learn from porsche how to setup with carbon body. It vibrates alot.


    Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
     
    Igor Ound likes this.
  5. Ferrari 308 Vetro

    Ferrari 308 Vetro F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed

    Nov 12, 2012
    4,389
    Austria
    Guys please, back to the 812 VS Rumors?
     
    Caeruleus11, Wheels1 and KenU like this.
  6. REALZEUS

    REALZEUS F1 Veteran

    Feb 16, 2011
    5,780
    Bournemouth, UK
    Aluminium allows for lower-narrower sills, less road noise-vibrations and easier repair in case of an accident. These are not serious considerations when it comes to race cars or hypercars, but they are in more "everyday" cars.

    Regarding CF, since you owned such a factory, surely you must know that there are different methods of making the thing, which results in different properties, strength/weight and cost.
     
  7. jumpinjohn

    jumpinjohn Formula 3
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 22, 2013
    2,493
    Texas
    Full Name:
    John
    No way!

    We are going down the same road where the big deal is Carbon Fiber vs those who don’t think Carbon fiber is the big deal. Some people think CF is what makes the car “super” and others think it is marketing. Then it becomes increasingly ridiculous because one is an expert on this and the other is an expert in that.

    It is both amusing and exasperating to me. Been done so many times. Perhaps there should be a thread dedicated to the debate: “This car is awesome because it is CF tub and that car sucks b/c it is not!”



    Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
     
    Caeruleus11 likes this.
  8. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East

    41 pages and hardly any info so perhaps we are getting bored? :)
     
  9. jumpinjohn

    jumpinjohn Formula 3
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 22, 2013
    2,493
    Texas
    Full Name:
    John
    Hahaha!

    Boredom is the Devil’s workshop?

    Happy Thanksgiving!!


    Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
     
    of2worlds and Gh21631 like this.
  10. Scraggy

    Scraggy Formula 3
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 2, 2012
    1,813
    England
    Full Name:
    Scraggy
    Am in Maranello tonight (Montana) at Atelier tomorrow - feeling Grigio Ferro again ! Will fish re 812 VS.
     
    TSOYBELIS, of2worlds, Gh21631 and 2 others like this.
  11. Caeruleus11

    Caeruleus11 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jun 11, 2013
    9,172
    #1011 Caeruleus11, Nov 28, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2019
    Well, I don't think I have your level of knowledge, so actually, I would like to know what you think about all this. I find it fascinating!

    As I wrote, this is all what I think is the case, based upon what I've read over the years.

    Supposedly the McLaren process is much closer to what BMW is using for their CFRP in their i3 and i8 cars than to what Ferrari uses in their hypercars, which is essentially what they use for F1. I always wondered why the McLaren cars weren't even lighter. And along these lines, if McLaren would use the F1 process, then their cars would be lighter, and could feature lower sills. Thus, by comparison, the process they are using you could call inferior when it comes to the structure per unit of mass than what they could do. Clearly, they have commercial reasons for charting their course.

    It just strikes me as a bit silly when people hold up one method of construction, because I think you can find pros and cons with either method (McLaren CF v Ferrari aluminum). And I think its worth noting that, unless Is am wrong (which is always possible!) the Ferrari hypercars do use a superior CF construction method than their McLaren counterparts.

    As an aside, I think your comment "this should be entertaining" to be very capable of being taken the wrong way, as a snide comment. Why make it when you have such an expertise? It seems unnecessary.

    PS apologies to the members for going OT.
     
    uhn2000, stavura, Doug23 and 2 others like this.
  12. Solid State

    Solid State F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed Owner

    Feb 4, 2014
    4,314
    Full Name:
    Ndugu Umbo
    Ferrari does create the VS version along side the production unit for new models. You can see that in the mules. If they were to offer a VS at the same time as the production unit it would be a major fail. Many or even most of the buyers of new Ferraris would easily pay the extra for the VS on the outset. No one would but the new production cars as there would be no path to the ones that don't depreciate as bad or at least as quickly.

    As a result, I think Ferrari will start to offer performance upgrades and this could doom them. The upgraded version will drive down the resale of the non-upgraded cars even worse than the new car depreciation on the 812 forward. Definitely a touch situation. The only temporary way out now is to bring back the limited numbered production cars. With prices and production levels so high it would bring back the rarity that propped up the asking price to begin with. Lucca keeps getting proven right. Going public with dramatic production and model increases no bueno.
     
    ewright and Bundy like this.
  13. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    I am not so sure, I think some people prefer the softer models that are better every day cars. For example the std 911 vs. the GT3 or RS versions. The latter come later in the cycle but available during the model run vs. the tail end.

    Pricing is all relative and the depreciation is coming regardless, the percentage of depreciation to each model type will likely be about the same unless the VS is limited which likely wont be the case. Looking ahead, I am thinking the more limited cars from Ferrari are going to be well over the current price point of the Pista. These might be the numbered versions reserved for their best customers who are willing to spend close 7 figures. Time will tell but certainly we can agree that things are changing. Sometimes change is good.
     
  14. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    As I pointed out I have fair amount of experience but I had experts that I leaned on, we focused on applications for sporting goods such as compound bows and structural (concrete and steel) reinforcement. Super interesting business and lots of fun for a while. The materials used vary by the type of weave, resins, and process. Costs are generally high because it is very much a manual process unless you go compressed which is NOT what McLaren is doing. If you are interested there is a lot of info online about the different materials and process. The "system" that is used for a given application is usually designed and tested over some period of time to achieve certain spec's. Does a road car need to meet the same specs as an F1 car? Probably not but the differences are likely minimal in the materials. Also in racing they don't have to withstand crash testing or certain safety requirements like road cars. I wont pretend to know too much about this though.

    Also, someone made reference to aluminum allowing for lower, narrow sills which I dont agree with when you consider carbon has 10x the tensile strength of steel. If hit broadside metal will bend before breaking, carbon will shatter so maybe this has something to do with it. I have no insight into how or why McLaren designed their monocoques but I bet there is more to it than what is being claimed here.

    Agreed, pros and cons to each as I also stated. From a cost standpoint the raw materials used to create carbon parts aren't that expensive and neither are the resins so to assume the materials used for one road car are better than another is presumptive. The real costs are in the time to develop the part, build the moulds and then build the product. Since this is done by hand there are high labor costs. I would imagine that for F1 the wind tunnel and other testing is pretty darn extensive and they are making and remaking parts which is where it can get very costly.

    My apologies, I didnt intend to offend though I do admit it gets a bit disconcerting when people make claims as facts without any firsthand knowledge. I am sure you can appreciate this as well.
     
    Caeruleus11 and Tu160bomber like this.
  15. mthompson2376

    mthompson2376 Karting

    Feb 2, 2017
    112
    North East England
    Full Name:
    Mark Thompson
    For the record, Ignoring cost point, as a structural Engineer, my personal view is CF is better, but there are trades...less flexibility means you must design in extra strength (increase thickness) to ensure it does not flex beyond its yield stress, or it will shatter...so by design it must be made thicker and stronger to compensate, that’s said when you do that, it is still lighter by 10-20% which is why F1 love it, the chassis isn’t the only component on a car though....and as 1% margin in F1 can cost in excess of £100m to achieve, F1 make everything out of it chasing any marginal gain they can at any cost...which means they reduce almost the whole weight of the car by these margins....

    In the real world, cost is a factor, and typically only the tubs are made of CF + other easy to manufacture components, and therefore whilst there is a weight saving it is not nearly as significant as F1, but we do see much more CF components and titanium bolts etc. On the Hypercars starting at £1m.

    The biggest thing to consider....and Ferrari was one of the first to introduce CF onto road cars, so has that long experience of CF....and ask why didn’t they jump first.....that long experience has thrown in a spanner in the works....CF can go ‘spongy’ over time, ask an owner of an F40 that has had to replace the doors at £13k each before labour and paint, or an owner of a historic 80’s or 90’s F1 car that is into mega bills ordering customised a replacement CF chassis, maybe that’s why McLarens process isn’t exactly the same as F1, how long will it last, how much will a chassis swap cost on a Mac that is worth £50 - 75k in 15 years, it potentially (potentially) pretty much writes the cars off after 15 years. Maybe on a rare hypercar, that will always be worth more than £1m then this argument is dismissed, but not on the standard production cars.

    Sometimes F1 tech doesn’t translate for good reasons....not least F1 cars only need to work for 2hrs, personally I think the Pista is about the right blend of CF and Al at this time.....a safe bet...in the real world and every bit as fast on normal bumpy roads, some flex is actually better on bumpy roads....

    Maybe Ferrari and Porsche are still holding back until further research and time proves new methods will last the test of time, we know Aluminium and Steel will last....and Ferrari is building cars to last....


    Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app
     
    Goblin, stavura, Igor Ound and 12 others like this.
  16. Caeruleus11

    Caeruleus11 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jun 11, 2013
    9,172
    @Gh21631 and @mthompson2376 Thank you both for sharing your knowledge with us. It is very fascinating, though we have to admit we've gone too far OT. There are so many people on F-Chat with a lot of experience and knowledge so it is really a special place to exchange ideas and opinions. Yes of course, none of us likes when someone makes a very broad statement not based on facts, I think we come at these things from which ever side we are most familiar with.

    To come back to 812 VS- I'm pretty sure if they make it, it will be on the aluminum frame/chassis - happy holidays to all :)
     
  17. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Likely the bumpers, hood and aero bits will all be carbon but nothing structural. It would cost way too much money to develop a whole new chassis. This `$600K car would be well over $1m. Lets see what Ferrari does with the all new platforms down the road.
     
    Caeruleus11 likes this.
  18. of2worlds

    of2worlds F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 6, 2004
    13,777
    ON
    Full Name:
    CH
    We have already seen the future platform; with Portofino, SF90 Stradale, Roma and next Little Brother. The same platform all these cars share is in aluminum.
    The engineer makes a very salient point about how cf ages vs aluminum. Setting aside for a minute the physical properties of cf vs aluminum some manufacturers choose one material for their manufacturing use as a way to differentiate themselves from the competition. This was a conscious choice by Lamborghini for example who teamed up with Boeing to utilize that companies advanced cf technology experience.
    Conversely the technology today utilizes aluminum with different strength properties based on the load requirements engineered into an aluminum platform. Also the manner in which various metal stampings are bonded together can have an effect on how rigid the platform is. Smart engineering can minimize the perceived advantage of a glamorous product like CF...
     
    stavura, Roland1688, Bundy and 2 others like this.
  19. of2worlds

    of2worlds F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 6, 2004
    13,777
    ON
    Full Name:
    CH
    How hard is your carbon? With all the interest in carbon fibre and whose is better and why is it being used; here are some comments on the last street Ferrari to get a CF tub and how it stacks up against the competition >
    So that would be the LaFerrari’s tub. Ferrari reckons aluminium is the right stuff elsewhere in its range, but this far up the food chain it’s got to be carbon fibre. Not just any old carbon fibre, though, and certainly not the easier-to-produce resin transfer moulding (RTM) type or pre-preg stuff used by its rivals. No, LaFerrari uses four different types of carbon fibre, all labour-intensively hand-laminated before being cured in the GES F1 autoclave. The main bit of the chassis is T800 carbon, strengthened with a uni-directional adhesive called T800UD. The structural bits below that use another type of carbon fibre, which has extra high tensile strength. The doors are made of T1000 carbon fibre, which has phenomenal impact-absorbing properties, and is used in the nose-cone of Ferrari’s F1 cars. The suspension pick-ups are part of the tub’s structure, as are the seats.
    As Carmelo Lo Faro, a Vice President at Cytec Engineered Materials, Ferrari’s partner in this carbon fibre adventure, stated, the aim is to use the right sort of material, in the right thickness, according to its location in the chassis and performance requirements. ‘We are talking about a technology that is beyond what you currently find in commercial aerospace, and is used only in the latest fighter jets. In fact, the new Ferrari features a type of carbon fibre that is used in the nuclear industry to manufacture the centrifuges that uranium is enriched in.’
    With that technological basis your street SF90 is in the aluminum use category for it's platform.
    So there are definite benefits to carbon fibre. However they come at a level of expense when done correctly for maximum advantage that their use is not suitable for regular production model volumes.
     
  20. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    T800 uni directional carbon is common place. I am surprised they haven't weaved in Aramid or Kevlar like Pagani. Material cost is a bit more but same process. Hand laid, vacuum bagged carbon parts is std. I am sure there are some real differentiators but a lot of this is marketing fluff. The comment about expense is in line with what I pointed out. Cost is always a driving factor especially at scale. Something interesting to point out is that there are a number of boat builders that will build their hulls with carbon and Kevlar. They will actually vacuum bag the entire hull. Pretty neat to see.
     
    of2worlds and Caeruleus11 like this.
  21. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Are the only platforms coming the ones you reference above? Is the SF90 the replacement for the F8 or will that be the little brother? What about the 812 replacement? In regards to the longevity of the materials they both have their pros and cons. For example carbon is actually used to reinforce concrete for bridges even in salt water so this will tell you something. Please note I am not saying one is better than another all of the time, each material has its place. In general carbon is considered the high performance, high dollar solution which is why you only see it in motorsports or high end autos. Can you imagine shaving 300-500lbs from an 812? ~800Hp and ~3300lbs would be pretty insane - 720 territory but front engine V12 monster.
     
  22. REALZEUS

    REALZEUS F1 Veteran

    Feb 16, 2011
    5,780
    Bournemouth, UK
    No! Case in point, the Monza. Granted, the construction is the same, but the whole bodywork is made in CF, plus it has no roof and windscreen. Grand total gain against a regular 812...? 10 kilogrammes!!!
     
    mthompson2376 and of2worlds like this.
  23. of2worlds

    of2worlds F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 6, 2004
    13,777
    ON
    Full Name:
    CH
    Yes and no regarding the platforms as the SUV is also done in aluminum to. The LaFerrari replacement is still over the horizon so not sure what it will be based on. There is a speculated mid engine V12 model which will also likely be aluminum to.
    SF90 Stradale is the new 'flagship' in the way that the Testarossa once was in the 80's. The so called 'Little Brother' is the replacement for the F8. The new Ferrari seems to now be able to build more kinds of models; which was the purpose of going with the modular aluminum platform program.
     
    Doug23, Gh21631 and KenU like this.
  24. REALZEUS

    REALZEUS F1 Veteran

    Feb 16, 2011
    5,780
    Bournemouth, UK
    The hypercars are always based on a CF monocoque.
     
    of2worlds likes this.
  25. Gh21631

    Gh21631 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 24, 2011
    4,023
    East
    Why do you think that is?
     

Share This Page