California is not really a Ferrari ?

i am not certain where your info comes from, but ferrari is/has built a new assembly building. this new site will replace the current assembly lines and increased production is more than adequately handled in the new facility.

 

The stillborn Coupe replacement wasn't drawn after Maserati was sold back into FIAT?

 

The Alcan facility is located inside the Ferrari facorty and Scaglietti is owned by Ferrari (FIAT?)

Which is beside the point, in the old days frames were built by subcontractors, but to Ferrari drawings.

The Calilfornia is no more a Ferrari than the FIAT Dino Spider, and no more deserves the Ferrari badge on its nose or script on its tail.

 

I have seen Fieros converted that meet all of the above (except the motor only said Ferrari and the price was much cheaper). Still, I have yet to see on on the lawn at Pebble Beach

 

correct me if i am wrong.
but I heard that Ferrari plans to build over 6000 californias per year.
if it is true, then Ferrari steps up for its massproduction.

Man people still discuss whether California remais Ferrari´s image or not.
We should rather wait till the model comes out and is driven.

but one thing is sure:
I do not like the way Ferrari develops and develops.

 

Exactly right and exactly WRONG.

I'm not sure what you mean by "old days" but in 1984, I went to Modena and Marenello with a friend of mine in the car business. He knew a lot of subcontractors in the area and I wanted to see the processes. I went to one relatively small factory in Modena what was cranking out Testarossa "A" arms and subframes. He was completely independent. I walked though the factory and watched them build them myself. There wasn't a "Ferrari" person in sight. On the Autostrada, I passed trucks bringing body shells from Milan heading to the factory. The practice was not uncommon or hidden.

So, would you say the Testarossa is not a Ferrari because the chassis, suspension, and body were not made at a "Ferrari" Factory?

Every car company in the world uses subcontractors and even parts from competitors at times. Here's what's important

Who engineered the engine? Ferrari
Who engineered the car? Ferrari
Who makes the engines? Ferrari
Who assembles and paints the car, makes the interior, tests it, and makes the standards of what is acceptable? Ferrari
Who sells and services the car? Ferrari

Now, let's look at the Fiat Dino spider (one of my all time favs by the way)

Who engineered the engine? Ferrari
Who engineered the car? Fiat
Who made the engines? Fiat
Who assembled and painted the car, made the interior, tested it, and made the standards of what is acceptable? Fiat.
Who sold and serviced the cars? Fiat

So, the California is no different than a Fiat Dino Spider? Sorry, not in my book.

I listened to the arguments like this, you couldn't call a Ford a Ford. Why not call a Rolls a BMW, a Bentley a VW, a Jaguar a Ford/Tata, or an Lamborghini an Audi? Here's one for you... Is a Pantera a Ford or a DeTomaso? It's no secret that it was designed by Ford, engineered by Ford, used a Ford engine, and sold through Ford (Lincoln) dealers. So, is it no different than an Pinto or Mustang made and sold at the same time? Them's fightin' words to any Pantera owner I can tell you.

Compared to a lot of other "exotic" cars, Ferrari makes, assembles, engineers, and designs more parts in it's cars than any other. If you want to argue that this car is not for you, fine. But, the argument that it's not a "true Ferrari" is not valid for disliking this car.

 

Pre-FIAT, works for me.

Nope. Didn't even say that, at all. I have said it's a lesser Ferrari because the styling so clearly borrows from worst in the Japanese idioms of its day.

Indeed, all of that is crucial, and inapplicable to the California.

Ferrari, at the end there.

FIAT(Maserati) chassis design and engineering, Ferrari engine.

If they do build them in the Ferrari factory it will be exactly the same as the later FIAT Dinos, which were FIAT designs assembled with Ferrari engines in the Ferrari factory, except the buyers will get to pay about $50,000-75,000 for the Ferrari nose badge and tail script.

They are BMWs. The new one will be nothign more than a rebodied 7-series.

Lard-ass TTs. (Phaetons actually, but work with me, I'm on a rolls.)

 

"Pre-FIAT", works for me.

Nope. Didn't even say that, at all. I have said it's a lesser Ferrari because the styling so clearly borrows from worst of the Japanese idioms of its day.

Indeed, all of that is crucial, and inapplicable to the California.

Ferrari, at the end there.

FIAT(Maserati) chassis design and engineering, Ferrari engine.

If they do build them in the Ferrari factory it will be exactly the same as the later FIAT Dinos, which were FIAT designs assembled with Ferrari engines in the Ferrari factory, except the buyers will get to pay about $50,000-75,000 for the Ferrari nose badge and tail script.

They are BMWs. Engines and body/chassis designe and built in Germany. Ugly, too.
The new one will be nothing more than a rebodied 7-series.

Lard-ass TTs. (Phaetons actually, but work with me, I'm on a rolls.)

...Hell, I coined the derogation "LamborgAudi".

Engines designed and built in a VW/Audi engine plant in Hungary, unibodies designed and built in a Audi plant in Germany.

Nothing about them Italian or Lamborghini, maybe excepting the leather, maybe, and the lower wages.

DeTomaso

No more a Ford than a FIAT Dino or Lancia Strato's or Thema 32.8 is a Ferrari.

It's not a pur sang Ferrari, nor an exotic.

It's a FIAT Group Automobiles S.p.A. car with a Ferrari engine. Ugly, too.

It's exactly a contemporaneous FIAT Dino Spider, the successor to the Maserati Coupe, without the pretty of either.

Buy it, enjoy it, love it; but with open eyes.

When word gets around, all il Commendatore's cavalina won't be able to keep the resale value from sinking like a Coupe Cambiocorso's.

...YMMV, imho, etc.

 

Ok, then you can tell all the GT4 owners that there car is not a Ferrari because it was originally badged a Dino and did not have a 12 cylinder engine. Then, you can tell all 308 owners that their cars are not Ferrari's. Then, you can tell all the 328 owners that there cars are not Ferraris. Next, that leads us to Mondial, 348, 355, 288 GTO, F40.... where do you stop? In your definition, Ferrari "pure sang" stopped existing in 1966. Sorry, I disagree and I think a lot of other owners would too.

Hey, hate the car all you want. I really don't care. But, it's not correct to be tearing down the entire brand because it doesn't fit you're narrow definition of what "is" and "is not" a Ferrari.


Over and out.... I'm done. Best of luck to you!

 

Actually, the Dino 246 was a hard sell when new, and they didn't really catch on in the resale market till a few years back.

The Ferrari identity isn't much of an issue, really, given that the engine/chassis were Ferrari-engineered. The implications of cranking out 6,000 of these cars (if that's true, per the post above) are more worrisome. I don't think Ferrari is set up to service the volume of cars that will be on the road, and its product line is too large/redundant.

 

I heard from a factory dealer that the volume would start lower and ramp up to a max of 4,000 cars per year.

For the first year or two, the volume would be quite a bit less than 4,000. So expect waiting lists for the California.

When the F430 replacement appears, it would would be sold in a smaller number than the current volume of F430 (5,200/year), and then the California would increase to 4,000.

The F430 replacement will also have long wait list especially due to a smaller production volume.

 

+10 agree; well articulated post

 

Looks like a cross between a Biemer and a Lexus. Not my taste.

 

As always, the voice of insight and intelligence in a superficial, flimsy, rumor-filled Ferrari world.

Do you plan to add this to the stable? That's the real question.


Forza,


Cavallini

 

That makes sense.

Thanks.


Cavallini

 

I never said all Dinos, nor six or eight (or four) cylinder cars, are not Ferraris. FIAT Dinos are not Ferraris, even though built by them. Maseratis are not Ferraris, even if built by them.

Not my argument. (Do you know the 308 GTB was originally considered to be badged Dino?)

Fine, except it is most certainly not _my_ definition.

Not mine, not narrow. Is a Lancia Thema 32.8 a Ferrari? No. Now: Why not?

Ferrari have lost the plot, as the Brits say.

Luca ThreeCardMontezemolo recently exlaimed of the California: "This is the first dual-purpose Spider/Coupé with a retractable hard top that closes in just 14 seconds. Despite its extraordinary performance, the California 2+ is also exceptionally easy to drive and has a space behind the front seats that makes it supremely flexible in terms of usage."

Imagine that, opened to closed in just 14seconds! Easy to drive! Room for the rugrats!

Must be tough to park that one next to a 275 GTB/4 at the Country Club.

Cheers!

 

Good point and yes, it has the Dino engine. The Dino platform was used up until the F360.

 

Ferrari partnered with Alcoa, not Alcan.

 

Well... Even in the 308 GT4 the engine is branded Ferrari, so...

The chassis changed to semi-space frame with the 348 (355 for sure) if that's what you meant by platform.

Which brings us back on point: The platform of the California was designed by and as a Maserati, the replacement for the Coupe, with all that means in terms of costs priority production shortcuts, performance trade offs and materials compromises: Sticking a prancing horse on its nose does not compensate for these particular shortcomings, no matter how magically it works on a key fob.

Making it butt ugly to boot was simply gratuitous cruelty.

 

Thanks.