F 50 Underachiever?

Now that F 50 is no longer Ferrari's flagship ,time has come to judge it properly
does anyone else think that it was just a rushed replacement for the highly succesful F40?
which by the way, it was never able to outdo it's predecessor
neither it succeded against the then (and currently) supercar leader Mc Laren F1.

So in my opinion F 50 will pass in history as the car which came between the 40 & Enzo and nothing else.

 

I hate the negativity that the F50 recieves. Rushed replacement or not, it is a car that has captured the hearts of millions. It is beautiful, sounds incredible, and goes like a bat outta hell. Saying that it is a failure is complete insanity, and it's label as a footnnote should be dismissed by all that have ever been captivated by its curvaceous body and symphonic V12.

It will only become a blurb in history if critics such as yourself continue to bash it so! I fear that this modern art masterpiece may never truly be understood or respected in its time, but a masterpiece it is, and a masterpiece it will always be.

 

What about lamborghinis? Why must it always be vs a McLaren? I mean, what honestly does compete with a McLaren? Even an Enzo struggles to match it's pace, so does that make the Enzo a failure? Because it struggles to achieve the acceleration of a 10-year-old vehicle? The F50 spanks a Diablo, it's main Italian competitor, but that is never even discussed-- only the fact that it cannot compete with a McLaren-- So freakin what!

You've gotten me a bit flustered, apologies for any offense recieved by you, but really-- think about what you're saying here.

 

If you look at it the cold way , yeah it wasnt that much faster than the F40 . But that doesnt make it a failure .

I love it . I find it more sensual than an F40 which is more raw and brutal to look at . It also sounds much better .

 

This coming from a guy that has the model names of 2 Lamborghinis as his alias...

My opinion... there is no way, shape, or form that the F50 could be considered a failure. 1) It looks too d@mn good, 2) It is fast as hell, 3) (like someone already said) It spanks every lamborghini from the time, etc. The fact that it has a little refinement for driver and passenger comfort is definitely NOT a negative issue. It makes the car a little more driveable.

 

ferrari stats...0-60 in 3.7 and 12.1 in the quater and 202top speed with world class handling and wild, race car looks...all this in the mid 90s....if thats underachieving, then i strive to underachieve!!!!!

 

The F50 was the car that drew me to Ferrari, they first time I saw it, I wnet crazy. If Ferrari didn't produce that car, I might now have the passion for ferrari as I have today. My goal in life is to own one.

 

I have an F40 but the F50 rocks too, I love convertibles & an F50 is on my list of top roadsters along w the
Murcielago
427 Cobra
57 Testa Rossa
300SL
Duesy
Cord
and of course the SLUTMOBILE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also I believe the F50 wsa the 1st road car w a composite tub, Thats what it will be known for
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I was going to ask you to post some pics of the slutmobile. Thanks

 

The F40 was the Ferrari that got me hooked. After seeing the F50 for the first time, it definitely became my favorite Ferrari and still is (looks wise, I've never been in or driven either).

I think the F50 has more historical positioning in Ferrari's time line than the Enzo. The F50 was made of the 50th anniversary (obviously) while the Enzo was more like a filler between the F50 and rumored F60 (or whatever they will call it). I don't think Enzo himself would've approved of the Enzo, just way too extreme looking.

 

I don't think Lambo claims there cars to be supercars(or know one considers them that). Ferrari has cars that go up against the Lambos and then they have their supercars. Who else at the time of the F50 was rocking a 'supercar' besides Mclaren?

You know the saying: to be the man, you have to beat the man. I love lambo(see name) to death, but they are not the man to beat in the "be all end all" of exotic automobiles

 

I dont think it is much if at all faster than a diablo SE30 Jota. Really not that much faster than the regular early diablos, as these were a good deal lighter than VT models. The F50 is compared with the mclaren also bc it is a hyper car, the diablo competed with the 512 that was made during the F50s run.

 

Not contradicting you but that was a golden time in terms of supercars going for broke. Early 90s we had the Jaguar XJ220 ( held the record for just under a year for fastest production car till the F1,) Cizeta Maroder, Vector even made a new car in the mid 90s, Bugatti EB110, EB110SS. The Porsche GT1 and Mercedes CLK GTR followed in the late 90s, taking the spotlight away from Mac in LeMans.

Heck, there were 50 XJR 15s way before the McLaren.

RocketBoy

 

Have you driven both? I have and I don't think you would have your perspective if you had. The F40 and the F50 both are increadible examples of the state of the art automotive technology of their respective era's. What is more increadible to me is the fact that Ferrari was able to bring both to market in the US with our restrictive smog and safety laws. I never cared for the styling of the F50 but on the performance side there are many areas where it outshines the F40.

 

any car which had the job of replacing the F40 would find it very tough indeed........

 

I have driven both, on and of the track. the F50 is a great car, but the F40 is more and looks the part.

 

The F50 was the car that sparked my talent as a writer and lead me to write seriously. I wrote a story about one of the first ones to hit the US. I was working for the New York Post at the time. The date was Jan. 3rd 1996. The first line from my story was "James Bond drove the wrong car....." The rest is history.
How could that be a failure, especially when it will lead to the purchase of several Ferraris?

Forza,


Cavallini

 

I reckon F40, F50 or Enzo has their own rights to be called supercar and are icons that belong to their own era.

For comparison, Cleopatra, Marilyn Monroe and Camera Diaz are all beauties in their own time, but can you really compare them...... ?! For a beter and fair comparison of someone, supercar or whatever it may be, I think we should take something from the same era..... So F40 to 959, F50 to F1, while leave CLK to Enzo..... thus no F40 to Mercielago.....


Well, just my 0.2 cents..... No offense....

 

I'm all for being educated so that's cool. I hit myself for forgetting the CLK GTR. I LOVE that car. More so than a Mclaren maybe

 

I think the time of the F1 is passing... There are other super cars out there now plenty capable. The Zondas are crazy fast, the Koeniggsegg, even a few Porsche Tuners are reaching insane speeds beyond the 200mph mark.

The F50 will always have its place. It looks better than the Enzo too.

 

*prepares to take cover...

 

It doesnt take much to look better than the Schmenzo

 

I long for an F 50 with an increased displacement, or even the unit from the Enzo(although I'm sure it wouldn't sound as good). The damn thing needs more torque, that is the only thing I feel it is lacking. I remember the first time I saw it on the cover of Motor Trend, the article had gone over every component of car and the color was a vibrant dark red(oxymoron?). It must have been the lighting because it didn't seem similar to one of the Rosso colors, more like a brilliant metallic powdercoating. Beautiful.