Hi, Might sounds like a stupid question, but I'd especially like to get the opinion of the lucky people having both. I think the FF is the "reasonable" choice, particularly for a daily driver and I love the more understated line of the FF but, maybe due to mid-life crisis if I had to have only 1 V12 fcar why not go for the more extreme, more visible one? My main question is: Is there a massive driving experience difference between the two? Are they completely different beasts or does the F12 feels like a faster FF? How does the 4WD impact driving on normal/wet conditions? The number of snow days being quite low around here that capability is great but probably won't tip the balance. Rainy days on the other hands are plenty (>150/yr). On a day to day / route drive is the extra power of the F12 an advantage, an handicap or no real effect? I didn't had the chance to test the cars yet, just doing a lot of research. Thanks, Stephane
we have an FF and just got our F12. they are both phenomenal cars, and are closer together in more ways than different. Why FF? If you have a family and want to take them with you in a Ferrari If you are going to drive it a lot, the 4RM provides a safety margin, lets you use all the V12 in lower grip conditions More of a hyper-GT car. Best car ever for eating up a lot of miles comfortably Surprising to many, it more than holds its own on the track (purely as a measure of performance relative to its peer group) Why F12? if 2 seats is enough you enjoy and want ultra performance in just about every dimension - it's an FF coupe on steroids in 2WD you want/need the extra bit of emotion and excitement in your Fcar F12 less than ideal in lower grip (cold, wet) - as is any hyper car with tires like these (you can change tires, but still a trade-down) If we could only have 1, it would be the FF. The car is great and we love bringing the kids with us, in it. Really though, other than the +2 seats and 4RM for persistent low-grip driving, F12 is a blast. Only last commentary, FF is lower cost and maybe better availability depending on where you are in the world. A lot of FF-bashing out there, mostly from non-FF owners/drivers. The car is awesome. It just lives in a neighborhood where most people want the "fastest" for reasons other than actually how they will use and drive the car (or, they let sit in the garage) Good luck, either way you will have a great car
Thanks, that sums up the impression I had so far, I'm not that fussy about the 4 seats, but the grip difference on wet will probably seal the deal for rainy UK! I love the understated FF looks, just wanted to confirm I won't miss much and regret not picking up the F12. I arrive at the same price for both due to the difference in specs (panoramic roof and semi-aniline leather making up for the FF/F12 difference). Thanks, Stephane
Stephane, if you're in London or nearby you're welcome to take mine for a drive. If, like me, you want all year driving ability, there's only really one practical choice. It's also quite nice to be a little less conspicuous on occasions. I'm in Bogota next week, but other than that you're welcome any time. Oh, and I'd need some convincing that the semi-aniline leather is a good idea. The leather is more sensitive (softer) and won't wear as well, particularly on the drivers seat bolsters. Daytona seats are the most comfortable for my money.
Hi John, Thanks for the offer but I'll try a dealer first. Really good point about wear&tear of the semi-aniline, so that's that option gone. Wasn't sure about it anyway as cuoio toscano seems to be quite orange, and testa di moro very dark, with the panoramic roof letting the sun in and the exterior probably dark I would prefer something lighter. Exterior I'm between Grigio Silverstone, Grigio Ferro and Canna Di Fucile. I love Canna di Fucile but scared that it will mask most of the curves, Grigio Ferro might be a bit too light and worried that the roof won't blend that well, so GS sounds like a perfect middle, and the pics of the 548 in GS corrected by Topaz are amazing. Not totally sure what the difference is between grigio ferro met and grigio FF, from the picture I saw they seem very similar (hard to tell between pics taken in different conditions). Thanks, Stephane
I saw an FF done in testa di moro and found it hard to distinguish from black. Grigio FF is just a tint lighter than Silverstone.
I would also take the F12. To me a Ferrari should be about passion and the FF is more about logic. I also found the AWD system distracting- it was not as seamless as I would have expected and with roads being so bad why would I want to expose a Ferrari to that? I prefer to use a truck that gets beat up on the bad roads. But to each their own. I've driven both though and both have the power that is for sure. But to me, the F12 is the choice.
Depends what other cars you have. I only have one car, so it was the FF for me as I need the space and seats. If your other cars can cover the space and seat requirements, then the F12 is the one to go for. Otherwise, your FF will make the your other cars redundant. The FF goes out all year round. My previous F-car sat on the drive once when we had heavy snow, otherwise it was out come UK rain or shine.
If you know Topaz, my FF is with them all next week for a spring clean. It's G. Silverstone over tan Daytona's. Feel free to drop in there and check out the colour in person. PM me your full name and I'll tell 'em you may drop by. Cheers, John
Good comment, and directionally right I think. But it is more complicated and we are dealing with nuances. If you want the most passion from the Ferrari line up, you will probably buy a Speciale. If that is too raw, you will probably get a regular 458 for its racing bike reflexes and nimbleness. If you want pure logic, you will get a Benz or a Porsche. But within the Ferrari V12 sphere, the FF and F12 do make for a definite choice which I think Entropy has defined very well. Both have that intoxicating V12 sound and fury.
I find the contrast of the apparent darkness of the glass roof to the rest of the body really nicely defines the car. It visually reduces the volume of the car as seen from the side and enhances the lines nicely. Not that any of the colors you're talking about won't nicely contrast with the glass roof. I loved Grigio FF, and also really love Grgio Silverstone on the car. When I first saw our car (Rubino Micalizzato)next to another ff without the glass roof, I realized how much it really impacts to appearance. At least to me. And it is soooo much fun to look up in a city while sitting at a signal and see the buildings above. Can't do that in an F12.
Perhaps Capristo will offer an window for the F12 roof like the window for the engine in the 458 Spider.
Well put. I agree. I also think there are those where a 4 seat Ferrari makes sense. It does not make sense to me and its not my vision of what I want a Ferrari to be. As someone else commented, they are making different flavors for a wider variety of tastes these days. So the winner is the customer.
Thanks. I don't really care about the 4 seats, got no kids and in the last 3-4 years maybe had someone at the back once or twice, so a 2 seater is fine. Looking for a GT more than purely sport car, it will be a daily drive so some minimum comfort and practicality are needed (boot). For the relatively few days of snow we get, I would probably use another car anyway, I would trust the FF on snow but wouldn't say the same of the other drivers on the road. The only exception would be long distance/winter holiday drive. I think the big question is how bad the F12 is on wet surface? The car would be driven at least 1/3 of the time on wet surface (thanks to UK weather). So the car MUST be enjoyable in those conditions. If the F12 is too stressful on wet, the choice would be obvious (the stress of the F12 on daily drive would be far above the pleasure provided by the extra power).
We have lived with the FF in wet and (mild) snow. The winter tires make a big difference, obviously - in wet but primarily COLD. Re one post re the FF's 4RM being clunky. Can't dispute what the poster experienced, but any high-torque, AWD car will feel that way especially if the driver is on/off, on/off the throttle, which is a common driving habit. The throttle (and torque) inputs are strong and you can feel it through the diffs (and, in an FF, the PTU). I just tried this earlier today (had the FF, went to get a haircut, it's raining). I've been cured of this from racing, where throttle modulation needs to definitive; but when I do it on the street I can tell immediately. Back to FF vs. F12... The F12 is fine in the wet, it won't kill you. The reality is it has so much power that even in the dry, driving it hard it takes a lot of focus. To some degree, compare it to the 458 that way. In the wet, keep the setting to WET and be careful with your right foot. Remember a key piece of the F12's performance are those bespoke tires, which you can use in rain but are tuned for (warm) dry. In cold weather, you'll want appropriate tires. The car is GREAT in the rain, you just need to remember you are driving a guided missile, with RWD. The traction and stability controls in WET are aggressive, that will help. But at some point the laws of physics apply. If anything, one "option" you should get with the car is the Ferrari Driving Experience....go get training IN the car. I've sent my wife 3 times now, it has increased her competence, confidence and enjoyment of the cars immensely. In the end, as mentioned the FF is the perfect hyper-GT. The F12 is a hyper-sports car that has GT qualities. Both are great. Pick the one you will enjoy the most. My experience is that if I lived where it was often cold/wet, I'd go FF since I know it will drive better/quicker and have more margin. But pick the one that works best for you. If having the latest, most extreme, magazine-trumped car is valuable to you, it's the F12. Otherwise I'd drive both in real-world settings and also on some fun roads, see what the tradeoffs are in your mind. Again, your choices are "awesome" and "awesome".
Yes, and I guess you can argue that the introduction of the California provided yet a different flavor. It attracted customers who wanted open air driving but did not want to go all the way to the full hard-core Ferrari such as a 458 Spider or Aperta -- "Ferrari Lite," if you will. Clearly widening the scope of Ferrari appeal has been their (Luca's) marketing strategy. And it has done just that.
Thanks again for your comments. I don't think I need the most extreme, I will drive it on open road in real world, so using 20% of the potential of the FF or 16% of the F12, I will still have a massive margin in both cases... I will do the odd track day but I'm sure the FF will be more than awesome. Regarding the Ferrari Experience it was on my (and my wife) to do/wish list. Was thinking about the basic and the ice one, not sure about the second (advanced) one. But for 2 people, it's a seriously expensive option, the basic+advanced, without the ice one is about $30k/person for only 2x2 days. That makes the carbon cup holder looking sooooo cheap.... Are they really worth the price or getting far more than 4 days 1-to-1 in other driving/racing school is a better investment?
I think Ferrari is missing a V12 convertible GT. IMO, a 2+2 convertible like the California is really designed to make the interior space more useful for 2 people rather than for squeezing 2+2 people into the car. A 2+2 is simply civilized where a 2-seater is claustrophobic. You can store briefcases, coats, shopping or whatever on the backseat/bench without risk of having them fall on the floor or falling into the front. Your passenger can have his/her hands free, recline properly and relax on a longer drive. Your seat does not rub against the bulkhead when you extend it. You can reach behind for items. You can bring your golf bags. You can bring your skis. With a convertible, when you drop the roof you hear exactly what everyone else hears. Your car does not have to be as obnoxiously loud just so you can hear the exhaust music through the car body. You also get fresh air and get to make your own vitamin D.
Ok, termporarily off thread, but you asked - My thoughts First, the most important thing is to take some competent, professional performance driving education. My view in the US is that this is definitely not the "Drivers Ed" on-track driving (which is a blast), but a real car-control program administered by professional instructors. Just my $0.02. (How often does Fchat laugh at people who spin their cars in the wet and bend them....we laugh at the "idiot driver"...but how many take the time to learn how to really drive these weapons?) I have attended in one form or another countless driving programs in the US, I actively track and race, and have experienced good and bad instruction and coaching. My wife has taken a few, including Skip Barber, and the Porsche one. The FDE's she's done have been in North America, at Mont Tremblant. My view: The instructors are absolutely the best I"ve encountered. Seriously, they have the pedigrees (multiple champions) but are accomplished at TEACHING, not just driving. The attitude is focused on learning and fun. They do a good job at keeping testosterone out of the equation. The curriculum is optimized for learning and progressive skills - not for maximizing the utilization of X number of cars or Y moments of track time. Having said that, the amount of seat time and instructor 1:1 is through the roof. The event is put on flawlessly, from (before it starts) until (after its done). The venue is beautiful. You get to drive Ferraris. (In our case, getting the chance to learn in the actual cars we own and she drives was a key point). It is expensive; there is a Ferrari premium. But, if you compare apples-to-apples to a comparable course with that level of instruction (hard to find), level of engagement (hard to find) and the curriculum (rare to find), you are likely paying 15-20% more for the venue, the 5-Star accommodations and to drive a Ferrari. Any course that offers 2 full days with this level of car, this level of program (i.e. teaching, not joy riding), etc is easily $6K+, not including insurance, accommodations, etc. If that is a reach, then there are plenty of options. As I've said, I've sent my wife, I've spectated closely. I would love to do it with her, just for fun, but 1) I get more than my share of seat time and 2) it IS expensive! and 3) someone has to watch the kids. In particular, for women, the guys in Mont Tremblant make it very approachable - other courses I've been to seem be accidentally a bit intimidating (see comment above re testosterone). I do not know much about the Fiorano course, so others may have opinions.
I definitely want to learn for 1) Not being that idiot driver 2) being able to take the most out of the car (or at least enjoying it the best possible way). Thanks for your review, I had a quick comparison with the 2 other programs that seem comparable, or at least have the same objectives and the same kind of structure: The Porsche one and the AMG one. The Porsche is probably about 35% cheaper if you include the car rental (which is separate), the AMG on the other hand is incredibly cheap (relatively speaking), we are talking about a third of Ferrari price.... but I suspect it's the price to pay to drive a fcar
I agree its a good idea to do the DE and any of these cars are so high power you really have to be extra careful with your application of power, or braking etc. I agree with the comment about knowing how to teach. The better programs know what to show you and (here is the important part) what to not show you. The Ferrari programs I've been to were excellent. As have those from other companies. The benefit of the Ferrari programs is you an see how your Ferrari behaves when really pushed. My experience with the FF vs other high power AWD cars is the FF system makes itself more known more often and I found that distracting- even on dry pavement. My roads are not the best. (I'm very sensitive to this- maybe you won't be) I think if you are really into laying down the power the FF is the better choice. It kind of comes down to the type of driver you are and what you like. The reality is these cars are now well behaved so long as you don't push too hard on the street and you don't act like a maniac with the throttle. Also its earlier into the F12s life cycle, so you could get an FF now, probably at a decent discount, try it out, if you want something more sporting, you could go for the F12.
In the US you have fantastic schools/programmes as Entropy mentions; Bondurant's, skip barber, richard petty, etc etc..Whereas in Europe we rely on the programmes made available by the various manufactures; Porsche (Nürburgring), Audi/Bentley (Lapland), Ferrari (various track in Italy), etc, etc..the Ferrari ones are exorbitant; for me simply unjustified cost. I've done quite a bit of track time with a Ferrari "pro" driver who is a friend on a circuit which was rented for the day (will be doing Yas in Abu Dhabi in 2 weeks with the same gent) as well as taken the challenge course offered by a well-known Challenge team in Italy; the tuition can not be compared, the "pro" instructor teaches/shows one how to drive the cars much smoother be it high speed or overall good car control (learning how to handle your F-car) and the other, which is taught by an actual pro racing driver, is about teaching you to go as fast as you possibly can (staying t the "limit") and almost zero finesse.
