Ferrari F80

It may be my suggestion, but the front view has some contact with the 512BB that I like a lot.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Looks incredible in this pic.

 

That falls under a completely different set of regs due to low volume

 

Low volume of AM or the Valkyrie? What's the cutoff volume to be exempt?

 

So... low volume allows for high volume!

I'll show myself out...

 

I believe on the Valkyrie they did something cheeky and had a separate company that fell under a different umbrella with red bull as it was a partnership.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I love it!

 

Love it.

 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBb7ufaC2Ry/?hl=en

 

It kind of makes sense now:

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

What? They they're all red?

 

The aero evolution of the family line-up. For me cars are machines, they serve a technical purpose.

Just as fighter jets serve a purpose, evolving from generation to generation to become better machines:

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

pirelli tyres

 

But does it have hot tubes?

 

Perhaps, however no one compares the LaF and the P1 today. The latter is worth one third of the former’s value, P1 owners (many of whom own LaFs) will also tell you the car spends a disproportionate amount of its life in the workshop with problems. Also no one really knows what the W1 drives like as the car is not developed yet. This will happen once the deposits come in, unlike the F80 which is more or less ready for production. A 3m car is an ownership proposition that stretches far beyond the track driving experience. If that is all that mattered the BAC Mono would be worth 1m+

btw I speak as a serial McLaren owner, not a blinded Ferrari fan. McLaren fail to understand this, which is why they are not doing well

 

Absolutely
Some posters here are just reacting like teenagers who absolutely don’t know what developing this kind of high performance car requires..
They are just obsessed with numbers because everything in their judgment is based on a virtual world.
Facts : F80 = more than 30 mules running thousands of kilometers since two years in all the possible conditions.
W1 =two displays cars waiting deposits to begin a costly development out of their real capacities ( technically and financial).

 

I completely agree on the rational vision.
One might simply point out that, in this particular case, aerodynamics does not evolve per se, but adapts to serve different purposes, which are expressions of its own epoch: more oriented for the SU 27 to maneuvering agility and dogfighting, completely devoted to serving the Stealth “platform” concept (assuming it really is) for the SU57.
A few people would comment here that the first is much more exciting and visceral, while the second is cynical and boring in its effectiveness.
And what about the livery, so classically retro and still very WWII reminiscent, opposed to the super-rational pixel-camo? Gorgeous vs. horrible...

However, even on an intuitive basis, few would deny that the latter example is modern and the former simply obsolete...

 

unfortunately, many have failed in understanding this.
We can argue the design, because it can be subjective.
But we can't argue the facts.
The one exists for 2 years, running around.
Second one is closer to concept.

 

Funnily enough, the 57 is even more manoeuvrable than the 27/35, as afforded by the 3D thrust vectoring AL-51 (Izdeliye 30) engines, with the added advantage of the stealth design.

 

Stealth design is no more an advantage with new radar’s generation.

 

Stealth designs are beneficial, up to a point. The L Band radars can unveil them, but at a shorter range compared to conventional designs. The IR seekers that the all moderna Su and MiG designs incorporate, also help greatly.

Anyway, we are way off topic. I apologise.

 

To bring it back to topic, youre saying its a bit like when Ferrari released the 599 GTO, they said the car needed the newly added systems to reach its immense abilities because it was (a little bit) unstable, which makes it more exciting to drive, but you need the systems to keep everything under control for the human pilot. Just like as these fighter jets have become more advanced, they are inherently unstable, but this allows them to achieve incredible maneuvers, however, they require the systems for the human pilot. There was a nice article on Motor 1 the other day about how Ferrari really first showed us where all this was going with race mode on the F430. I remember when that car came out, and I think they have a good point. Its become so much more advanced now, and, in addition to what has been very well pointed out in all the above posts, I would say, none of us has experienced what the car is like to drive. And of course at this point, how could we? But, just like there was a lot of quibbling when they released the GTO (should they really use that name?), today there is none and it is accepted. Ferrari often surprises us, sometimes that causes some confusion or even angst amongst the fans, but in time things come into better focus.