Ferrari F80

I wanted to avoid the natural vs artificial debate with the two members you mention, they've been drinking from the same cup for years. From the 488 thread:

I tried to keep it fact and source based, and provide some clarity on the components involved and terms being used (like Scuderia explicitly using 'speaker').

Of course there is no guarantee that the F80 does not get active components (in Europe), since it has to conform to even stricter regulations, but I don't expect they will deviate much from the existing set-up for the 296.

 

The 4WD is activated at 190 km/h on the Ferrari and Toyota and at 150 km/h on the Peugeot. Although in Le Mans there are not many corners where the speed is more than 190 km/h the 4WD provides extra traction compared to the rear-wheel-drive cars even on a dry track. In the rain, this will be an even bigger advantage for the 4WD than in the dry.

 

I suppose Le Mans has pretty much zero corners in the wet where speed is over 190 km/h and 4WD would be essential in accelerating out of them.

That said, 4WD might still help on the wet straights, where it is at least safer.

 

I think the whole point of the 190 km/h rule was that 4WD cars would not get any traction advantage in Le Mans.

Peugeot got a lower limit of 150 km/h because their car obviosly has some traction issues compared to Toyota and Ferrari.

 

So the main purpose of 4WD was to allow more efficient hybrid system.

 

Yes there is. The term in question was ‘speaker’ from the Scuderia parts catalogue and the post even questioned whether there could be microphones somewhere around the engine bay! I think it’s very clear what the implication was. And it’s incorrect. There is no electronic amplifying speaker requiring microphones to replay sound into the intake system. No amount of backtracking can cover this - it was incorrect and that’s all, no big deal.

And as for the musical instrument comment, this is getting too silly for me to continue beyond this post. I can play the saxophone. The length, variable diameter and shape of a brass tube, with air passing out of holes (keys) amplifies the sound and changes the note depending on where the air leaks out (which keys are pressed). The original amplified sound is from the lips and the reed - it is the same sound, simply amplified, in the same way an exhaust system can amplify or restrict the sound of an engine. The sound of the air over the reed is enhanced for volume and altered for note by where the air is allowed to leak out. There is no air passing through Ferrari’s diaphragm but it is instead the speed of the engine which changes the note. The diaphragm simply alters the volume into the cabin. This is no more artificial than an after-market exhaust. The type most American ferraristi love. So your analysis suggests that even the Ferrari V8 turbo is a beautiful musical instrument. Just like the V12, which also uses the sound generator.

Whoever quoted both my and RealZeus’ 8-year old post, thank you. We’re consistent.

 

In theory, at Le Mans, 4WD should not have an advantage and therefore the reason why the system is only operative at higher speeds. However, I think there is a consensus and rear-wheel-drive car drivers also say so, that 4WD has a clear advantage in terms of traction in the rain.

 

I'm glad you are so vocal about your gratitude. I aim to please! I prefer to rule things out based on research rather than assume. That's why I said it was not a good look for you to dismiss things out of hand. It makes you look arrogant and a know-it-all. I did not want to rule out the Sound Generator was playing sounds until I had had a further look at the catalogs (for electronic components) and the part itself (for wire connectors). Sure, I could have waited with my post until I had done the additional research, but I like to post my research as I go, it is part of the fun for me.

There are in fact systems that are active despite not using the audio speakers in the cabin, for example VW/Porsche's Soundaktor.



Yes, you were right about the Sound Generator all along, but in all these years you have provided nothing at all to illustrate why you are right, which is not helpful at all. And when I set out to proof or disproof the assumptions, you pretty much attacked me for even questioning things. After decades on internet forums my skin is thick enough, but I do wonder what's up with your behavior. It does not make you Lukeylikeable.

 

That’s funny - lukeylikeyable! Nice. I certainly don’t know everything but some things. I also don’t mean to be in any way arrogant. But….there is a narrative here that is simply out to criticise Ferrari whatever they do. I don’t see you as part of that but for some reason I find myself wanting to defend them when I feel there is a narrative that doesn’t regard the facts or simply poses a certain opinion as a fact. For a (hypothetical) example; “everyone knows that the modern cars are worse than the previous ones”. Sometimes, and for some people that may be true. But that is rarely the definitive it is regularly posed as. I use our Pista Spider more than our Speciale coupe these days. When driving, I enjoy the sound of our Pista, probably more than our Speciale, for most of the road trips we do. Doesn’t make my view any less valid than someone who thinks differently or theirs less valid than mine. But they are only that - views.

Why do I feel the need to defend them? Perhaps because I have worked on the other end of the keyboard-warrioring for a long time. Or perhaps it’s just because they have always treated me well. I have absolutely no link to Ferrari other than being a customer (different to many here).

 

Wanna have a go at defending Jaguar's rebranding?



I can see how the subject might have triggered you, but as I said before (in the post about EVs), I care about the result of the tech, even if some 'purity' is sacrificed. I don't consider a sound tube artificial myself. Like someone said in the 488 thread back then:

 

We can both agree about not continuing beyond this point. Just as well you play the saxophone. Given how the F80 sounded around Imola, Ferrari may well appreciate customers who can play one while driving, just to generate some some aural interest, all naturally of course.

 

Unfortunately he sold it because the driving experience was too involved.

I used a Surface Book from launch. Actually 4 of them because the first 3 kept bricking themselves. While I agree the do have cool concepts (the hinge was quite cool) their execution and the real world benefit of those concepts are lacking. IMO even if they were not as flashy Lenovo paved the way for 2 in 1s. Same with Ferrari haptic steering wheel. And turning indicators on the steering wheel. But they are too proud.

As one of those young people, I have to say the video game/changing with the times narrative is vastly overstated. Sure there are tech bros who love to brag about how their Tesla can beat X supercar to 60mph but the amount of those type of tech bros who are willing to spend >3x on an actual supercar is very low, IMO. If you look at the dumb Youtube channels or vloggers that these young people are watching (stuff like Donut, Alex Choi, etc) they care about the sound and overall theater even more than the older generation. Maybe they don't have as 1st hand reference points but with the advent of the internet it is not hard to relive past eras. If you need any evidence just look at who is driving the clapped out ricer cars with soup cans for mufflers. Or the many **** (at least financially and at time of launch in the market) cars that are being idolatrized (mainly by millennials on social media) through revisionist history and one Jeremy Clarkson quote (LFA cough cough).

There are many people who can afford these cars but the ones who are interest in buying them still enjoy the emotions of owning a supercar. Maybe that balance has shifted more from driving to posturing, but you still need some theater to convey that emotion. Personal experience, when you drive a nice car for the first time you realize how much more there is to cars than the video games told you.

Also at the top end of the market:
Pagani Says 70 Percent of Utopias Sold Have Manual Transmissions

I agree the debate is what makes this interesting (except for the last 3 pages debating the semantics of a translation....) so hopefully this comes off as constructive. I don't think it is hard to see that Ferrari is making a mistake by not offering a more analogue car occupied by Gordon Murray, restomods, and even Porsche GT3. There are so many ownership issues with the boutique manufacturers are restomods, if Ferrari came out with one they would capture the huge proportion of the market, even if they limited production to something like 1k per yr. The product strategy by trying to become more haptic and video game to "adapt to the times" is a huge mistake (which I think they are now realizing). In the end, no matter how hard they try, they will never be able to control what the customer wants.

 

Also if you need any more evidence, just look at Rimac. They even offer a drift mode and holographic projection of the racing lines on track but they haven't even sold out 150 cars. Not sure it's sister the Battista is doing much better....

 

Sound Generator is just an industry term for a diaphragm connecting the engine and cabin I think.

Also if you look at the actual patent you can see how the device functions and more importantly, Ferrari's thought process and reasoning.

 

While the purpose is the same the effect is different. Even if the symposer is natural, in that the sound waves are physically transmitted to the cabin, there are so many limitations that a speaker might be better. First, if you look at the labyrinth the sound pipe has to run through, there must be so many reflections that by the time the waves reach the diaphragm the individual harmonics would be muddled. Additionally, the diaphragm can only be designed to resonate within a specific frequency. ("Therefore, a known symposer device is a "mass-spring" system (namely, a system consisting of a spring hanging from a constraint coupled to a mass), which, from the acoustic point of view, behaves like a band-pass filter centred on the resonance frequency of the system; the acoustic passband of the symposer device must be positioned in the area of the most significant frequencies of the noise generated by the internal combustion engine (approximately between 350 and 600 Hz) and must be sufficiently wide (it must approximately have a total width of at least 250-300 Hz).

Meanwhile a speaker has no such limitations in terms of frequency. Just feels unnatural subconsciously because there is a lack of associated vibration and reproduction is not 100% perfect.

The best solution would be to have an intake interfacing with the cabin like in the GT4RS, Mclaren P1/F1/675lt, or Gordon Murray T50. Unfortunately looking at the F80 intake position this is not the case.

Just google "Mclaren ISG delete" or "Alpine A110 sound tube delete". Not every is satisfied and there is a reason why.

Also referencing another symposer patent (that was referenced by Ferrari)

 

Thanks for finding that, I had looked on Google Patent but nothing came up for me. This confirms what I wrote here and in the 488 thread.

Case closed!

 

Do you not think Ferrari are better to make what they are geared up to do? When you go to the factory, visit Fiorano, talk to the people, designers and engineers, they have become good at a particular thing. The Gordon Murray approach is just not what they do best. Murray’s particular skill is that one man can obsess about every little detail of one car. He oversees every little detail of it. Ferrari don’t do it that way. Ferrari can build larger numbers, GMA do a great job over a handful. Neither is as good at what the other is great at.

We don’t need to worry - if you like a GMA style car then buy one. It could be really good (though I would still personally worry about reliability). It’s nice not all of the best cars have a yellow and black badge.

 

I don't think the issue is with the abilities of an active speaker, rather with the source of the sound. As I wrote before, even the best videogames struggle with producing accurate engine sounds. But there are new technologies to improve this though, for example granular synthesis as employed by recent Forza Horizon games.The gist of it is that the engine and exhaust are recorded across a wide rev range, and then software is used to make very short sound files that are 1 rpm long. Low rpm sound files are longer in duration, high rpm sound files are shorter in duration. These are then played one after the other for a more accurate, natural sound, as opposed to the old systems where they recorded for example every 1,000 rpm and synthesized the intermediate rpms.

All this to say that if Ferrari or any other car manufacturer really wanted to, they could make the audio speakers play natural sounding engine and exhaust noise that closely matches the actual rpm, even accounting for engine load if they really made an effort. It would still be artificial, but only the purists would care. I don't think we will be seeing this any time soon though.

 

“Ferrari F80 Evoluzione” render.

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

 

I love the recipe. Lightweight, manual, NA V12 that revs to the moon. Gordon Murray's design philosophy is my ideal. But...

...yes, exactly. And when you have issues, service will be less straightforward, I'd guess.

Not to mention the price. And limited quantities. And...they're not very good looking IMO.

I have zero doubt that Ferrari could excel at making more analog cars if its managers were so inclined. I think that's what @sailfly was suggesting, not that they need to emulate GMA's remarkable attention to detail.

Whether or not that mission would inspire the workforce, I don't know. Though I'd imagine it would excite a large subset of their staff, just as it would delight many of this forum's members and so many other enthusiasts. Certainly enough to staff such projects.

 

I did

 

It is not attention to detail but a matter of priorities and philosophy. GMA cars are all about weight reduction and "analogue feel" (whatever that may mean), whereas Ferraris are about cutting edge engineering and performance.

 

Amazing what some decent wheels do for a car, take note Ferrari !

 

Imagine how far we have come with a Dodge Charger EV named Daytona that is capable of producing all these fake sounds. Sound intensity is linked to higher performance: Sport mode offers medium sound output, while Drag, Drift, Donut, and Track modes offer a louder roar. roar that closely matches the rpm.

Benedetto Vigna in an attempt to differentiate Ferrari from all other EV companies, but the reality is that Ferrari is already part of that club, said Ferrari didn’t want to use an artificial sound on its electric car. To begin with, Ferrari's electric mule has systematically presented itself with fake exhaust tips, which is something absolutely pathetic whose childish objective cannot be understood. Regarding the sound of the future electric Ferrari, probably as it has done many times throughout its history, Ferrari has now invented a new form of sound transmission achieved through a non-artificial natural method that is capable of amplify the almost inaudible sounds generated by electric motors.

I completely agree, we are heading towards a new era in which any day those who know how to distinguish the pure and natural sound of an ICE from the fake sound of an EV will be called purists.





Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

That looks fantastic! I agree about the wheels. The livery works well too