Ferrari FF vs Panamera TurboS

The more power u leave unused in the engine the more the engine is....unused and the more it should run....or not ?

Pushing to 200 km/h a car that does 230 max is one thing. Going 200 with an FF is different.

 

No, not really.

 

Like the conservation of heartbeats philosophy to life extension, probably not going to bear out in the long run. Back in the old days, I'd say a motor that didn't hit the full rpm band regularly would be less healthy. I really have no idea if that is at all the case anymore, probably not. Conversely, I'd think that if you ran at high RPM all the time you might maybe take some time off the motor. A well driven car is going to run better longer, and trying deliberately to run at unnaturally low or high RPM probably isn't helpful or well driven. Generally though and especially when you're talking over engineered German cars, my laymans expectation is that we throw most of our cars away for not looking pretty and accessories and **** breaking long before the drive train has worn out.

 

REALZEUS, what Piper means is that I'm right and you're not

 

Uh, no. I'm saying with modern cars it probably doesn't matter, but generally trying to over or under rev, in any way running it other than intended, is likely less optimal. So do you think the Panamera Turbo S was designed from the start to run at low rpm to increase longevity? My guess is not.

 

In that case what are u doing with a 612 on normal public roads ? Are u telling me u don't use it on auto and stay at 2k rpm manually ? all the time ?

 

I'm saying this because people said to NOT use auto on F1 ferrari transmissions, while there is no problem in using auto in a Panamera.

 

I absolutely never use auto.

And I drive the car correctly using all gears and all rpms.

 

I wonder if they guy wants to do it manually like that too.

 

Apples and oranges. Auto works pretty well on any dual clutch.

The auto function seems to work quite well in my 599, and therefore I assume also late model 612's, though definitely not so well in my '05.

Lost me there.

 

ah but then u DO use auto in your 599 !

 

I might. Just bought her.

 

Let me know if it shows any problem, with time. It's my only concern on the 599. I cannot see myself driving with paddles ALL THE TIME. When having fun yes, but not cruising.

 

If I use auto it will only be occasionally. Paddle shifting all the time is great.

 

Modern cars are meant to be driven throughout their rev and power range. Taking a Ferrari up to only 6000 RPMS guarantees nothing in terms of longevity.

 

LOL. Who cares if driving under certain RPM would or wouldn't increase longevity when they barely get any miles in the first place?

I'd be shocked if a modern Ferrari couldn't go at least 100K miles regardless of how you use it (non-track of course,) with just minor repairs and maintenance.

 

Well there are VERY FEW Ferraris over 100k u know ? and none that I know after 2000 (year). Not even in Italy where they use it daily mostly and where they all have great milage. Not even 100k in 14 years ....

 

Which is why how you drive it is irrelevant. I'm inclined to believe using it all throughout the range is best, though I bet 90% of miles on most Ferraris are in fact low rev, highway miles. It's too hard and tiresome to put only high rev miles on a car. The average highway drive more than negates any mileage you could do with high revs at lower speeds given US infrastructure and urban sprawl. I can't imagine anyone driving high rpms at 70-80mph on a highway. I'd feel like such a tool cruising at 8000.

 

The market has become too much about having the latest and greatest. Passionate owners seem to be wavering to the LA/Vegas/Miami crowd who get out of their car as soon as something new comes out. It's really kind of sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's actually good for enthusiasts since the market will get saturated quicker or more inventory, hence lower prices if you can wait a little before buying. The more people who get in and out of the car, the better the prices are for those who can wait a year or two before buying the latest/greatest.

 

As noone1 said (lol) this is really good. the more the market saturates, the better for the prices and for us who buy used

 

Drove a Panamera S and a turbo. Found them bland to drive, disconnected and artificial. Got a Macan turbo which basically drives the same, is more practical and way cheaper (and lighter!). Did not try a FF but being the owner of a manual 612 for 6 years, there is simply no comparison between the V12 Ferrari and the Panamera.

 

There are quite a few post 2000 Ferrari's with over 100K in Europe.

Recently there was a 2007 (I think) 599 for sale in france with 220.000kms on it.

In a 2 second search I found 20 Ferrari post 2000 with 100K (3 or so 99000) kms on it.

 

Having recently traded in my Panamera Turbo for a FF I do have an opinion.

While I really liked my PTT and thought it was the best car I had owned. It performed like a 2 door Porsche, when you are driving it, you don't even realize there are 4 doors and 4 seats. It was reliable, fun, and comfortable.

However, the FF is just sheer excitement. As others have said, I get a smile on my face each time I get in and press the start button. It's an amazing piece of machinery with an absolutely beautiful interior and it goes like nothing else.

I also liked the rarity of the FF. Even here in Northern California I have never seen one on the street and Panameras are now almost as common as Teslas.

 

this question is as hard to answer as which of you children do you love the most , both have their pro's and cons .