© 2019 MOTORSPORT NETWORK. All rights reserved.
Sign up to receive latest updates for Ferrari News, Threads, and Classifieds
Discussion in '458 Italia/488/F8' started by Dilusha, Aug 8, 2019.
So true. Im going to lose 25 kgs if I decide on a F8
Clearly every bonafidi super car enthusiast will be on a strict diet to ensure optimum performance from their exotic.
Just joking. Seriously when is anyone ever going to put the pedal to the metal in suburbia ? More than enough speed with a 488.
1 gallon of gas weighs 6.073 lbs. 15 gallon tank weighs 91 lbs.
" Believing the weight claims of any Italian company- especially Ferrari- is a rookie mistake in the car business."- R & T- p.46- Sept/19- Jason Cammisa.
There are legal implications if a declared spec figure is not within certain limits. Are manufacturers stretching those limits? Of course they are! But they are not blatantly lying.
Off chance Realzeus you don't happen to work for Ferrari in any way? Just wondering...
The right thing to do would be to advertise the weight of the car with a full tank of gas and all fluids and any other mainstream equipment usually ordered such as radios nav and the likes. That would at least be going some ways to being honest. Anything else is just straight deception and lying....there IS no other way of looking at it.
Can’t agree with that. Whatever method you choose, the weight is the weight and I think the manufacturers must be able to back up their claim so it will be possible somehow. It’s irrelevant that you can’t drive the car dry, in the same way that it’s irrelevant to have a full tank of fuel and a passenger at 75kg - most of the time you are not driving under those circumstances either (in my case never...!). The point is that whatever weight you declare it needs to be comparable to other competitor products and so long as it achieves that, the formula for weight - dry, kerb or whatever - is irrelevant. No manufacturer will blatantly lie about weight but they will certainly mislead - the specification that they weigh is unlikely to be built and may not even be orderable in some circumstances. Misleading, yes, incorrect, not exactly. For example, you can order unpainted aluminium panels. Very expensive and no paint, so lighter. Or order the car with no communication and radio. No one does it though.
I don't think anyone is talking about adding the weight of a passenger or driver as these are clearly variables. However starting off with all necessary fluids inc a full fuel along what is what normally is supplied in the greater majority of cars such as the radio A/C and Nav etc then provides a realistic weight and allows those who choose to be extremely minimal to work the weight backwards from a benchmark that is easy to qualify . As with the fuel - it's easier to weigh with a full tank which again covers for the scenario where someone wants to cheat the actual fill. It's generally easier to work the weight backwards from a benchmark than forwards and therefore easier for anyone to qualify what the manufacturer is claiming.
I have never worked for any car manufacturer, since you cared to ask, sir. I have worked for the Government in a defence-intelligence capacity and I am an entrepreneur nowadays.
I am just stating the obvious, which any EU citizen (now, with the Brexit this sounds funny) happens to know.
A full tank you say? Do you know that MB offers a 44 litre tank as standard for the C Class, in order for the EU weight to be lower and for them to take the emissions-economy test like that? The 66 litre tank is optional, but everyone specs it anyway over here (actually it is the standard UK tank, even though the car has been type approved in Germany with the small tank).
Still, the law is the law ("dura lex, sed lex" as the Romans might say)
and manufacturers have to abide by it.
I think it should be quoted with all fluids but no fuel. Fuel is fuel and penalising manufacturers for making larger tanks is crazy.
Weight numbers are primarily for comparison with competitors...when every manufacturer adopts a common standard with objective, third party confirmation, the numbers will be significantly less subject to -- ahem-- shall we say, "optimistic self evaluation" by the manufacturers. I don't ever see that happening, except in real world instances similar to what Ryan posted earlier in this thread.
Having said that, weight makes a gigantic difference in vehicle dynamics. I pull my cars to events using an 80,000 GVRW Volvo Totercoach. (For those outside of North America, its basically a long-haul lorry with about 14 meters of living quarters slapped on the back). After I get done white-knuckling that thing down some of our Rocky Mountain grades, my 1 Ton dually feels like a Lotus.
I think we'd all agree that adding a heavy passenger to a car, especially at the track, makes a huge difference. So, while I can't blame Ferrari for trying to find the absolute lightest possible metric for reporting the weight of the Pista, it comes down to driving dynamics and feel as you drive and compare one car with another. Taking weight off the driver's belly is a good start. Lithium battery and lighter wheels are also low hanging fruit.
You get the prize of the biggest Ferrari defender in the forum. Not a single post criticizing the brand ( and we do it so Ferrari listens and gets better) doesn’t get an answer from you defending the brand. In a way it’s quite beautiful but also silly. You’re like a cheerleader supporting the team even if they suck.
Ferrari is a company absolutely at the top of its game. It is the clear de facto market leader and is not making lazy cars but ones that get repeated and effusive critical acclaim. Porsche is the only other that gets close, maybe even equal. If you’re being objective, most comments should be favourable.
I do though have a criticism. It takes far too long to get cars (2+ years already for my 812 and only a guess that it should be October). This criticism however, while unfortunate and irritating for me, hardly makes them less desirable..
I wouldn't go that far.
If anything it would be the other way around on the mentioned brands.
Most of my comments are favorable (re Ferrari) and I'm a huge supporter of the brand in general but some things are far too obvious and, hard to overlook - well for me anyway. I could mention them but it may only make matters worse amongst some of you who will only clammer to the defense, and that is unproductive.
Anyway I know what the deficiencies are and that's all that matters to me as an owner and driver of these cars. Would be be a lovely thought if Ferrari could one day get actually their **** together on these things - some of which are quite elementary - but I guess what can one do other than not buy the car and I'm not prepared to go that far as in general it works for me, if not for the frustrations which go with these ridiculously unnecessary issues.
I'm not a lover of all Ferrari models but nor am I on all Porsche models or many of the other brands models either for that matter. Each Brand has their models which are of personal attraction hence garner my attention and respect in accordance with what works for me personally and, I imagine that works in the same way for everyone here.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you had to choose 1 car out of your current fleet which would it be?
I can guess. GT2RS
And you get the the prize of the biggest Ferrari detractor on this forum.
The brand is despicable in its recent F1 efforts; then again a 10 year dry spell is to expectedm as it happened before in the '60s and the '80s. The road cars though are beyond reproach.
Personally, I don't regard Porsche as a worthy Ferrari competitor. Lamborghini for sure and McLaren in about 20 years, when they will will become established...
Dont kid yourself Mclaren is doing very well. Over time they will sort their issues and become a formidable competitor. It won't be 20 years that would be too late and too long.
McLaren is not a house name, even in the UK.
They seemed fairly popular when I was there recently. I can tell you they are doing well in the US, just look at the numbers. They have some issues to sort out but they are moving in the right direction.
So, you reckon they are a household name over here?
Dont know, I didnt take a poll.
Porsche is a worthy Ferrari competitor (and we’re talking GT products, some of the Boxster/Cayman line and some of the 911 range such as the TTS) in the sense that their cars get top-notch critical acclaim, the design and execution of the products is excellent for those who love driving and the market for them is mature and pretty stable. They have no directly competitive product such as a mid V8 or a V12.
Lamborghini is a level below - Aventador is wonderful but doesn’t drive particularly well and has a single plate clutch still, standard Huracan was not as good as it could have been - Performate is clearly a hot-spot and a top drawer product.
McLaren is two levels below. The product gets great reviews from the press but there are many customer issues and McLaren are not always good at dealing with them. The dealers don’t always bid on their own cars and in my view there is close to a crisis of confidence from many customers and traders in the brand. Discounts are far too readily available and I don’t believe the market to be completely stable or mature yet. That is obviously country dependent but picking up comments from here I don’t think that comment is generally wide of the mark.
These are obviously opinions but I don’t think they are wild ones.
Honestly I wish I was this faithful in other things in my life. I’m not a Ferrari detractor, I live this brand that’s why I have their products but they need to step up the game and stop being lazy. One word: weight! Not power shows you how lazy a company can be.
It's not laziness, it's a business decision. They decided to go with aluminium construction and that has a slight weight penalty over CF. They are on average 50-100 kilos heavier than the opposite number McLarens; hardly a catastrophe.