LaFerrari replacement: v12, no hybrid, less power than SF90stradale?

Where's the proof of that?

 

As much as I am rooting for the 499, vs the F50 GT, this is plainly not true. In qualifying, Leclerc with the Ferrari did 1.46.988, let's call it 1.47. A nearly 14'' difference in a 2 minute lap is an enormous difference. The F1 car is so much quicker that it isn't even a contest. The LeMans hypercar is slower even than an F2 car.

Not really mate. F1 cars are vastly quicker. Even if LMh hypercars had F1 power levels, their weight would still put them at a huge disadvantage over F1 racers.

 

They need to use a 5L NA V10 revving at 15.000 RPM and making around 1100 HP

 

It lapped it in around 1:10

 

Again, where's the proof of that?

 

Ferrari Don't make V10s for the road and have not used V10s in F1 for a very long time. They have no tooling / production setup to produce them either. at 15,000rpm it would never be road legal. I suggest you pay Ferrari to make you a one-off track car

 

There was a time I was trying to reason with said forum member. Believe me, it's a waste of time. That said, Ferrari are master engine makers, so they could easily produce a V10 if they wanted to. Making it road legal and usable is another thing altogether, as you rightly said. Making a 15k RPM engine reliable for 100,000 miles is even tougher. Some people live in a fantasy land...

 

Ferrari are more than capable of producing a V10. They can use the F2004 V10 as a base for design, but with an increased displacement.

So what, they can make a production setup, it's not that big of a deal.

As far as I'm aware, there are no restrictions on how much rpm an engine's gotta have.

Unfortunately, I don't have 10-20 million to do that.

 

We disagree because you're not a purist like me.
Also, so what of the engine is not reliable for 100.000 miles. As far as I'm concerned, it could break down ever 10.000 miles and it still wouldn't be an issue.
If you've got a few millions to buy the car, replacing the engine once a year (since most owners of such cars rarely drive more than 10.000 miles/year) is no big deal. And even then, you'd probably only have to change a few parts of the engine, not the whole engine block in itself.
Also, unless you run it hard day in day out, the engine will be just fine. Even an F1 engine could probably last tens of thousands of miles if you're not pushing it to it's limit.

 

Being stuck in the past doesn't make one a purist. It makes him a technophobe.

 

Did you really just say it wouldn’t be an issue to replace the engine every year? [emoji23] I had a CGT and the engine out was a hassle! Had to ship the car to a specialist and wait months (and $50k) for it to come back. Even if you have all the cash in the world, who wants the hassle of an engine rebuild every year (let alone leaving their cars in the shop so long)?


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Nope. I'm not afraid of technology in a car, I just don't want modern one. I like to be the one driving, in complete control of everything, not a stupid computer.

 

It's no hassle at all. If you have more supercars, you can use another one while they are building you a new engine.
Or better yet, order a couple of spare engines. That way, you just have to mount a new one, it just takes a day or two.

 

Even better, why dont we order two cars so that we can drive one while the other one is being rebuilt [emoji4]


Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat

 

Expecting a F250 & F250 Aperta, so why not? ;-)

 

Now you’re talking. Then I can have my personal driving team swap the cars or my personal engineering team deal with the extra motors. So just buy a few extra cars and a support team and good to go! Really no hassle at all [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The wing appears to sit lower in this picture, compared to earlier ones. I wonder whether it is motorised, or manually adjustable.

 

Or there shall be no wing, I hope


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

They wouldn't be wasting resources, by testing a wing, if they didn't intend on using it in the end.

 

Motorized i guess.

 

Being motorised would give the advantage on-the-go adjustability. A manual wing would be lighter though.

 

30kgs less is no advantage compared with a mobile aero device working with an agressive underbody.

 

Yes, I agree.

 

I think its manual at the moment but has been designed to be motorised.