Mid-engined 12's --- gone for good at Maranello?

there are a few threads on the new Enzo replacement, confirming it will be V12

 

Lambo makes one. Ferrari will make one.

 

fixed.

I always wanted to see a competitor to the Muricelago, I know the 599 is a price competitor but i could imagine building a more menacing 458... 0-60 2.8.... 210 mph... a little more aggressive than a 458 would be my dream car.

 

What sacrifice would that be? The sacrifice in my point of view would the loss of lineage for a production model as you stated and of which I agree with.

 

Since when does Ferrari follow Lambo's lead?

 

A 512TR has great luggage space, it's comfortable, it's easy to see out of - even to the rear, and I never had any heat issues. And that car was 15 years old.

But, I don't see Ferrari building a mid-engine V12 short of the Enzo replacement hypercar. So I think the 512TR will remain the last attainable mid engine V12.

 

good points JS
the TR series is know to be popular to many, has the TV cred, the plus' you've mentioned....makes you wonder why it doesn't hold better value in the market place?

 

They made 10K of them, and there are still plenty around. If they had made a relative handful, like the Countach, the demand would so outstrip the supply there would be at least a 1 or maybe a 2 in front of their current selling prices...just look at the 512M (and that car is not terribly attractive in the eyes of many TR lovers).

In time, I believe lower production cars, like the flying mirror and the 512 TR will see their values rise significantly. I don't buy into the argument that operating costs are holding these cars back. Countaches, Miura's, Boxers, Jaguars, and plenty of other V12 classics are expensive to maintain. Its the cost to value proposition that has the bean counter prospective investor/buyers turned off.

Personally, I can't spend five minutes next to a Testarossa without drooling...and I own one. For many of us, it is not just A ferrari it is THE Ferrari.


We'll see if I am right regarding values, but the next 15 years should tell the tale.

 

Lamborghini never stopped making them, I certainly would be interested in another mid engine 12 from Ferrari...

 

fair to say Joe, congrats on the TR
the producton might play a factor as you say, still you don't see them a lot
i've had a couple of jags, last being xjs, so i know what you mean there
i'd be interesting to learn how many of the first series (testarossa) are still out there?
i'd love to own a clean 512TR someday

 

Thanks! FWIW, I LOVE the XJS!! What a stately GT. My family used to have one, and I actually almost bought one this summer!

As for the TR's, you are right. You really don't see a lot of them...which is shocking considering it was and may still be Ferrari's highest volume model ever!

It seems a disproportionate number of Testarossa owners keep these cars as garage jewelry. There are more ultra low mileage TR's for sale than any other FIAT era Ferrari I can recall.

It's a shame too, because they are sublime to drive.

As for Ferrari moving back to mid-engined. I don't see it happening. Ferrari has a long history of making elegant front engined V12's, most of which have more than a modicum of practicality. It was Lambo and its Miura that dragged Enzo kicking and screaming into the mid-engined V12 market (beginning, of course, with their V6 Dino). It is a market, with the exception of their supercars, that they were all too ready to abandon. After all, in their 60+ year history, they only built two midengined 12 cylinder production cars--the Boxer and the Testarossa (both flat 12's). The 550 and 599 that followed were significantly better performing and balanced cars in every measurable way, while not having the operating costs and packaging difficulties of the earlier models. With Ferrari now building cars like the FF and the California, it is clear they are going back to their roots and towards making GT's that are more user friendly and practical. I don't know where a midengined production v-12 cylinder fits into that scheme, especially since it would require a clean sheet redesign and componentry rather than borrowing structural and design elements from sister cars, like the 550 did with the 456, etc.

IMHO, Ferrari will continue limiting its "sport cars" to the mid engine V-8 line, while putting v12's in its GT and hopefully its supercars.

I hope I am wrong

and of course, these are just my observations and my worthless .02

 

Miura >> Boxer

 

Uhm...that was over 40 yrs ago??...I don't think Ferrri takes much notice of Lambo anymore...they are far more interested in McLaren IMO

 

The mid-engine arrangement is good. The powerplant will be the only question.

Weight is the enemy of performance. So it may be that the V12 will not be favored in the future. Especially for a production car.

Now a W12. Hmmmm?

 

Not just performance, it's also the enemy of fuel economy (which seems a bit irrelevant in a Ferrari), and emissions.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, like it or not, the days of the big capacity V12's (& W12's for that matter), are numbered!. They're dinosaurs and their era is coming to an end due to ever tightening noise, fuel economy and emission regulations.

Don't be too surprised if you find that the "Enzo" hypercar that follows the next one is a twin turbo V8.

The dawning of a new age is upon us and it is medium capacity forced induction!

 

You kind of answered your own question.

The Countach, Miura and 365 BB are rare cars. The TR and Jag XJS are relatively common, as is the E-Type V12 which has lagged the sixes in value.

Unless/until TRs appeal to the 1 percenters, they will have to find buyers in a shrinking middle class, where $10,000 is considered a lot for a major service bill on non-collectible car.

I agree with you. I think we're going to see more power from smaller, lighter, more efficient engines -- probably a trickle down from F1. The focus will likely be on chassis engineering for less weight and better handling.

As for mid-engine, again if it wasn't the optimal configuration the F1 teams would have figured that out a while ago. It may not be optimal for golf club bags (California/599), but it is the de facto choice for performance flagships (Enzo, 458).

 

A bit irrelevant for a road car that is rarely driven, but an obsessive focus of the F1 team... I do think efficiency matters to Ferrari.

 

I used to think TRs would eventually go up, also...however, yesterday, I was perusing Infinity's webstite and saw one of their vanilla cars had somewhere around 360hp.

While a TR does & will always sound pretty cool, the day is here where many off the shelf cars can match or exceed it's performance parameters.

And, with electric stuff on the horizon, I now think much less of the future value of today's and yesterday's Ferraris. They'll be quaint, interesting, and hard to find someone to work on them.

Generic is passing 'em by...after all, many current cars exceed human capabilities and we humans ain't gonna be evolving faster reflexes and any need for super duper hot cars. What's the diff between driving an 800hp car vs. 1000hp vs. 1200hp vs. 10,000 hp? Not much.

 

maybe competition?

 

On or off track, Ferraris and Lambos do not compete. There is very little overlap between
people who are attracted to Ferrari and people who are attracted to Lambo. Thank God.

TR's are a love it or hate it aesthetic proposition. Many people love them, but many dislike the whale shape, the cheese graters, and the Lambo-like "look at me" style.

That, together with the astronomic production numbers, means in my opinion that the TR's have very little upside potential.

 

of course they compete with sales, mclaren will compete with ferrari and lamborghini now, and also the more expensive porsches.

I'm attracted to both Ferrari and Lamborghini... A lot of people are, and a lot of people always will, some may have preferences as to which brand appeals to them more.

That's like saying Audi don't compete with BMW, when they do. Even the Audi R8 competes with Ferrari... Mostly r8 vs cali.

And a Lamborghini definitely is not a whale shape, you might as well say a blue whale looks like a 456 because the front grill looked like its mouth....

the ferrari has smooth lines, the lamborghini is very much a 'in your face car', 'look at me', the show-off car.. an aggressive car... They offer similar performence but do have different characteristics but at the end of the day they do compete.

The car's may never be the same specs... but its all about the brand name, enter a super car discussion... 'whos got the best supercars'... we all know the 2 car names that will be said.

 

The very fact that the Testarossa exists at all should be proof enough to you that Ferrari and Lambo do compete...even if Ferrari if has always been too proud to admit it. Every single thing about the Testarossa, from its top speed to its exotic styling were directly aimed at knocking the vaulted Countach off its lofty perch in car magazines, little boys bedrooms, and the general public.

Moreover, as is commonly told, Lambo was created solely so Ferruccio Lamborghini could stick it to Enzo. Also, as previously noted, the godfather of the Dino and Boxer is actually the Lambo Miura.

While die-hard Ferrari fans may have difficulty understanding the attraction to Lambo and vice versa...they do compete in the same high end exotic car market and there is a fair amount of cross-marque shopping.

Not every Ferrari owner purchased their car for the proud racing history...some just want a fast exotic sports car.

 

I agree that efficiency matters to Ferrari, especially in this day and age of offsetting your carbon footprint, and it's a big reason why the days of the V12's are numbered.

The irrelevance I was talking about was not actually from Ferrari's side but from the side of the owners who are lucky enough to be able to afford a brand new Ferrari.

Lets be honest here, people who buy a brand new V12 Ferrari do not then tend to worry about the MPG they are getting from it.

As for fuel economy being "an obsessive focus of the F1 team", that's true but the problem is, big capacity V12's have very little relevance to F1 anymore and with 1.6 V6 turbo's coming in in 2014, the relevance is getting less and less.

For Ferrari, the lessons learned from the future F1 engines will further make big capacity V12's even more obsolete.

At the moment, a big part of Ferrari continuing with V12's is based on the history of the company using these engines but the day is fast approaching when that is no longer justifiable as a business plan.

BMW are in a similar situation. Take a look at their future model ranges (including the M-series). Suddenly, large capacity (by European standards), normally aspirated engines are being phased out and are being replaced by forced induction engines in order to meet emission, noise and economy regulations.

Like it or not, turbo's are the future, even for Ferrari!

 

I agree.