Add me to that minority. For me a GT is open top driving. Doesn't have to be on the edge all the time, but for me, no convertible = no sale. Some of my best drives are through France and Italy with the top down, well within the speed limit and just cruising.
agreed... but just because something is made out of carbon people assume its "better" that is not always the case
Good point, however driving my McLaren 650S Spider and my 458 Speciale Aperta back to back, there is simply no comparison when it comes to torsional rigidity. The 650 Spider feels like a coupe, the Aperta flex is quite noticeable on mildly bumpy roads. Both cars are "properly engineered" but materials make a huge difference. I hope Ferrari take the plunge and go CF. McLaren have proven it can be done cost-effectively and the fact that the new 720 is similar money to a 488 is a great achievement
I very much doubt it. They appaer wedded to aluminium for many justifiable reasons for now, except for the Halo cars.
I agree, McLaren have shown their expertise in constructing CF "no compromise" tubs to almost perfection, they're currently considering selling them to other manufacturers, you never know Maranello could be the first customer, wouldn't that be hilarious! Albeit highly unlikely...
It would be ideal, but we´re not living in an ideal world: they´re not going to go that way because it´s not cost effective. They pretend to use a modular chassis adapable to all their models to save money and you can´t do that with CF. Porsche is still using steel because alluminium is not suitable for the mass production cars they make and McLaren uses CF only because they can use the same chassis in all their models.
And that's the problem as consequently they all look the same with all the issues that creates. Personally I am happy with Ferraris route and consequential clear model definition.
Maranello has all the expertise needed in CF! If anything their CF expertise is even higher, as demonstrated by the LF that uses F1 grade CF and not the cheaper stuff that McLaren and Lamborghini use. Ferrari just decided to go with aluminium for a number of reasons, as Traveller has already said.
Indeed, but I wonder if they could buy a modular chassis around a central CF core and front and rear alluminium subframes and roof. I´m not and engineer, but I guess it could work. That would be the best of both worlds.
I get the cost/model differentiation points but not much help when my 430 spider is wobbling like jelly over even slightly bumpy roads that it makes it unpleasant to drive.
Considering that the Italian guy in charge of composites at McLaren is ex-Ferrari and ex-ATR (Italian composite company, chassis maker for the Enzo and Carrera GT, I believe) I would agree with your opening statement. Probably the main reason McLaren went with composites, I believe, is that it supports their narrative of being innovators in composites - having pioneered this in F1 - in the relative absence of any car or engine building history.
Guys, so if Ferrari launches New GT at Frankfurt motor show, then what they gonna launch at Geneva motor show next year? Don't they always launch a new mondel at Geneva and Frankfurt only for spider or performance model? Could it be Dino for Geneva? Cuz I just don't think they will launch 488GTO at Geneva, will they?
unfortunately it doesn't work. Using multiple materials is usually not a good idea. Each material has strengths and weaknesses and they can overlap and exaggerate the weakness of the neighborhing material. It comes down to this... remember the jaguar xk8... ever seen one with the nose that was the same color as the rest of the car? That is a very very minor and insignificant consequence of using more than one material. Carbon just isn't so superior to utilize it at the cost of mixing materials and at the moment it isn't worth building the car in full carbon for ferrari. Maybe one day. Could be the next car... who knows...and Im fine with that. My biggest concern with carbon is... especially structurally is... what happens... or how long will it take to de-lam... If the monocoque fails... the car is totaled.
I think it did and is called an alfa 4c. Sales have not been overwhelming. While there are some on here that want a "sports car", the market continues to tell the manufacturers that GT's are in much greater demand (many on here have stated they feel the 458/488 are more GT like that go-cart like sports car). Its like manual shifters. Folks on here get religious about it, but the market spoke clearly, loudly and consistently (how many cali's came with a stick?). Lightweight, smallish, sports cars with manual transmissions are pretty low on the demand list and a good way to lose money it seems.
Apart from the roof that's exactly what McLaren is doing (carbon tub and front and rear aluminium subframes), as far as I understand.
Personally I don't subscribe to that narrative. A 458 is a real, hard core super-sportscar, not a GT. The fact it can also make a trip without shaking off the teeth out of one's mouth is just a testament to its great refinement and engineering prowess. As all racing drivers say, a good car is a benign car! The 4C is just a half baked product. Great chassis, mediocre engine, bad steering (being unassisted makes it both heavy and slow). Great looks but not the product it should have been. Lotus does it better. Ferrari was never about small sportscars; it was always about powerful supercars, with the odd GT in the range.
Huh? There is no problem at all mixing and matching materials. The Huracan and R8 for example use a hybrid CF/aluminum chassis. http://www.autoconcept-reviews.com/cars_reviews/audi/audi-r8%20-V10-V10-plus-R8-e-tron-R8-LMS-2015/illustrations/R8%20structure-150108_large.jpg
How much of that would you say is carbon? Would you say enough of it is usable for multiple platforms which is what the context of the argument was in regards to. Thats one car in the industry that does that... and in a very very small way. Of course there are cars that use a carbon roof. Or carbon body with aluminum doors there is a time and a place for it... but it is not the best solution at this time
Yes, sort of: http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2011/02/2012-McLaren-MP4-12C-chassis-side.jpg For Ferrari it would be a bit more difficult as they also build front engined cars. In the McLaren the front wheels are directly attached to the carbon tub, the front subframe is only for crash protection, so it wouldn´t be suitable for a front engined car. Ferrari also would need to build a specific longer tub for the 2+2 cars. Certainly it´s doable, but I don´t know if it would be cost effective.
This times x100. The other factor for me in buying the Cali T was the "no cheese factor". The car is just spectacular to look at (top down or top up). There is no "extra panels, ports, fins, etc" needed to make the car any more alluring/attractive. My issue was the 488 was simple - "great car, wrong vibe". The Cali T is a classic design. I have enjoyed it immensely.
