New pic of ferrari 599 gtb at fiorano circuit

Very well said, too many are stuck in the past.
This isn't the 1980's, leave the been-there-done-that
chunk of cheese shapes to Lambo.

 

hit the nail on the head that thing is gross

 

The 550 is worlds better then the TR IMO.
Quicker, faster, better handling, more user
friendly, easier and cheaper to maintain, more modern etc....

 

I find it ****ing mind boggling that people thing that thing looks anything like a Covette

 

Yeah ... what he said.

Have a look at the current Le Mans cars ... none are as ugly as this car, and they are most definitely using modern aerodynamics.

Pete

 

The Audi R8 is butt-ugly....but it wins....

 

I guess we have reached the area of different opinions. The R8 is beautiful compared to this Ferrari offering.

We are in a poor styling era, simple as that. All this edgy styling sucks!

Something soon will show the way and it is functional and stunning ...
Pete

 

The Enzos nose is purposeful. It has that shape due to the openings next to it. All in the name of good airflow....I happen to love the look of the Enzo. As well as the SLR, much better then the boring, bland CGT IMO.

 

Well, no matter what....
It's better then retro crap!

 

Maybe, but there are many ways of doing and meeting their aero requirements ... they choose that way to 'look' a little like a F1 car, that's all.

It is not just functional, but 90% marketing BS. Otherwise every Le Mans prototype would have a similar front.
Pete

 

How can you even compare the Audi R8, a race car, with the new Ferrari, a street car?

You are right about one thing, we have reached an area of different opinions. We are in a styling transition, and not everyone is ready to accept the new themes. Just like the transition of 10 years ago, and the one 20 years ago, etc. It is interesting how people that complain about a style today, embrace it when the next trend begins.

 

Well they do....large bubble fenders, center hump....usually a center air intake....splitter....etc....

 

You can say that agian....
Like eveyone hated, now loves the:
TR
550
360
etc....

 

I was discussing this so called modern aerodynamics that was raised by zjpj, thus I thought of a car where modern aerodynamics are really important.

Actually I will give this ugly Ferrari some credit, atleast it is not a rehash of an old design. Still ugly IMO.

I meant the totally unnecessary F1 look-alike fake nose . Every prototype has your description ... but not all have a wanabe F1 fake nose.

Pete

 

And is NOT front engine. The R8? lol
Even if the comparison were fruitful on other grounds, which it isn't, it does not work in that crucial respect.

That is my whole point. Front engine cars these days, if they are to be fast, have to look a lot like this car does. The reason why I contend that there is a lot less flexibility of design with front engine cars is because of the size of modern engines. Keep in mind that the GTO had a 3 liter engine. That's nothing these days. Mid-engine cars have a lot of flexibility in the design because the car can be built around that big engine. And a longer rear, behind the cockpit, can be quite flattering and doesn't really play such a major role in the design somehow... By contrast, a long front bonnet, no matter how many scoops and stuff you add, still looks like a long front bonnet. I don't know, there's a reason why most front-engine cars look the same - that long hood is the car's most prominent feature. Not so with mid-engine cars. Whatever design the front and nose of the car has is offset by the size/proportion of the rear where the engine is. It's much harder to squeeze today's engines into a front-engine scheme and build a great-looking design. It's either going to look like this and be fast, or be gigantic and stupid like the Maybach coupe, or be bulbous and sleek like the DB9 and Contential GT. And those are pretty much your options.

 

Pete, I didn't say modern aerodynamics don't look good.

I said 1) modern aerodynamics, as well as the need for cooling today's advanced technology, necessarily affect the design of any car. That is undeniable. 2) That this formula is harder to work with in a street-legal, front-engine GT car.

 

Hmmm, lets think about that:

1. If you want to go that fast and dynamically correct, then a mid engined car is the way to go! I personally do not think the 0.003 of a second in lap time that pushing the already centrally located engine back a few inches/cm's is worth the ugly result. Lets think about the buyers ... if you are buying a front engined car you are already thinking compromise.

2. How about designing a different engine layout?. Lets try a shorter engine, like a W12, or even a v6.


Personally I reckon if Michael Schumacher raced me around Spa in a 456 and me in the god ugly 612 ... guess what Michael will win. **** if Michael was in even a Daytona he would win.

Designing involves huge compromises and if a Ferrari purchaser has decided on a front engined car he/she is already thought: 'Hmmm, mid engined car is just too much race for me, I do not need that performance level' and thus made that compromise.

Lets face it a 456, 550 are undoubtably good fun and dynamic on the race track, these front engined dynosaurs should be stunning to look at so everybody goes: 'Yep I'd have chosen class, style over performance too'

Pete

 

That wasn't my point though, he was talking about LeMans prototypes....

 

We were discussing the Enzo's front as well as modern aero.

Anyway yes a front engined car has it's own air flow, etc. requirements ... but there are millions of solutions ... not just the ugly, edgy ones

BTW: I loved the TR when it came out, and 550 and 360. Still like the 360, but now not so in love with the TR and 550.

Pete

 

absolutely, one only need look at the DB9 racer to see that beauty and performance can mix!

 

Humm, you went the opposite way of most lol.

 

The DB9 is nice, BUT tooooooo much like a Jaguar.
The roadcar is to bland....

 

Well, there's a reason I like the vintage cars....

But, in any event, my point is this. Yes, Ferrari could have gone in different directions. They could have kept with the TR and stuck with a mid-engine layout. They could have said we want a front-engine light sports car, and not a GT cruiser that also happens to go like the clappers. But they didn't. They wanted a big, modern GT car, and then they made it fast as hell. If you want a little sports car, or a mid-engine sports car, then that's a disagreement with Ferrari's entire business/marketing strategy, not this car. They designed what Ferrari wanted, and for what it is (a big, hugely fast GT car), it looks good. IMO, of course.

 

Well said on many points....