New to ferrari -amazed at all of their weak links

Who cares? Lol

 

Exactly! If a Tesla comes up at a stoplight, I simple change into placide mode and let him fool around

With respect to the "weak links", I do not believe that modern Ferraris have more than other more average cars. In contrast, the build and design quality seems to be significantly better than (modern) average.

I have my 550 since 12 years and "suffered" typical weak points being intake gaskets and shock actuators. Aside usual wear replacements and some very minor issues. Thats all. The clutch is still strong with more than 70,000 km. I use it occasionally (not often) in trackdays, not at the limit, but nevertheless in most cases faster than other cars, including modern maschinery like Nissan GTR and Porsche (non GT2/3).

The 599 is just about a year with me, so no long term experience. However at least in this first year of ownership (about 5,000 km) absolutely no issue and no noticable wear at all.

For comparison in my experience:

As a daily driver I had a VW Phaeton (supposed to be top luxury level), until I sold it in real anger at 50,000 km only, because of plenty and expensive to repair serious faults, at least in part due to bad (=cheap) design. My present daily driver, Mercedes GLK, is quite OK, but not free of technical issues and some quirky (technical) design features.

I recently thought of buying a Murcielago, first series and shifter. Upon my request why the clutch was exchanged at 25,000 km already, the seller responded that this is evidence for his caring, since with spirited driving the clutch (remember: manual) is smoked up typically at 10,000 km already. Googleing around seems to somewhat confirm this. Now, THAT really seems to be a "weak link" and makes me reconsider my interest.

 

140k miles and already a burnt alternator? In a Mercedes W123, where the lifespan is measured in millions of km, that would be unthinkable.

I guess everything is relative.

 

This boggles my mind (what's left of it)!!!


sid

 

You are correct. The fact is new Ferrari buyers typically do not keep the car that long or put very many miles on it before trading for a new one. Ferrari understands that very well and designs and chooses vendors based on that model. If the car goes the period their market research shows is the average time of first ownership without too many issues they have achieved their goal. As long as there is a line at the door waiting to buy they have no motivation to change. I have been in the business long enough to have seen downturns several times and that is always blamed on overall economic circumstances and to a great degree that has been right. Until buyers turn their back on the product it will not change and there is no sign that is happening or ever will happen.


Despite all this they are a car that is special in a number of way so many choose to live with the problems and accept it as a price to be factored in.

 

They are scary fast.

And the timing belt services are quite reasonable.

That said, I don't know that I really want one.

 

100% correct, Modern cars are built to sustain there lease period after that buyer
beware.

 

There in lies the difference! - If the Italians had made that engine then they would have fitted it to a road car!

And your point is?

Honda's "Ferrari beater" from decades ago was "superior in every aspect" as you say, in fact it was so good at going fast that test drivers found it disappointing because it took no effort whatsoever to get the best out of it and it was a tad boring to drive for them.

In the end, the 348 was rated by a lot of drivers as being the better drivers car because it needed to be mastered to get the best out of it, and when they did get the best out of it they felt that it was something that they had achieved rather than the car.

Whilst the NSX did push Ferrari into raising it's game and creating the 355 from the 348, it otherwise had no effect on Ferrari.

At no point did it cause a panic at Ferrari, and neither did it have any dramatic effect on their sales.

Today, it could arguably be claimed that McLaren already make cars that are superior in every aspect to Ferrari, and yet they are still not rated as being the guaranteed preferred choice over Ferrari, because the one thing that the likes of McLaren/Lamborghini/Pagani/Bugatti/Porsche etc., etc., cannot do, is "out Ferrari" Ferrari.

This is what these rival companies with their their technical tour de forces fail to realise, just because your car is faster than a Ferrari doesn't automatically make it better or more desirable than a Ferrari.

Like it or not, Honda, even with better build quality and superior handling performance, will never have the desirability that Ferrari has.

I would also add that, based on the test drives of Ferrari's 488 that I've seen so far, I wouldn't guarantee that Honda will come out with a "Ferrari beater"! - The 488 appears to be one hell of a bit of kit!

 

I'm sure that most companies are also aware that if their resale value goes down the drain (i.e. nobody wants the cars due to long-term issues), they can't sell new cars either.

Of course, Ferrari are far from being that short-sighted, since people like me are willing to buy the cars second-hand and the market for this is healthy.

 

"bit of kit" ?.

 

I would have to say that Ferrari's support of older models has until recently, been pretty poor, with loads of parts being unavailable not long after the cars went out of production.

(And some parts were never available in the first place! Try buying the door mirror glass for a 348/355! It was never available as a separate part, even when new!, you had to buy the whole door mirror assembly complete for @£2500 ( $4000), just to replace the damaged glass!. Can you imagine a Company like BMW not supplying just the mirror glass on it's own?).

For many years, Ferrari has pretty much ignored the owners of older cars (I'm talking of the cars over 10 years old or thereabouts, that have tended to no longer be serviced at main dealers but go to specialists instead, not when they are 3~5 years old and still being serviced by main dealers), concentrating their business on new car customers and those with the 3~5 year old cars.

The problem is, when a Ferrari gets to a certain age, it becomes affordable to the likes of Myself, an ordinary working class guy, not one of the rich elite that the car was originally intended for.

And Ferrari makes no allowance for this, because in reality, I'm not the owner they really care about or want. Unless I win the lottery or become successful and rich in business then I'm not going to buy a brand new Ferrari, and they have no real interest in having "paupers" own their cars, as it was not who the car was made for originally.

The sad part is, it's "paupers" such as Myself, who scrimp, save and make massive sacrifices just to own a Ferrari (My 348 TS costs Me £2500 per year just to park it securely with 24/7 access all year round!), who are the true enthusiasts of the marque!

I worship all things Ferrari!, always have done since I was 9 years old. It's more than just liking the cars and the team, it's a genuine love of the marque, it's a religion (on our last National Census I stated My religion as being "Tifosi", because I only worship Ferrari!), which Ferrari appreciates - having Me as a fan of the marque, but like I say, I'm not an owner they truly care about.

Ferrari quite rightly take great pride in their history and heritage, but they could do a damn site more to help the owners of the older cars!

(Producing parts and Reproducing obsolete parts at a much reduced cost to make them affordable to "poorer" owners, rather than still charging the same sort of prices they charged when the cars were brand new and had rich owners, discounted servicing at official dealerships that matches [or is close to matching] the independents prices, holding a larger stock of parts for older cars so that fewer cars have to be cannibalised for parts, things like that).

The sad fact of life is, the only Ferrari owners that the company really cares about are the rich owners who, in their eyes are worthy of their cars. The rest of us were only ever really meant to be fans of the Marque, looking on enviously at those who could afford the dream. The ordinary, everyday working guys and girls were never really supposed to be owners.

If Ferrari were smart though, then they'd realise that there is now a massive Ferrari market for older cars that belong to the ordinary guys and girls, and they could make a good business out of helping keep these cars on the road, whilst keeping the prices comparatively affordable.

Sadly though, unless you have a big bank account to show them, owner or not, you're still just "Riff - Raff" to Ferrari!

 

If Ferrari were smart though, then they'd realise that there is now a massive Ferrari market for older cars that belong to the ordinary guys and girls, and they could make a good business out of helping keep these cars on the road, whilst keeping the prices comparatively affordable.

They have one of the best buissness models on the planet why would they change
that for us.
D.

 

A lot of projection here. Modern Ferrari's are quite durable. In places other than the USA and in some domestic places with year round good weather, Ferrari's see a lot more miles per year.

The limited use that Ferrari's in North America get may be more of a problem for the manufacturer than a blessing. Every dealer and mechanic I have ever talked to says the cars that are driven more drive better and have fewer problems. It is the garage queen that gets dried out seals, gunk in the gas lines, bushings that loose flexibility, electrical gremlins, etc.

Ferrari actively discourages flipping cars. If they were only concerned about the first buyer who puts cash in their pocket, why not encourage flipping? Included maintenance programs I was told are to ensure that leased cars or cars owned short term are actually serviced. Otherwise a lessee could pocket the maintenance money and let owner number two deal with the fallout. Of course that would ruin the reputation of the car when three year old models coming off lease have major problems. So the second owner is critical to the brand's reputation.

Ferrari made a major marketing coup when it won the 24 hours at Le Mans, specifically to put aside concerns about the durability of their cars. I don;t think they are uninterested in durability now.

I think the parts issue is mostly from the limited production numbers. If you want parts available buy a more mass market car such as a Porsche. If a total production run is 35,000 cars, and the cars are on the road for 20 years average and some for 30-40 years, it is a huge logistical problem maintaining an inventory of parts for sale worldwide. I wonder if Lotus suffers from similar parts problems?

 

As I've already explained, these days there is a massive market for older Ferrari's that are no longer owned by the rich, but are now owned by the ordinary, average working class guy/girl, and by ignoring them, Ferrari are missing out on a very lucrative business.

Today there are tens of thousands of old 70's/80's/90's Ferrari's still in existence, being kept going by ordinary people, and they still need spares and servicing. That right there is a multi-million Dollar a year business that Ferrari is missing out on due to it's own arrogance when it comes to older cars.

Their business plan works very well, but it never hurts to add another string to your bow, especially if it generates $Millions for your company.

The main point of My post though is that when it comes to older "cooking" model Ferrari's, the company doesn't give a damn about the cars or their owners, and for a company so proud of it's heritage and international support, that's a bit sad really!

 

The only thing critical to Ferrari's reputation is F1

Plain and simple..Ferrari doesn't care!!!
Doesn't matter if first tier buyer, 2nd, etc. They simply don't care. It is the only manufacturer that can put out substandard parts, etc., then treat the customer like sh@t and for some reason the customer continues to return for punishment. It's a marketing phenomena.

 

I haven't read all the replies so forgive me if it's been said, but I see it as a matter of engineering time...the larger brands have thousands of engineers to spend countless hours on every small detail. It takes time and $ to engineer and fatigue test and re-design if needed every minute component, like a door handle, window mechanism, etc. I'm sure even with engine durability they do a fraction of the pre-production dyno testing that a Ford or Honda does...yes they know if they do have a 1% failure rate on something, they can just say sorry. If Ford or Honda see 1%, they're spending millions to call cars back.

 

I don't think so. They had sold lots of cars during periods where they were not winning in F1 and vice versa. Also some of their biggest markets (USA, China) don't care about F1.

 

Agree to disagree. The intangible auro of Ferrari comes from F1 lore and historical events. I'm in no way saying that sale fluctuations are tied directly to the current F1 season or any season of the past. Ferrari has been historically about racing (which lead to road cars to support the campaign) and has lead to this mystic that exists today and that allows us (myself included) to accept sh#tty sticky buttons, poor interior longevity, outrageous parts/service costs, etc.....

In regards to USA and F1: we're getting there and it seems to be picking up some steam. My feeling is many F-car owners do follow F1 by comparison to Tesla owners, etc.

 

Do other carmakers in this price range and volume do better by their veteran owners?

 

What others view as "flaws", Ferrari (and other Italian car make owners) view as "charm".

 

I also think it has to do with who Ferrari outsources their parts to, as they can't make everything in house. They seemed to stick with the same sources, hence the horrible buttons on the 430, which was there since the 355, and the horrible Becker stereo on the 430, which looked like it belonged in my '95 Acura Integra.

The 458 seems like a massive step up, though.

 

Except for the first 2- 3 years of the ZF gearboxes in the CA and 458. Massive step backwards in terms of reliability.