POLL: If F80 were offered with different engine choices

I chose the current powertrain, I am not a fan of V12's, particularly NA V12's. I like low end torque, light weight engines and the V12 is just not the answer. IMHO

 

You'll be surprised just how heavy the V6 is.

Base engine is 185 kg (I assume this does include turbos, not sure about ancillaries such as intercoolers and associated piping, but for arguments sake assume it does)
Battery pack 25kg
Electric engine 22kg x3 (excludes all the heavy cabling etc)

276kg

F140 V12 weighs 205kg.

Cosworth RA (Valkyrie engine, 6.5 liter V12) 206 kg
Cosworth GMA (T50 engine) 178 kg (But crucially this includes the FULL exhaust system even for road car, including cats etc)

A lightweight car with a high revving V12 (so "gutless" low down torque wise) will suddenly feel very quick indeed as it just has no weight to push forwards.

 

Many thanks for restoring the truth and debunking the myth of the small lightweight V6, which it is not due to hybridization.

 

if the performance was identical or better to what it is now then the V12, otherwise keep it as it is

 

I think the V6 power unit’s biggest advantages are packaging and torque.

 

Engines are power units. let me see if this helps. Yes you can package a V12 into the F80 but there is more to just fitting it into the car, its how well you can package and engine and what the results yield (dimensionality and weight distribution).

F80 Hybrid vs. F140 V12

Specific Output

• • V6: ~395 hp/L (900 hp from 3.0L)
    
    
  • V12: ~126 hp/L (819 hp from 6.5L) → V6 delivers nearly 3x the power density.
• Thermal Efficiency
  • V6: >41% (boosted by lean burn, HPDI, and 3.7 bar boost)
    
    
  • V12: ~33% (limited by NA combustion and frictional losses) → V6 extracts more energy per unit of fuel.
• Boost Strategy
  • V6: Twin 48V e-turbos spinning to 130,000 rpm for instant boost
    
    
  • V12: No forced induction → V6 achieves higher cylinder pressures and faster spool.
• Torque Delivery
  • V6: >900 Nm from 0 RPM via tri-motor hybrid system
    
    
  • V12: 678 Nm at 7,250 RPM → V6 offers full torque instantly; V12 requires high revs.
• Transient Response Time
  • V6: <100 ms (electric motors + e-turbos)
    
    
  • V12: >250 ms (mechanical throttle and inertia) → V6 reacts more than twice as fast.
• Maximum Engine Speed
  • V6: 9,000 rpm (dynamic limiter at 9,200 rpm)
    
    
  • V12: 9,500 rpm → V12 revs higher, but V6 achieves more power per rev.
• Packaging and Mass Efficiency
  • V6: Compact, rear-tilted layout with transverse battery
    
    
  • V12: Longitudinal, front-heavy configuration → V6 enables better weight distribution and aero centralization.
• Center of Gravity & Chassis Integration
  • V6: Low-mounted ICE + battery behind cockpit
    
    
  • V12: Higher engine placement due to block size → V6 improves roll stiffness, lateral grip, and yaw agility.
• Aerodynamic Compatibility
  • V6: Allows 1800 mm diffuser and active aero surfaces
    
    
  • V12: Bulk limits underbody airflow and diffuser volume → V6 supports higher downforce and lower drag.
• Torque Vectoring & Lateral Control
  • V6: Dual front motors enable predictive yaw modulation
    
    
  • V12: Relies on mechanical LSD and passive steering → V6 offers superior cornering precision and stability.
• Energy Recovery & Efficiency
  • V6: Regenerative braking + MGU-K recharge strategy
    
    
  • V12: No energy recovery → V6 improves endurance and reduces thermal load.
• System-Level Control
  • V6: Ferrari’s Vehicle Dynamics Control Module blends ICE/EV torque
    
    
  • V12: Traditional ECU with gear-dependent torque shaping → V6 offers seamless power delivery and traction envelope optimization.
• Reliability Under Load
  • V6: Derived from Le Mans-winning 499P; built for endurance
    
    
  • V12: Susceptible to thermal soak and over-rev stress → V6 maintains peak output under sustained track conditions.
• Scalability & Future-Proofing
  • V6: Compatible with evolving battery tech and electric motor upgrades
    
    
  • V12: Physically and thermally maxed out → V6 supports long-term performance evolution

 

Asked another way - would owners give up 15% in outright performance for a 100% increase in sound and emotion?

Yes: 100%

 

Not 100% accurate. An ICE engine in an automotive application is considered a power unit as a solo element. In terms of a hybrid system an ICE engine is one component of a power unit. The term is acceptable in both contexts.

 

I didn't write it, my friend sent it to me. He is a mechanical engineer. He has been developing race engines going all the way back to when Honda built the Prelude 2.2 liter motor pushing 13K RPM and 450hp NA in 1993, that was his project. He has been in engine development his whole life, most recently consulting on hybrid systems for the best known Hypercars on the market today as well as hybrid systems for military drones. In his spare time he rebuilt both of my 1960 250 Colombo engines for my Ferrari's, he is everything engine from the early V12's all the way to the most current F80 setup.

BTW if building a V12 was a better solution for the F80 Ferrari would have went this route. It was part of the "whitepaper" for the F80 project, and in the end they chose the direction they took for performance reasons, its non disputable.

 

While I can make a case for the V12, that 6 cylinder platform is pretty darn good. If they can get the right sound out of it I am sure it will be great.

 

This poll is really asking whether you prefer performance (hybrid V6) or heritage (V12).

And, no, we cannot have both.

Unlike many things, these two choices are indeed mutually exclusive.

 

why not?

They now have a winning heritage with the V6turbo hybrid platform. The reason we all say V12 V12 V12 is because it won races for Ferrari. Many times it was not the most powerful but it was the most durable or reliable. The V12 happens to sound glorious, and it has other wonderful attributes. But if it didn’t sound amazing, we’d still find a way to say it sounds good, because it won. Anyway, we now have the heritage, the performance, the myth, which is the V12. And rightly so. Maybe it is a missed opportunity, they could have found a way to adapt the V12. But I will give them credit for taking an approach that is directly inspired by racing but also takes important understanding of road cars into consideration.

I think the 296 sounds pretty good, so theres no mechanical reason why the F80 couldn’t sound better; but there are regulatory reasons. The F80 is pretty quiet, and thats a shame. Sound=energy; energy=emotion; and these cars are about emotion first and foremost. Maybe they can figure out a way to get more sound out of the car and still be in compliance with regulations?

 

I disagree with the mantra that the V6 has more performance than the V12.
It's worth remembering that the current V12 (F140) was launched 23 years ago (Enzo), while the F163 V6 was launched six years ago (296 GTB).
It's very convenient and comfortable for some to claim that its new V6, suffocated with turbos and excessive electrification, has more performance than the V12 N/A projected 23 years ago.
The V6 F163 is the highest performing engine not because it is a V6, but because it is the only engine developed in the last decade by Ferrari, combined with forced turbo induction and electrification.
The question is: how would an all-new V12 Ferrari perform? I'm sure the V6 wouldn't even stand a chance.
In my opinion, if a V12 competes on equal engineering and age conditions with a V6, the V12 will always win, as it has greater capacity. In fact, it would win in everything: performance, excitement, collectibility.
It's also important to emphasize that, in today's engineering, there's little difference in weight between a V6 and a V12.

 

He didn't write it, he sent it to me, and I'm guessing that comment is beneath you. And its origins does not demean its credibility or accuracy.

 

If we analyze the situation, I would say we can have both, because on one hand, who can reasonably think that a LAF is underpowered and lacks performance??? We're talking about a road car, not a car intended to set lap times in a race!!! And on the other hand, if Ferrari had wanted to play "positively" with its difference, thanks to the aura of the badge, it would have focused on a significant reduction in weight, because less weight also means more performance. Finally, we're dealing with power figures on open roads that are totally unusable, except for flattering egos, because objectively, we are more in a contest of who has the biggest, rather than a more objective approach to automotive passion. We're talking about road cars, and 1300 hp on three-meter-wide ribbons in the middle of traffic is of no interest, let's wake up !!!
Is this going to continue until where ??? soon or later 2000 hp for the road, and some will find that it is not performing well enough compared to the competition...come on ...