Rising kerb weights - what happened to 'progress'?

One area where the "progress" in weight reduction has gone is into crash survivability, but you've still got a point. My preference would be for a much more gritty 550/575/599 -- but I think that the manufacturers feel that the customers think low NVH = "quality" (so more sound insulation, etc.).

 

also look at the equipment; power steering, air con, sound systems, etc., the size of cars (599 vs Daytona). Put a 308 next to 430 there is a lot of difference, size and equipment( not even counting the 500 lbs. of safety related stuff. They are still makings cars out of the same materials now as they were 35 years ago. A Boxer for example had aluminum body panels and it weighed aprox. 3600+.

 

Doesn't a 308QV and a 430 weigh about the same (at least for US spec cars)?

 

With the "green movement" starting to take hold the next performance frontier is going to be weight reduction. Lighter cars get better gas milage and don't need as much horse power.

 

Actually, the 308 is slightly heavier. I own a 430 and, if I could, would shrink it about 10% which would make it lighter and mostly likely better handling. All the weight savings from aluminum structure went to making a bigger car.

Dave

 

You bring up a very good point. We have all these weight saving materials, and yes the cars have been beefed up which makes them safer, but they seem to be getting quite a bit larger. I saw a picture a couple of days ago of a 328 right behind a 575 and the 328 looked like a kids toy almost. Ferrari's have become quite large.

I truly think with all this "green" mantra and laws (I'm sure they will add further gas guzzler taxes in the US) will most likely cause the Ferrari's to get smaller which is good because I loss of unsprung weight is a good thing for performance. .

 

Model Weight kg Output kW kW/tonne Index kW/tonne

1973 308 GT4 1265 190.2 150.4 100%
1975 308GTB 1265 190.2 150.3 100%
1980 Mondial 8 1446 159.6 110.4 73%
1980 Mondial 8 US 1586 152.9 96.4 64%
1981 308 GTBi 1286 159.6 124.1 83%
1982 308 GTB QV 1275 179.0 140.4 93%
1989 348tb 1390 220.0 158.3 105%
2003 360 Ch.Strad. 1280 312.4 244.1 162%
328 GTB 1263 201.3 159.4 106%
328 Mondial 1410 201.3 142.8 95%
Mondial T 1570 223.7 142.5 95%
1993 348 GTB 1497 238.6 159.4 106%
1994 F355 1350 279.6 207.2 138%
360 Modena 1390 293.8 211.3 141%
550 Maranello 1690 361.7 214.0 142%
288GTO 1160 294.6 254.0 169%
575M Maranello 1690 384.0 227.2 151%
F50 1230 387.8 315.2 210%
F40 1100 352.0 320.0 213%

 

That didn't come out very well... I'll try again

 

This is easier to read.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Nice chart Grahame;

+1 here, everyone is shocked when I tell them what my 355 weighs in. I was looking at a 430 yesterday at Lime Rock...that is one huge hood, just a big looking car overall. Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to drive around in a Fiero or anything but I'd think there is a better happy medium somewhere in between.

 

The 308QV is generally quoted to weight 1,280kg with the standard 430 quoted as weighing 1,450kg. Not sure if you were actually suggesting the 430 is heavier than a 308 but it's clearly not.

 

With all the money Ferrari spent trimming as much weight as they reasonably could from a Scuderia and the 360CS do you have any idea what I see in most of the ones I service?


About 200 lbs of stereo and nav equipment. And the only thought given to where it is placed is where will it fit.



You might be genuinely interested in a car that is lightweight and stripped to the bone but when we are talking about new car buyers and the rubber meets the road we are talking about a teeny tiny percentage of the checkwriters and nobody is even going consider product planning for that small a group.


Lotus used to do it and even they got smart.

 

The 360 and 430 were bigger for 2 reasons. The cabin size was in response to customer complaints about the cars being too cramped. Ferrari was just trying to give real, new Ferrari buyers what they asked for.

The second reason is really 2. The inline gearbox is a better system and the layout was required and some space was eaten up buy the desire to have the aerodynamic underbody. It just could not be done with the sort of packaging a 355 had.

360 and 430 sales figures and waiting lines suggest new car buyers were not put of to an extent that prevented sales.

 

With the US being the large proportion of sales, the cars have legislated into survival cells which accomodate larger people. We could drive around in much more practical and efficient vehicles and educate the drivers better, but that's not p.c. in this climate.

bring back the Citroen 2CV I say!

 

Too right Brian, and think about the petrol that will be saved too. The nanny-states all over the world though seem to think otherwise. I'm so happy with my non-airbag, non-abs, non traction control etc etc etc 308....How did the thing get so heavy without all that?

 

The idea that less can be more wouldn't occur to most luxury car buyers.

 

Don't even TRY to sell a 6'3", 245 lb American Male an Italian car purpose-built to accomodate a 5'9" driver who weighs 170 lbs. tops. The 308/328 cars are VERY ITALIAN. Case-in-point - I have a 308, I'm 5'9" about 165 lbs. and the ergonomics of the machine are perfect for me. Everything is were it should be from the steering wheel, the mirrors, the gauges, seat position, armrests, levers, etc. From a comfort and ease-of-use perspective, the 308/328 is Engineering Perfection.

My friend is over 6'.....he cannot fit in the car comfortably, cannot 'see', and has difficulty driving the car with knee placement near the gearshift lever and other issues. SO, he bought a Testarossa. Bigger, wider car. He fit perfectly in the roomy, well-appointed machine. So did a lot of other 'large' Americans, since Ferrari sold thousands of them like never before. A trend arose - 'space' equals 'luxury'. Sell a big, luxurious car, and Rich people will buy it if they're not uncomfortable or cramped inside. And why not- they've gotten fat around the midsection like most other Americans have in the past two decades. I also read a study somewhere that stated that Larger, Taller people were even paid more in salary than shorter/smaller people, as they commanded more of an Authoritative/Leadership stature....thus, one can infer, they were in a greater financial position to demand and afford better-appointed vehicles.

This might help explain why SUVs and large trucks are still strong-sellers, even in this economy. People may not actually 'need' such gargantuan machines, but having the extra 'space' and size/volume is a value-added luxury to most buyers.

Now, couple all this with a Ferrari that has gone-away from Steel Unibody to all-Aluminum construction. The car saves weight, but now spends it in increased size to appeal to the new-money buyer who wants 'space' and comfort for their $250,000. We can debate 'till the Cows Come Home whether Ferrari actually builds a 'Sports Car' anymore, since most new-Ferrari buyers cannot realistically tap the performance capabilities of the machines they're buying. Therefore, Ferrari needed to 'up' their game and create value in their offerings by increasing cabin refinement and interior luxury appointments.

 

I agree with Chris. At 6'-4", there is no way I could be comfortable in a TR. I would still rather have the light, small, nimble car like my 700kg Lotus Europa S2, unless I could get a 550kg Super 7...

 

Makes you wonder how Chevrolet can make a C6 Z06 that weighs 3120 lbs or so with a full load of fuel, a 7 liter engine, and a chassis and drivetrain that can handle 470 ft lbs of torque. Imagine a 599 weighing that much and what performance it would have. Not that the 599 is any slouch now.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

The Z06 actually a pretty impressive piece of engineering....One of the keys to the performance of the Z06 (both fifth and sixth generation) was a curb weight of around 3100 pounds. In the fifth gen car that was done with a steel frame, and in the sixth gen they went to an aluminum frame to keep it down there. They really did it pretty well..

One interesting car from a weight perspective is the last Gen RX7 turbo. They weighed 2860 pounds, about 100 lbs less than an NSX (2980 lbs) and they did it with a pretty conventional steel unit body, where the NSX had an expensive aluminum unit body. Pretty impressive.

There are a good number of RX7's running around with LS6 aluminum Chevy motors and the weight increase appears to be minimal. To my mind that is about the "right size" for a sports car. It isn't a grand touring car, it is, in my mind a pretty sporting car.

As an aside I have a good friend that works at GM in the Vehicle Dynamics lab. He pointed out that if you just gave him the "shadow area" of a car he could tell you the weight withn +/-10%... I countered that the difference between the -10% weight car and the +10% one was the difference between a race horse and a jackass.... Think about it, for a 3000 lb "estimated weight" you could see cars between 2700 lbs and 3300 lbs.....

One last point, and this falls into the "unintended consequences" area. A lot of the weight reduction for the Corvette was justified to the bean counters to get the fuel mileage up to where it woudn't be hit by the gas guzzler tax. Now, the guys doing the work were all racers and knew darn well the performance would get better with less weight, but they had to justify the reductions and avoiding the gas guzzler tax was part of it.... Most of us hate government madates (me included), and the safety stuff that has caused a lot of the weight gain in our favorite cars are absurd. But you have to thank the gas guzzler tax for things like tall gear ratios that will let a car hit 170+ mph, and still get almost 30 mpg on the highway, and the weight reduction in some cars. I would have a hard time imagining a 4,000 lb Corvette being any fun. If there wasn't a gas guzzler tax cars would have been even more porky.

I'd like to see a car with 400 hp, about the size of an RX7 with a weight of about 2500 lbs or a bit less... That would be a hoot.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like ZO6's and I have been in a few. The amenities, sound deadening, interior quality and comfort do not even come close. The ZO6 is a pretty bare bones car and the 599 has all the bells and whistles and it's not made of plastic either. While the quality of the things you are exposed to sitting in the 599 could be better they are light years ahead of the interior of the Z06. GM redefined cheap.

A better comparison would be a CS to the Chevy.

 

Yes, if you look at the table I posted above, the "less is more" argument certainly applies to the F40, with its light weight and considerable power making it top of this list in terms of power to weight ratio, even ahead of the F50 slightly.