News

Turbo'd Ferraris

Discussion in 'Ferrari Discussion (not model specific)' started by bostonmini, Nov 25, 2003.

  1. bostonmini

    bostonmini Formula 3

    Nov 8, 2003
    1,881
    guys,

    Can someone tell me why Ferrari refuses to incorporate Turbochargers into their product lineup? I cant decide whether the trend today is to use them or not, its strange that the premier Turbo company (porsche) used NA power for their Carrera GT, yet many companies are using turbos (such as the new bentley GT, AMG MB etc) to gain more lowend power. Will ferrari use these at some point? I think NA is very interesting and lots of fun with the appropriate low gearing however I cant say I totally understand why they stick with this...I know that it follows the current trend in their F1 cars, but those are RACE cars....and furthermore, the few Turbo designs theyve done in the 288 and the F40 were huge sucesses...so what are your thoughts? ARe turbos a good thing? they sure boost efficiency...your thoughts are awaited...
     
  2. F360@20

    F360@20 Karting

    Nov 24, 2003
    244
    San Diego
    That is a good questions. I personaly had a turbo M3 before I stepped it up. I think a car that is boosting has awsome feel to it! But I dont know if I could ever see a 360 or a 550 with a turbo on it. And I know for sure I would never want to see what the up keep would be on a turbo ferrari............jez that would be insane imagine if you put a controller in and boosted to much a blew your engine? Hey but anything is possible. I would buy one.
     
  3. TestShoot

    TestShoot F1 World Champ

    Sep 1, 2003
    10,248
    Beverly Hills
    Full Name:
    King Koopa
    Great question. I am thinking about selling the remnants of my 550 and going for the 575, but I think either a Koenig prep (read:turbo'd) or possibly Ferrari Chat Sponsor FX Performance prepped car.

    Chances are new pistons rings rods etc... But in general, the Enzo with turbo, I expected that, but noooo. I have suspicion that the 'go fast' designs and locations available for intercoolers is an issue. When spending upwards of $250k again for a sports car, I don't expect it to be third or fourth amongst rivals costing half that.

    I really have to say I am at odds with Ferrari over this issue. what once was a great car, is now getting beatien badly by tuner cars. The 575GTC is even weak.

    Ferrari engineers get off your asses! This is a wake up call!

    if you are a sports car maker, and your tuning company DOUBLES your horsepower, you need to get out of the business
     
  4. Nibblesworth

    Nibblesworth Formula 3
    BANNED

    Nov 29, 2002
    1,756
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    BillyBoy
    Even the most reliable engine becomes significantly less reliable when turbos are added to the mix. Now, I'm not saying hat a turbo'ed engine is not reliable - I'm saying that turbo engines can tend to have reliability issues.

    I would tend to think that Ferrari is making a *tiny* attempt to keep their engines as long lasting and reliable as possible. Considering a 3.6l n/a Ferrari V8 puts out the same HP as a 4.6l Blown Ford V8, the engine is already under enough stress *without* the addition of forced induction. While the 360 engine is a fairly reliable engine, that does not mean that repairs are cheap, and I would bet that Ferrari does not want to alienate any non-enthusiast buyers by selling an engine that could grenade and cost over $60,000 to replace.

    And in regards the the supercars, when the Enzo is putting out 200 more HP than the F40 without turbos, why add them? 800hp sounds nice, but is INCREDIBLY hard to manage on the streets.

    Just my 0.02.
     
  5. aventino

    aventino Formula Junior

    Jun 16, 2003
    768
    Hong Kong
    Full Name:
    David L
    Ummmmm, because they whistle and fart and sound like crap.
     
  6. 456mgt

    456mgt Formula Junior

    Mar 24, 2002
    622
    Cambridge UK
    Full Name:
    Kevin
    If anything, Ferrari seem to be moving *away* from forced induction- they took the turbos off the Maserati 3200 and replaced it with an enlarged n.a. motor in the 4200. I don't know why either.

    Personally, I really like turbocharged cars for the kick in the back when you accelerate. In fact the way the turbos kick in on a 3200 is one of its most likeable features. Let's face it, there are so many ways you're going to get nailed if you hit 3 figure speeds on the roads, it's mainly the way the car accelerates up to speed that tells you you're in something special. I would gladly trade top end for faster acceleration. One of the reasons an F40 is still so deeply appealing is its power delivery (there are others too!).

    As long as they don't do superchargers; all that whining is like you've got a car full off pissed off kids ALL the time. No way.
     
  7. Izza

    Izza Formula 3

    Nov 3, 2003
    1,046
    London
    In a magazine interview I read that Ferrari believe forced induction is the automotive equivalent of Viagra. THhey believe in normally aspirated cars that don't have turbo 'kicks' or 'lags'.

    With Porsche developing turbo's that practically eradicate these flaws, all we have to do is work out is whether this is a reason or excuse?
     
  8. Ken

    Ken F1 World Champ

    Oct 19, 2001
    16,078
    Arlington Heights IL
    Full Name:
    Kenneth
    Turbos are expensive. You need to do R&D on them first. Then the reliability means lots more warrenty work, especially in the US. Knowing that Ferrari isn't flush with money, no turbo makes sense.
     
  9. carguy

    carguy F1 Rookie

    Oct 30, 2002
    3,299
    Alabama (was Mich.)
    Full Name:
    Jeff
    I remember when GM wrestled with the idea of adding turbos to keep the Vette ahead of Japanese imports when creating the ZR-1. They ended up letting Callaway do this as an option instead. Their research showed that while turbo cars can be quick and reliable to a point, it was viewed as an easy way out, and "low tech". While in reality it is NOT low tech., the public seems to perceive that it's a "bandaid" because you can't seem to get the power "naturally". This is not true in all cases, but most of them. I must admit I too see it that way even though I understand what it really takes to make a turbo package work well. As has been said it's viewed as "Viagra" this is quite true. And yet to sound contradictory I would gladly give up several valuable body parts to own an F40. So no one formula works for all cases, but when spending huge amounts of money developing a new car it's better to play the odds and appeal to the largest group.
     
  10. zsnnf

    zsnnf Formula 3

    Sep 11, 2003
    1,877
    Let's try this...... Think F1.
    Why would Ferrari spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year on F1 technology and not bring it to their production cars? When the F40 was built, their F1 cars were turboed. Notice the F1 transmission now available?
    Sure, I love to drive my F40, But I wouldn't mind an 8,500 rpm F1 shifting Stradale either!
    Um...... Does Porsche have a Turo charged F1 engine? Do they have any F1 engine?

    Rick
     
  11. bostonmini

    bostonmini Formula 3

    Nov 8, 2003
    1,881
    I think that some people are missing my point, Im positive that the high engine speed concept currently used is more than sufficient considering th HP/L output of the current F1 cars, these cars are incredible engineering feats, however I was really just saying that you have to be realistic in real world driving conditions where Turbos frequently provide much more low end torque. I agree, NA engines sound better and all, but if you wanna pull ahead in 6th gear, one only need realize that torque in any given gear equals acceleration, then look at the dyno chart of a 360 and then a 996 turbo...Then again, the currently most sought after porsche seems to be the Carrera GT or the GT3 so....Its up in the air still...I would NEVER turbo a car that didnt come with it, turbo'ing a 360 to me is sacrilege. For anyone that has driven both the modena and the 996TT, whats the acceleration difference like? is it that the 360 just doesnt pull as hard but due to a superior curve (dyno) it just pulls smoother and loooonger?
     
  12. TestShoot

    TestShoot F1 World Champ

    Sep 1, 2003
    10,248
    Beverly Hills
    Full Name:
    King Koopa
    Hmm. Well consider that most of the competitors are kicking our non-turbo butts. The point is Ferrari is in a position to put a nail in Porsche's coffin with a turbo 360. I suspect they lack male hormone at the factory.

    With a car like this to stay bone stock is well, falling short of everything Enzo did. Why win in F1 if your street cars are sluggish at best. If they did their job, Koenig and FX Performance would be out of business.

    In their defence, a N/A engine is a foundation, and without a strong foundation, you can not grow. Turbos are a boost that was designed to add performance, but they should introduce a turbo model of something approaching the 700hp range. It is within their reach. We are talking supercars, so to be conservative is to lose.

    Oh crap, now I am getting really mad.
     
  13. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Owner Miami 2018

    Dec 1, 2000
    49,035
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
  14. TestShoot

    TestShoot F1 World Champ

    Sep 1, 2003
    10,248
    Beverly Hills
    Full Name:
    King Koopa
  15. whart

    whart F1 Veteran
    Honorary

    Dec 5, 2001
    6,485
    Grandview NY
    Full Name:
    Herr Prof.
    For what its worth, the turbo'd GT-2 still lags, and i prefer the linear power delivery of an "na" engine. In some ways, i think the 288 and F-40 are atypical of the Ferrari supercar (not that there's anything wrong with that). The Ferrari "schtick" has always been 12's, as you know. So,at least for their "big" production car, i don't see that changing. For the 8's, why not? One of the neat things about the GIAC system (an aftermarket remap used in the P cars) is its remote controlled variable settings; you can have the car set for racing fuel, and even set a 35mph limit for valet purposes;).
     
  16. CCarlisi

    CCarlisi Karting

    Nov 4, 2003
    174
    Manhattan
    Full Name:
    Christian
    Part of what makes f-cars appealing to me is the induction sound. Adding forced induction would muffle it considerably. I think this is part of the reason Ferrari is reluctant to go this route.
     
  17. ferrari_kid

    ferrari_kid Formula Junior

    Jul 5, 2003
    768
    Is that to say that Porsche is the same way? Ruf makes a great reliable Porsche engine even better, what about Hamann or Schnitzer with BMW? I don't think it has to do with a weak engine design. It could just be the fact that, like you said, it's a good base that can be improved upon depending on the desires of the owner. Even if Ferrari put out another turbo car someone will be out there saying it's still not fast enough I want bigger ones.

    It does bother me that all you have to do is get an import car and throw turbos on it and it'll beat a Ferrari though. In that sense it does seem to be a "band-aid" to beat exotics.
     
  18. Dave

    Dave F1 Rookie

    Apr 15, 2001
    2,722
    Little Rock
    Full Name:
    David Jones
    Why do you feel that Ferrari needs to add a Turbocharger?
    Which of your Ferraris do you feel needs the added boost?
    I own two turbocharged cars, a Conquest TSI, and a BMW M3,
    But happen to dig the sound of old Carb Ferraris.
    Some of us could give a rats ass about owning the fastest car on the block, we own Ferraris for other reasons.
     
  19. mk e

    mk e F1 World Champ

    Oct 31, 2003
    11,384
    The twilight zone
    Full Name:
    The Butcher
    I think the answer is pretty simple, turbos are not nearly as well mannered on the street as naturally aspirated engines. That’s because it is just plain impossible to get to get a flat torque curve or lag-free throttle response. On the roadrace track, those things don’t matter at all, so a turbo’d car is hard to beat. On the street it’s another story….IMO a roots or screw type supercharger is a much better option and many of the auto makers are leaning that way. Just making the engine bigger is the best, but a blower comes close.
     
  20. TestShoot

    TestShoot F1 World Champ

    Sep 1, 2003
    10,248
    Beverly Hills
    Full Name:
    King Koopa
    Dave, I am going Lombardi on you. Losing is not ok, nobody remembers who came in second. If it was not speed that got you in the dealership, but looking good... well that is just plain sad.

    I have a way ugly p1800 with turbo, pumping out 350+hp in half the weight of my 550, I would love to have a Ferrari devotee give it a ride and tell me where the turbo lag is. My Aston DB2/4 is from an era and line of cars that were competitive with Ferrari, often going both ways. Heritage got me to the dealer, potential made me buy.

    Ferrari pumps out solid A- performance, when the tuners and Porsches go for turbo extra credit bringing them to solid A and A+ status. It is that little extra effort that impresses us, not cheating. So what is so hard about that? Wanting more?
     
  21. mk e

    mk e F1 World Champ

    Oct 31, 2003
    11,384
    The twilight zone
    Full Name:
    The Butcher
    "I would love to have a Ferrari devotee give it a ride and tell me where the turbo lag is"

    I don't need to ride in the car to tell you where your turbo comes up short or lags. It makes 0 psi of boost below 1/3 of your redline and at any point on the tach with the car rolling along at 5-15 inHg vacuum (normal cruising), slam the throttle to the floor and there will be not less than 0.1 sec of lag before the turbo responds. Neither problem is that serious, but they do detract from the over-all driving experience. Most people feel that the extra hp more than makes up for it, but others find it annoying. I think ferrari did the right thing moving away from turbos.

    If you’re talking about a turbo that doubles the hp, then you also have a real safety problem on your hands. The reason is that if you enter a turn below the boost rpm and cross the boost threshold as you accelerate out of the turn, the dramatic and very non-linear change in torque tends to tear the rear tires loose and send you into the nearest guard rail. That is part of the reason the 80s low compression/high boost engines have been basically universally replaced with today’s moderate compression/low boost engines.

    If it’s a streetcar, increasing displacement is the manufactures best option. Once it’s off the showroom floor, a positive displacement supercharger is the way to go if it’s going to continue to be a streetcar. Neither of these options suffer from any of the turbo’s weaknesses.
     
  22. 348 Turbo

    348 Turbo Formula 3

    Jul 17, 2002
    1,837
    I understand the concerns listed in this thread, better than most. BUT, If most of thee poster's had a ride in my 348 Twin Turbo, by Norwoods; I'd bet they'd agree, this is how the car should've been produced by the factory. Smiles are just unstoppable in the car!
     
  23. I think it has to do with realibility and the heritage. The cars where made natrual with steroid like add ons like a supercharger. They where made to look good sound great and be realible from the begining the F40 was a different story that was a car made for the track but also being street legal. Look what they did with the Enzo 3.3sec to 60 is good enough without any turbo.
     
  24. Dave

    Dave F1 Rookie

    Apr 15, 2001
    2,722
    Little Rock
    Full Name:
    David Jones
    "I am going Lombardi on you. Losing is not ok, nobody remembers who came in second. If it was not speed that got you in the dealership, but looking good... well that is just plain sad."


    Sorry, I'm not into shopping the dealership,
    or salivate over "The Speed" of a car...
    And if Ferrari comes in second in an F1 race,
    how does that reflect on a 1960 250, a 1977 308, or a 1979 512...
    Sure I dig fast cars, hell when I was younger I raced my stepfather's AA/fuel altered with Keith Black Hemi, and campaigned my own Pro Stock drag car, a 72 pinto with 647 "normally aspirated" HP at the flywheel.
    So if I gave a **** about HP, it would take a little more than the 350+hp at the wheels your car has to get my nut.

    If you are worried that other people might think your 550 is slower than the car its parked next to, well that is just plain sad.
     
  25. TestShoot

    TestShoot F1 World Champ

    Sep 1, 2003
    10,248
    Beverly Hills
    Full Name:
    King Koopa
    hahah, Dave lol much respect

    Seems you ladies want to yell at us for wanting more, that is Un-American you commies!!! lol

    Ferrari could sell more cars with a turbo option, we are not saying force the turbo on all production models. I had a chat with Phillipe from the Beverly Hills shop a while ago as we looked at the then new F50. He candidly told me the 40 was a better car, sighting the turbo as one of many key factors. Maybe he changed his mind since then, but I got the 40 that day.

    I hate the idea of living vicariously through a modern car that has little in common with the 60's cars. I love vintage racing myself, but don't buy a new car thinking at all of what once was. I look at my DB and know where it raced and noting the log book of a little track called "Spa." See I love the Aston Vs Ferrari, and I aim to own two cars that actually raced against each other.

    For those whining about turbo lag, you are obviously not up to date. Sure there maybe a short millisecond of lag, but let's lay down street-legal cars in quarter miles and see what the end result is. I invite japanese tuners all to stare at the tail lights of a formerly raced 1966 p1800, 'cause for most of them, that is all they will see.

    Turbo lag fine, how about a super charger?

    I know I can't always win, that is not ok, but I am not going to settle for a car or mentality that I know is not going to get me close to the podium. If I can't add to it, why bother. Buying off the rack just does not suit me anyway.
     

Share This Page