Why isn't Gallardo selling?

These "homers" are in awe of the spermicidal 612. That should tell you everything you need to know about their objectivity when it comes to F-cars.

 

This is the perfect example of a Ferrari moron. To make statements like...it is not a Ferrari, 20% of the U.S. will only know what a Lambo is... ways to overcome their "not Ferrari-ness is truly idiotic.

Having owned Fcars and Lcars for many years, ill absolutely tell you that Lcars are far more recognised. No one has ever mistaken my Diablo for anything but a Lambo, while both my 348 and 355 have been mistaken for Fieros.(seriously, not being sarcastic).

What i get from your post is this though. According to you, people buy Lambos for their weirdness, while people buy Ferraris to be snobs, to impress girlfriends,neighbors, and say he drives an icon. So which is worse, buying a car to be a snob, or buying a car to get noticed? I bought my car, FOR ME. I could give a **** what anyone thinks or likes, i dont need other people to accept my decisions. Thats why i tell people here, and everywhere exactly how i think. I dont need acceptance, while you feel the need to be accepted. Im a car nut, i love them all, but am not a brand loyal fool. Everyone always thinks i defend Lambo, and i do. But what about Porsche? I dont own a Porsche, but i can say that Porsche makes the best cars, better in many ways than Lambos, and in my opinion the 996TT is better than any current Ferrari. Im secure in saying Porsche is great, and better than Lambos in many ways, while you will start looking for all the excuses.

 

I think youre just testing the waters to see if youll still be accepted. Its ok, your fellow fchat bretheren will still love you.

 

Welcome to ferrarichat.com. Historically speaking, any convo about Ferrari and/or Lamborghini in FChat goes fine until allanlameboy weighs in with asinine, derisive comments about Ferrari and/or Ferrarichat members. Only slightly different than a Catholic walking into a synagogue and spewing hatred towards Jews. In either case, I think everyone should question their own faith - they don't need haters to vandalize their place of worship, if you will.
You homeros can jerk each other off all you want, allanlameboy is in awe of Lamborghini as any twelve-year-old can be, as many a forum can attest. Lamborghini isn't the problem. Ferrari isn't the problem. allanlameboy's "F" in Charm School is the problem.

 

The guy already have the Enzo for a while now.

I happened to like classic Ferraris too (always have). Interested in the history (alway have). I also like the new stuff (always have). Tell me again where I went wrong when I purchased the 360.

 

Change must always come from within wax. And this forum needs to realize that Ferrari is gradually going away from being a design leader, and instead is following worthless trends. I despise the way the company is being run, particularly reading stories about how Montezemolo lengthened the 360's wheelbase to better accomdate luggage, or how he raised the 575's ride height to allow his wife to have easier entry/access with a skirt on (no joke). These are not meant to be family cars. They're meant to be surgical scalpels, designed for precisely slicing away at apexes. If I want to go to the f-ing golf course, I'll take my way-too-practical-and-thus-boring NSX. It can carry TWO golf bags, woohoo. If I want to destroy the road, I want a Ferrari with fewer compromises towards civility.

Where is the Ferrari that I grew up with and loved, putting out radical designs like the GTO, TR, F40, F50, F355, and the Enzo (their lone shining light right now). You may not like the Enzo's body, but at least it takes a RISK. That's something Ferrari seems unwilling to do with their watered down production cars of late.

Change comes from within, and the F-car community should be the ones driving that change instead of fawning all over each successively ugly release (Hi 612). I am a huge F-car fan, no one yells louder when Schumacher crosses the line in 1st, but that doesn't mean I stick my head in the sand and go with what the company says is the party line.

And while many of you may laugh at Audi's involvement with Lamborghini, I'd ask you to consider that they are building cars that are a hell of a lot closer to what this market wants than Ferrari is at the moment. As an example, ask yourself if you would you choose a 575M over a Murcielago. If you answered yes, then you may be blinded by the prancing horse.

I can see choosing a 360 CS over a Gallardo, the 360 CS is sharper and higher strung which is the RIGHT direction for Ferrari, but a 575M over a Murci? No way.

 

Again:

I personally would not buy a modern performance car unless I bought it for track use. I find that with modern cars that you have to go way to fast (which is socially unacceptable) to get them to work, or become dynamic and thus interesting to control. With the older cars you can have that experience at a lot slower speeds. I have many times stated that I think Ferrari (and others) are on the wrong track making cars that continually go faster and faster. What they should be doing (again my personal opinion) is making cars that are light and handle and peak at about 150 mph, like Lotus. 150 mph is way fast enough and when you think about it how many owners of Ferrari capable of 180 mph actually go over 100 mph, thus nearly 50% of its performance capability are wasted!

This is one of my reasons for liking the older vehicles. Yes a Daytona and 365BB nearly hit 180 mph but at 100 mph they would be requiring a lot more driver input than a 360 ... unless technology has stood still . I find it challenging and fun to own road cars that take a bit of effort to chuck into a corner, infact that is the only thing that keeps me awake behind the wheel nowadays ... because I no longer race, and thus find driving boring, thus the extra effort required in the older car would be welcomed by me. Thus I am no longer interested in how fast or how quickly I travelled the distance, but more how I travelled and how I tamed the beast. (On many posts I have already discussed how I find traction control and F1 (paddle shift) and ABS to be detracting from the driving experience, as well as these new clever engines that have such massively wide torque spread that you can be in the wrong gear and still be fast).

Anyway my interest in Ferraris, except the F40, has always been from the historic and older car perspective.

Others naturally, like yourself, think completely differently and undoubtably love the new technology that improves the efficiency and ease of driving and controlling the car ... and the F360 is one great looking car, and I am not attempting to insult your choice because one has to always go with what pushes their button.

Pete

 

"would you choose a 575M over a Murcielago"

I did.

"I can see choosing a 360 CS over a Gallardo"

Did that, too.


We agree half the time - not bad. We agree all the time - boring.

 

"What they should be doing (again my personal opinion) is making cars that are light and handle and peak at about 150 mph, like Lotus."

I think many people who've raced, even at the amateur level, eventually begin to feel that it's futile and wasteful to own a fast street car. Kofod has expressed that in another thread, and I've felt it, too - but still I keep buying "fast" cars because they remind me of the track.

Your comment about the Lotus makes a great deal of sense to me, and I truly hope you'll get your wish; performance levels already have gotten so absurdly high, even for relatively inexpensive cars, it's hard for me to imagine that slight differences in specs will close many sales. Do I really care that my car goes 0-60 in 4.1, and yours does it in 3.9? No. As you've said perfectly, it's the experience, the sound, the smell, the handling, a lot of which I think has been muted in the US by our safety standards, but also by the industry's apparent conclusion that most buyers want luxury with their performance.

This is a bit incoherent, but I would buy, and even pay a premium for, a smaller than the 360, light, quick, aggressively styles, torquey, noisy Ferrari (a 12!) sadly lacking in creature comforts. The Stradale is the closest I can get at the moment. I think I am in a very, very small market niche.

It's the experience.

 

OK, It looks like we have some common ground in regards to the appeal of the classics. That's good.

But from your posts, you seemed to insinuate that a new Ferrari owner is somehow less of an enthusiast than someone who's really into the old stuff exclusively. It's dead wrong to think that 360 owners are "newbies" when it comes to all things Ferrari and that we have no interest in the marque's history.

 

I 100% never meant to do that, and fully appologise if that is how it came across.

That is why I started the other post to try and work out why people choose the cars they choose. In the end you had the choice of buying either old and new, and while you like the old you bought the new. Thus what was it that pushed the new car to the fore for you?

Pete

 

The 360 has the complete package for my current needs.

 

It must not be that small of a niche, because I'm in it, and my buddies all are too.

Save all the luxury for the other cars in the garage. In my sports cars I want direct to my brain steering, ultra light weight, good power, brakes that send me through the windshield, massive grip, and an engine note that makes my nuts tingle.

The 360 CS accomplishes 5 of the 6 (it could lose a few more pounds) so it definitely is the closest Ferrari right now to what the company should be all about. It's easily the most satisfying Ferrari made today by a long shot, and likely will be for awhile. The 575M, 456 Abomination, upcomming 612 sperm-mobile, and compromised base 360 are all missing the mark for the true enthusiast.

I've read that "best Ferrari today" line about the 360 CS in a few mags now, so we must not be alone.

 

allan, please read the post before you blow up and call me a moron - it is offensive to me and makes you look bad. i did not say i dislike lambos, actually i like them just fine which is indicated by my hope that whatever issues affect the gallardo's popularity might lower the price to an attainable level for me.

the opinion i am voicing is based on the observations of nearly 40 years of being a car nut. gallardos are simply not going to sell as well as the 360 because it isn't a ferrari. ferrari has a greater recognition and presence and one of the worlds most revered brands. lambo's have a different recognition, and it is not the same at all - different demographics etc. so in that rarified world of people with $200k to spend on a car, the competition is rife with cars that have greater appeal than the lambos, even though the gallardo is a better machine than any current ferrari except the enzo - sorry thats just the way it is.

 

Why,in your mind is Ferrari not allowed to produce GT cars that have the "image",practicality and performance far exceeding anything the competition throws at them?
A hardcore,supercar does not fill the needs of everybody,some people still want to experience the "supercar" ownership but demand for different reasons some modicum of practicality.
Stop with these silly names for cars that really do not deserve this.
456 at the introduction was the best performing car on the market and is still considered to be one of the most beautiful and classy designs.

 

As an example, ask yourself if you would you choose a 575M over a Murcielago. If you answered yes, then you may be blinded by the prancing horse.

I can see choosing a 360 CS over a Gallardo, the 360 CS is sharper and higher strung which is the RIGHT direction for Ferrari, but a 575M over a Murci? No way.[/QUOTE]Mako99



So i guess the Daytona ,275 GTB , 250 SWB etc arent great Ferraris ?

I ll choose a 575 over a Murcielago anyday because :

The Lambo is AWD
The Lambo interior is a shame
I really dont like its look.

Now the 575 isnt a mid engined car with Miami vice looks like the TR had, its a different approach bt not a new one.

 

dble post

 

Well, we LOOK at the new cars!!! LOL We just don't talk about them at all because it's so off topic to us. We don't spend posts justifying how our cars stack up to a Miata or RX7 which are two of our big competitors in ASP Autocross. Yes, the older cars all have that "soul" that people claim newer Ferraris, Porsches and NSX's lack, and keeping them running in top condition is half the experience of ownership. But I also wouldn't mind a 360 in my garage as well!


Ken

 

I wonder how you feel then about the Gallardo and Murcielago..
They certainly arent ultra lightweight...
As for the driving feel , most reviews i have read still place the Modena first.

 

I'm going to respond to you, but you are the millionth person who has written something like this on FChat, so I'm responding to everyone who has ever bemoaned Ferrari's supposed "shift." How many times on FChat do you read this "what happened to the Ferraris I grew up with?" garbage. Everyone cites the era of the Testarosa, or BB, or Daytona as the old days when Ferrari was all about making purely sporty road cars and didn't care about practicality. I'm sorry, but if you grew up thinking that the Testarosa or the BB were the only cars Ferrari was making, then you just weren't familiar with the marque's full lineup.

Ferrari has made 2+2s for a VERY long time. And they all had a trunk for stowing all your gear. The 400 and 412 started their lives in 1976. Before that you had others - how about the 330 2+2?

Look, there's a number of niches in the upper price ranges - GT cars, light sports cars, supercars, even big sedans. As a business, Ferrari is doing its job by filling those niches (aside from a sedan) and providing what their customers want. Some of you are passionate about a super-exotic sports car. Personally, I agree, and I would love a 512TR. But if someone wants a Ferrari with luggage space, I think it's ridiculous to call them soft or any less of an automotive enthusiast. They are just looking for something different than you are. Ferrari makes a 612 or 575 for them, and an Enzo for those who want a supercar. And don't bemoan it just because it's out of your financial reach or because they made so few - they certainly made more Enzos than 250 GTOs or 250 LMs or even 288 GTOs (which you cite as one of the long-lost "radical designs") from the "good old days."

Basically, I just wanted to call attention to this fiction that Ferrari USED to make exotica and now they make gentlemen's cruisers. They've tried to do both for decades, even during the childhoods that many of you so affectionately refer too.

 

No thats the way you THINK it is.

 

Very well said Wax. Allan - your thoughts on the above?

 

I think you and Wax are in a relationship. Please note, i also express my opinion as to the fact that not only is Lambo superior, but so are Porsche and Lotus.

 

Lotus?

You are on crack.