Crown

ISUK:

Rosso alongside Nero

Rosso all the way.
 

The secret of life is to admire without desiring.

berfes:

nberry instead maybe you think to be  the sceriff of this forum..............

I have a news for you nberry....... You arn't..!!!!   

So if I or someone else want to ask something that you don't like please...shut up!

Thank you... 

Err, Berfes, such a post makes me believe Nick is absolutely right.
 

The secret of life is to admire without desiring.

Pentium:

Funny Gnil! I wrote the reply to reginos before I read what you wrote

I was first on the list for a 458. I decided to keep the scud instead. Lately I started to be attracted by the new McLaren but not for the looks which are OK but more for the performance. For now I am trying to resist the urge of buying a new car. OK, ok, perhaps the new 911 to add it next to the Scud as a daily driver...

I have noticed we have the same views  I own now a 997.2  C2S, and before a 997.1 4S. I was tempted to get my first Ferrari with the 458.... but after I had it for a test drive , I decided against it ( not because of the performance and driving feeling ) but because of the look.

The Mc-Laren is tempting...

 997.2 C2S, PDK, -20mm

 What is wrong with the look of the 458 ?

Anyone has one single picture of the 458 and 430 SIDE-BY-SIDE ?

Nobody said that is something wrong with the look. That's a very subjective topic so what's the point to argue about it?

However, what a couple of us are saying is that the 458, especially in real life, doesn't stir the same emotions in people like the 360 and 430 did. Hey, perhaps is just us getting old of too many Ferrari's we drove Anyway, the 458 is less raw in the way it looks and in the way it drives. Simply put, it's a softer car. And again, only SOME of us, they rather spend that kind of money on a car that looks and feel EXOTIC (like the Zonda for example OR if we want just sheer performance the new McLaren which for the same money will beat the crap out of the 458 - wait and see or ask Kreso). Otherwise we can just stick with the perfect daily "tool" name 911.... sporty, different, distinctive&original, cheap (in such companion), reliable, back seats for small children, low maintenance and running costs, etc....

There is no try. Just do.

reginos:

pride355:

REALZEUS:

Reginos some people like revolution you know.  I find the 911 so dated nowadays... Furthermore, Ferrari's design is influenced by aerodynamics and engineering. Ferrari for example would never keep the engine in the wrong place for 40 years...

+1
 

Can't say it better myself

Please tell me what revolutionary engineering idea this car (or Ferrari in general ) has introduced? Maybe I didn't read the specification sheet very thoroughly!

Manufacturing another very fast car and clothing it in an unusually styled body is hardly what I would call revolution.

I, myself and Me; find F40, F50, Enzo and Enzo FXX very revolutionary. Further more since F360, Ferrari improve its built quality, reliability and driveability by significant amount. I drove both F360 and F430. F430's E-Diff is by itself big revolution in electronic engineering, IMO. It puts the power down without risking your life and you thought you have done it by yourself; it makes a real hero.
 

IMO, f430 Scuderia, F599 and F599 GTO are further steps in terms of engineering; and I'm leaving aside 458.

On the other hand, I owned a 07 911 Carrera S Coupe (the reason of becoming member on this forum) with sports chassie and manual tranny. I had the car for more than 1 year and drove it about 22.000 km.

I never liked the car's driving dynamics because the engine is in the wrong place. The front is always light, reacts too much to lifting off the throttle, carry too much weight at the back and IMO, doesn't sound nice.  

ONUR

09 Audi TTS Ibis

07 997 Carrera S / 05 M3 Coupe / 03 M3 Coupe / 96 M3 Coupe EVO (ALL BUT HISTORY)

interior bi-color red&black..... what do you think?

do we have another sceriff named Rossi..???  

berfes:

do we have another sceriff named Rossi..???  

Before you continue insulting senior members such as Rossi and Nick, you might want to learn how to spell.

Crash:

berfes:

do we have another sceriff named Rossi..???  

 

 

Before you continue insulting senior members such as Rossi and Nick, you might want to learn how to spell.

Sceriffo = italiano

berfes= italiano? no new york, united states

--
It's not where you're going, it's how you get there that counts

sheriff I think is sceriffo in italian... 

berfes:

interior bi-color red&black..... what do you think?

In your words? 

Orrible.
 

--

The secret of life is to admire without desiring.

Nice... for a pimp's car

There is no try. Just do.

Pentium:

Nice... for a pimp's car

special order for this valued customer

Rossi:

ISUK:

Rosso alongside Nero

Rosso all the way.
 

+1 It looks so much better from this angle.

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 
_____________________________________________________________________
1984 BMW 323i 5spd 2.3L 141 hp (105 kW) More door. Black on black (parting out) 
1986 BMW 325e 5spd 2.7L 121 hp (172 lb·ft) Le Mans Blau on Tan leather.
1986 BMW 325is 5spd 2.5L 168 hp (164 lb-ft) White on Tan leather (parted out) 
2005 Ford Focus S, 5spd 2.0L 136 hp (120lb-ft) CD silver on grey (sold)
1986 Porsche 944, 5spd 2.5L 150 hp (168lb-ft) champagne gold on grown leather. (sold)

reginos:

I've driven many, koko from the 70s onwards

But the debate here is about "revolution" in auto engineering. IMO Ferrari (and the other FIAT brands) have added nothing in this area. This doesn't mean that their cars don't fulfill a purpose in the automotive landscape, of course.

Just to highlight my point, take Mercedes-Benz for example. You could write a large book about the technical and engineering solutions that went into their cars first, over the last 40 years or so. From airbags to ABS, Active chassis, stability systems, common rail diesel, composite brakes (Porsche contest that one), vario-roof etc etc. For me this is the real revolution.

The Ferrari California when introduced was considered a big breakthrough by Ferraristi because it had Direct Injection, Twin Clutch Transmission and Vario-Roof. Things that were introduced ages ago by "humble" VW and "boring" Mercedes.

My perspective is just different from yours

 

 

I also find the F40, F50, Enzo, FXX more than revolutionary, as the vast majority of people do! Ferrari is one of the selected few car companies (together with McLaren and to a limited extent Porsche) that transfer racing technology to their road cars. Ferrari and McLaren though go the extra mile. 9000 RMPs, F1 gearbozes, carbon brakes, carbon tubs, carbon panels, F1 style electronics and aerodynamics. Saying that Ferrari is not revolutionary is laughable at best! Comparing Mercedes to Ferrari is like comparing a Boeing to the Concorde...
 

--
FERRARI RULES!!!

REALZEUS:

reginos:

I've driven many, koko from the 70s onwards

But the debate here is about "revolution" in auto engineering. IMO Ferrari (and the other FIAT brands) have added nothing in this area. This doesn't mean that their cars don't fulfill a purpose in the automotive landscape, of course.

Just to highlight my point, take Mercedes-Benz for example. You could write a large book about the technical and engineering solutions that went into their cars first, over the last 40 years or so. From airbags to ABS, Active chassis, stability systems, common rail diesel, composite brakes (Porsche contest that one), vario-roof etc etc. For me this is the real revolution.

The Ferrari California when introduced was considered a big breakthrough by Ferraristi because it had Direct Injection, Twin Clutch Transmission and Vario-Roof. Things that were introduced ages ago by "humble" VW and "boring" Mercedes.

My perspective is just different from yours

 

 

I also find the F40, F50, Enzo, FXX more than revolutionary, as the vast majority of people do! Ferrari is one of the selected few car companies (together with McLaren and to a limited extent Porsche) that transfer racing technology to their road cars. Ferrari and McLaren though go the extra mile. 9000 RMPs, F1 gearbozes, carbon brakes, carbon tubs, carbon panels, F1 style electronics and aerodynamics. Saying that Ferrari is not revolutionary is laughable at best! Comparing Mercedes to Ferrari is like comparing a Boeing to the Concorde...
  

 

The Concorde doesn't  fly anymore, I think

reginos:

REALZEUS:

Saying that Ferrari is not revolutionary is laughable at best! Comparing Mercedes to Ferrari is like comparing a Boeing to the Concorde...

The Concorde doesn't  fly anymore, I think

good one reginos

Also as far as I remember isn't Mercedes the oldest car manufacturer company?

And mind you I am NOT very fond of their latest models so I am not a fan; I just respect them. that's all.

From what I know the Silver arrows were doing 300km/h in 1938 and 1939 fighting with some strange mid engine 16cyl Ferdinand Porsche's designs marked Auto Union destroying italian and british competition by a mile...

There is no try. Just do.

The Concorde was deemed too expensive to operate, that's the reason it was decommissioned.

Pentium, those Mercedes and Auto Unions were stately funded by the Nazi Government. Alfa Romeo was a private company against the financial might of a whole country. In any case, Ferrari was not around at that time. Then again 1938? A bit earlier than that, the Roman chariots were quicker than those of the Goths...

Red 458 hard acceleration....!!!!  

Back on topic: one thing is for sure though, you can compare Mercedes and Ferrari. That was my point. For instance, last year the "lame" Boeing, excuse me, Mercedes, had a pretty good Formula1 engine and I read that this year are doing great engines too.

Reginos point was about innovation. And historical speaking that means who got it first. Or perhaps we should stop sending men in space too because damn!, rocket since evolved funded by the same crowd that innovated cars in '38 and '39. Who knows how the wheel was invented?   Anyway, it's unfortunate that war brings innovation but that's human nature.

--

There is no try. Just do.

458 -  USA

458 in action!!!

PorSchelover1:

458 -  USA

 

 

 

 Its weird that Patrick Dempsey is not on any car forum, from what i hear he is a very passionate owner and collector, he even races. He seems to be a genuinely cool guy.

Pentium:

Back on topic: one thing is for sure though, you can compare Mercedes and Ferrari. That was my point. For instance, last year the "lame" Boeing, excuse me, Mercedes, had a pretty good Formula1 engine and I read that this year are doing great engines too.

Reginos point was about innovation. And historical speaking that means who got it first. Or perhaps we should stop sending men in space too because damn!, rocket since evolved funded by the same crowd that innovated cars in '38 and '39. Who knows how the wheel was invented?   Anyway, it's unfortunate that war brings innovation but that's human nature.

 

--

There is no try. Just do.

 

Mercedes High Performance Centre that builds the F1 engines is in Brixworth, UK and most technicians are British... so much for German engineering...  At any rate, Ferrari is BY FAR the most successful engine maker in F1.

 

REALZEUS:

Pentium:

Back on topic: one thing is for sure though, you can compare Mercedes and Ferrari. That was my point. For instance, last year the "lame" Boeing, excuse me, Mercedes, had a pretty good Formula1 engine and I read that this year are doing great engines too.

Reginos point was about innovation. And historical speaking that means who got it first. Or perhaps we should stop sending men in space too because damn!, rocket since evolved funded by the same crowd that innovated cars in '38 and '39. Who knows how the wheel was invented?   Anyway, it's unfortunate that war brings innovation but that's human nature.

 

--

There is no try. Just do.

 

Mercedes High Performance Centre that builds the F1 engines is in Brixworth, UK and most technicians are British... so much for German engineering...  At any rate, Ferrari is BY FAR the most successful engine maker in F1.

 

 

Most businesses are multi-national nowadays. Ferrari has been using many non-Italians in their road and race car departments  over the years, but this doesn't belittle their status as an Italian icon.

The technicians in Brixworth (defined as skilled or semi-skilled workers) could be whatever, but I'm sure the engineering brains are from the Vaterland 

Right! Now we move to discuss worker's nationality... So, Ferrari's greatest recent run was led by Jean Todt, Ross Brawn and Michael Schumacher, right?

Anyway, the topic was, again, innovation. Which Ferrari did too, there is no doubt. But also many other car manufacturers, especially the oldest established ones. I understand that your belief is "Ferrari rules" but you should accept that until the time machine will be invented the history can't be truly rewritten (I wonder why dictators are destroying or limiting access to books? ). So until that will happen Ferrari owes a lot to many other people no matter of what nationality or religion. There is no shame in admitting that. Actually it's quite classy and professional to do that.

Oh, and by the way, in endurance racing I think Porsche rules big time according to your definition.... and I also remember a story about a certain manufacturer called Ford which kicked Ferrari's ass BIG time with a certain GT40.... Or it was Renault in Formula1 who did something similar?

You know, Ford, the ones who invented cars mass production... from the same country with Boeing... the ones who created B52's...

And don't get me started on Renault. Or Audi. Or Citroen. Or Bosch. Or Lotus.

There is no try. Just do.

Pentium:

.....

Anyway, the topic was, again, innovation. ...

 

No, the topic is the 458 

ISUK:

Pentium:

.....

Anyway, the topic was, again, innovation. ...

 

 

No, the topic is the 458 

Just to calm things down a very good video

--
It's not where you're going, it's how you get there that counts

I am not Italian myself and never said that Ferrari, or for that matter any other company/team, is not multinational. Ferrari's engine guru is Italian, the head designer is Greek and the star driver Spanish. I was against nationalising this argument in the first place, that's why I objected the superiority of german engineering by referring to Ferrari, which undoubtedly in he most successful racing team ever. I never said that others do not innovate but I just can't read that the italians do not innovate at least as much if not more. The multiair and common rail engine technologies are Italian inventions after all and both are revolutionary. The same goes for the variable valve timing and turbo combined with supercharger technology. The Germans, the British, the French, the Janapanese, the Americans and even the Swedes have also contributed greatly with automotive innovations. Saying that only one country innovates is narrow-minded at best.