How Ferrari Spins

[Just_a_fan]

I am not interested at all in the opinion of the journalist or the guy that reads the stuff out in the news. I want it bone dry and focused on facts which of course are just facts when they are proven and the proof is presented otherwise it’s just speculation.

This is the point! Any review of Ferrari road cars will never contain pure facts because Ferrari won't allow just pure facts. They ensure that the performance test results do not actually show what the showroom cars will do. They show what the showroom cars will do if Ferrari are allowed a day to set the cars up each time they are driven. In order to replicate the test data (and thus prove the facts as you wish) the owner of the showroom car will have to get Ferrari to spend a day setting the car up for each drive the owner wants to make. Now that's just wrong on so many levels. That's what the journo is moaning about.

[Just_a_fan]

[Even if you lost the ability to review Ferrari's I would still bet that enough owners would be supportive and would lend you their cars, and that whilst you may lose out on sales when a new Ferrari is launched, you'd make up for it when you did the follow up 'real' review.

Evo magazine tried this very thing during a recent test. Ferrari could provide a 458 or 599GTO (IIRC). Evo offered to source the other one from a reader and Ferrari said they'd pull their car if that happened. Reading between the lines - Ferrari didn't want one car to be scored above the other.

The same test had both a 911GT3 RS and 911GT2 (or whatever combination of GT and RS it was). Chalk one up to Porsche. Chalk Ferrari up as a bunch of tossers.

Oh, and a Porsche won the test...

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

Comparing a 458 with a GT3 or a GT2 is quite a fail. They are special versions like the Scuderia versions against the regular 458, and by special they have way more than a setup any owner can do. If they didn't win it would be embarrassing. If it took the GT2 to win then it was already embarrassing, Ferrari being setup or not. I don't get why the magazine decided not to do the test with the private Ferrari after all, maybe they didn't care much as it was already comparing different cars.

Besides, as I said before, how can you guys know the cars provided by other companies don't do the same?

The tossers are able to match or surpass Porsche even so. Top Gear tests are done with private cars many times and they are still able to perform very well. The last comparison using a GT3 and a Scuderia was a deuce in their track. I get why people don't like their testing method and that it does interfere with comparisons even though we don't know what other competitors do, but thinking their cars are bad machines because of that or that they would lose if it wasn't by this seems like wishful thinking to me.

[myurr]

Besides, as I said before, how can you guys know the cars provided by other companies don't do the same?

We don't know that for sure, but the journalist making the allegations against Ferrari explicitly said that it was only Ferrari acting in this manner and that other manufacturers were giving them the cars and letting them get on with it. So until we see some evidence that other manufacturers are also engaged in this kind of manipulation then it will be only Ferrari who will receive our criticism.

Also note that Ferrari has yet to issue any kind of legal threat to that journalist, something they would do if he was making it all up and lying.

but thinking their cars are bad machines because of that or that they would lose if it wasn't by this seems like wishful thinking to me.

That hasn't been claimed. In fact in my posts I've gone out of my way to say that the Ferrari's are still good cars. That doesn't get away from the fact that Ferrari are actively engaged in lying to you and everyone else about just how good or otherwise their cars are.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

I wasn't referring to you on that last couple of lines, myurr. You indeed have made you point very clear on your last post.

I hope they don't sue the journalist, apparently he was saying the truth. I also hope Ferrari makes this policy clear in every review of them from now on and that they allow comparisons with private cars. That would actually be interesting in seeing what are the differences between the setup car and the stock one, so that you know how much you can get out of it.

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.thenational.ae/lifestyle/mot ... ageCount=2

Apparently this kind of fuss is usual in Ferrari's corsa clienti program. Perhaps they should think about dropping this for the press, as it is not creating the right impression.

[nipo]

The one thing I don't understand about Ferrari is why they haven't built the ultimate best-of-the-best car yet. Like in my opinion McLaren F1 is a legend yet to be beaten. Others think Bugatti Veyron, Pagani Zonda etc. I think nobody thinks "Ferrari", cos they've got no cars in that calibre.

I think Ferrari's fame is because of its racing success - it symbolizes passion and victory. Now that so many brands have established themselves on an even higher level in terms of road car production, I'm wondering if Ferrari can still just sit there forever producing the same V8s and V12s... And, even in those segments they are not winning over their rivals (e.g. Lambo)!

I would really love to see Ferrari pulling it together to create a real benchmark for the next decade, rather than sending engineers around making sure test reports on mags will look good.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

Indeed nipo, the F40 was maybe their last best of the best. I guess those cars are very, very specific on their public and very high on costs and so they decided to concentrate on the more traditional mid-engined V8 supercars that will appeal to most and have more possible buyers. They are not always the same though, the V8 was completely changed in the 430 and in the 458 it has been through a nice makeover. The V12 is quite old in spite of the last update it had on Enzo and the 612, but for the new FF it's a new one as well.

I also would love to see a modern version of the F40, but I guess they don't have much interest on that and it would be possibly very limited in their production. Unlike the Veyron that is in production for many years now.

[Just_a_fan]

The F40 was built for a very specific purpose - to beat Porsche in the race to the first 200mph road car.

[Just_a_fan]

Comparing a 458 with a GT3 or a GT2 is quite a fail. They are special versions like the Scuderia versions against the regular 458, and by special they have way more than a setup any owner can do. If they didn't win it would be embarrassing.

The test was a group test of the cars of the year, with each car there (about 12 I think) being selected by one of the journos on the magazine. It wasn't just about the 458 and the GT2/3.

Against a wide range of cars (from Ford Focus RS up to the 458) the 911 was chosen as the best driver's car (which is the remit of the test). As a year-long driving tool, the 458 would almost certainly beat the compromised GT/3.

[FoxHound]

Came across this piece while writing up a story, and it had me in fits of laughter.

I wouldn't want a Ferrari bashing thread, as they make fantastic cars as any leper could testify. What strikes me though, is the lengths to which the Scuderia go to win group tests. It's almost psychotic.
Want to review the car? They send 2 examples, 1 for straight line tests only, and the other for track work.
Group test? Engineers arrive at the track and tune the car to specifically match the requirements of the circuit.

If this it happened in everyday ownership, one couldn't argue.... but of course it doesn't come with Luca and Mario everytime you want a thrash around Thruxton.

I doff my cap to Mr Chris Harris for having the cojones to write this. Even as a journo, if you drive any current Ferrari you MUST call the factory for permission to do so. It is so paranoid one wonders wether Ferrari's marketing department have ever driven their own cars, Such machines do not warrant the paranoia being levelled in their direction. As it turns out, Ferrari banned him from ever driving a press Ferrari again.

The article:

http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

A video:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHjd7PVAA-4[/youtube]

[bhall]

Unless there's something new to add, why would you revive a loooong-dead topic with nothing more than a rehash of the original post?

[PistoneRovente]

I feel its just more Ferrari basing by the British press. Customers who can afford a Ferrari, can definitely afford getting a small team of racing engineers to set up a car for them if they intend to go racing. I believe, the sports car division of Ferrari has an equivalent organisation like Corsa Clienti to set up cars for racing performance for special customers.

Nothing incorrect IMO

I see there is still some one in this forum that sees things as they are.

[strad]

I just saw this,,,haven't read all the posts so I may be adding on, BUT...
Preparing the cars for a test is nothing new or limited to Ferrari.
I remember an article in AutoWeek,,,the one with one of them worthless Russian cars on the cover and an article where they admit the only car they could test honestly was a Lada or some other Russian piece of crap (whatever it was on the cover) because it was the only manufacturers that it wouldn't care if they got mad over a bad review. The article spoke to how they could never give a bad review to Ferrari or Corvette or practically any car because then they wouldn't be invited for the next grand reveal or test drive .

[Pierce89]

True, Ciro. But you know I can't let that keep me from putting a little fuel on the fire...

Go, Rinty, go!


I'm appalled. Do you mean that car magazines actually exaggerate about the quality and style of "top cars"? Should I change my 66 GTO for a Porsche? What should I do with the John Deere? Perhaps change it for a Lambo, instead of a Ferrari. Hmmmm.... hard to decide.

Ferrari tested under Maranello specs. Oh, the beauty of it!


Same car tuned for straight road test. Chicks, I'm on my way!


BTW, this is a paint job by Christian Lassen Automobiles, it costs 100.000 devaluated dollars, so it has to be good. Instead of only a cavallino I can have a cavallino AND a dolphinllino.

On a related theme, Pup, is it true that chicks in men magazines are uglier than they look? Is it true that they use make up to enhance artificially their beauty? Some friend sent this to me (if I can call him a "friend", after trying to shatter my confidence in the honesty of the human race. The dog!).

Paint shop. Pro.


Look! A blonde!


If true, life won't be the same for me. You know, there is this woman with the mini miniskirt (really short!) that stands in the corner close to my house, every weekend night, really a beauty, with big hands and long legs. Really big hands. I was going to go for her, but now, I'm not sure. She could be another Maranello girl or a Lambo woman. Where is this world headed, if you cannot trust in journalists and beautiful girls? They all seem the same to me, earning their lives the HARD way. So, puhleeze, let's respect those two professions which, I understand, are very old.

Thanks heaven we have Porsches, like dumrick made clear. Those germans! You can ALWAYS trust on them. Like the German we have at the Vatican, the new Pope. Gentle and understanding. I understand people call him "A True German Shepherd". Shepherd of souls, of course.

I just wanted people to bask in the glory that WAS Ciro