Portofino Launch and picture thread

I'll send you a PM

 

While I think the Portofino looks prettier than the Cali, generally-speaking; I do prefer the roof line of the Cali.

The rear window panel of the Portofino makes the car look more like a practical hatchback than a coupe. I know the Portofino does not have a hatch and I admit this same roof line works great for the F12 but somehow it seems to make the Portofino look a bit more utilitarian than exotic. Hatchbacks conjure up a practical, "stuff-hauling" image, whereas coupes are very focused on driving fun, practicality be damned. The rear window panel of the Cali leaves no room for mistaking the appearance of the roof line for anything other than a coupe's.

 

One very nice improvement of the Portofino is the ability to operate its roof mechanism while the car is moving at a reasonable pace. While I have never been caught by a sudden downpour in my Cali while in motion, I have had a couple of close calls. It was just by good luck and quick action that I avoided disaster on both occasions.

I have always wondered why Ferrari imposed the restriction on the Cali. My salesman said it was to protect the heavy roof mechanism from damage in case the car pitched while going over rough roads or leaned too much to one side. However, the new roof mechanism looks pretty much like the old one so I wonder what the reason really was behind the Cali's "roof operating handicap".

 

Perhaps safety was a reason why they didn't want one to operate the roof in motion. You cant see what is behind and people behand cant see what is happening ahead of you. Plus the roof when in mid cycle is a bit of a sail at full mast. The wind force cant be a good thing for the hydraulics.

 

The trunk on the current car tips and extends backwards -- which is why you can't operate it if something or someone is too close behind you, via the parking sensors . It would be impossible to manage that if the car was in motion. I don't really understand how they are getting around that in this version.

Of course, with the new car you will be able to experience a "roof failure" while moving which should make for some rather interesting photo opportunities : )

 

Agree!

The Portofino now has brake lights attached to the body panel on either side of the trunk panel

So when the roof is being operated, the driver behind you can see if you hit
The brakes or are signaling with your turn blinkers

In the Cali when the trunk panel opened, the third brake light is angled down and the whole panel may obscure the turn signals and brake lights which were located at the level of the bumper.

in the 458 spider, one isn't allowed to operate the top when in motion

 

Interesting you say that, because from the angle posted here, I kind of got a whiff of Nissan 350/370 Z...T

 

Allowable or not, I would not be brave enough to try operating the roof on a hard top convertible while in motion. To me, that would be a feature that's not really a feature...T

 

True - good observation.

I think what contributes to this reaction is the unfortunate kink in the rear quarter window, both in the actual glass and in the shape of the triangular filler. I don't understand why, if you're cheating the shape of the rear window anyway, just not make the window come to a point, without the down-turned upper edge of the window, like on the Cali.

The compromise for the actual quarter window shape was obviously a result of trying to reconcile the window shape with the desire to have a sleeker fastback profile and the effect pf this on the panel cut lines. And though many have commented om how good the car looks because of the swoopier fastback, this has been partly achieved by having a shorter greenhouse and so a smaller greenhouse-to-body ratio. I find the body so big that the wheels are lost in the fenders.

Also, they have had to resort to the very curiously designed sill skirt (likened to a shovel by TheMayor or a side-mounted snowplow by me) running back from the front wheel opening to try to impart a sense of length (instead of a short, stubby appearance) to the car.

 

By the sill skirt, do you mean the grey bit most noticeable below the door handle? If so, I liked that element! Thought it tied in nicely with the wheels and rear exhaust area. Different strokes for different folks, as they say. Regardless, can't wait to see a Portofino in the flesh, I think it may be the most handsome design by Ferrari since the F12.
T

 

Tom below you can see the differences and similarities Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login ^ Thank you, Mario. Two more that I found. Top is a 370Z. Bottom is a 350Z. Area of similarity, to my eye, is from rear wheel and back, especially around the rear glass. I should say that I think the Z's to be nice looking cars.

Does anyone know if the posted pics above is the new Rosso Portofino? I think it looks great.
T

 

Tom I grew up with the Datsun 240z from the end of the 60's and this great car marks my youth therefore I can't put aside the sentimental connection with Nissan. Even considering that the Nissan 350Z and the 370Z are in a totally different category of the Portofino, to my eyes both Nissan's have a personality of their own in design terms and follow the company heritage. Because Nissan cars are very well known for their superior engineering, reliability and performance, the 370Z is a very tempting convertible option in it's market segment.

 

One of the car journalists described the difference between roof lines of the Portofino and Cali as a switch to a 2-BOX design in the Portofino from the 3-BOX design of the Cali. This may also explain why the rear of the Portofino reminds Tom of the 350/370Z.

There is a break in the rear roof line of the Cali where the roof meets the trunk, creating a "3rd BOX".

Image Unavailable, Please Login

The Datsun is a hatchback.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

MalibuGuy, your explanation is the best and the most likely reason I have come across for these unfortunate "features" of the Cali.

 

I meant the part captured in white below, looks like a snowplow:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

I know they tried to get the public used to this on the J50, which used the same treatment of this area, but I found that to be the worst feature of the J50, especially in conjunction with the subsequent flaring ahead on the rear wheel. Makes for a really awkwardly shaped underlying skirt (the grey bit).

It looks like a gratuitous feature that's just different to be different and not very useful aerodynamically. In fact many more aero-driven designs (and most GT race cars) tend to free up the area behind the front wheels to promote evacuation of air from under the floor.

It looks to me like an artifact of an aborted design for a winged version of the car ;-)
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

New 575 h.p. Jag Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

LOL!

You express your views very well... and very graphically!

Personally, I don't have a big problem with it even though I find the body flares a bit distracting from the general shape of the bodywork.

I do think part of the reason, besides styling, is aerodynamic. Along with the CF skirt, this flaring probably adds a bit of extra down force, and that's a good thing.

As for GT race cars using the area behind the front wheels to promote evacuation of air front from under the floor, I am not so sure that would apply to the Portofino. My understanding is that air flow under the current Fcars is generally directed to and accelerated out the back of the car via the diffuser so as to create an area of low pressure air just behind the car. This along with higher pressure air flowing over the top of the car, creates down force on the rear wheels. The rush of higher pressure air to equalize the low pressure behind the car presses down on the trunk lid and any lip spoiler that it may feature (like on the Portofino). I believe this design is partly responsible for the excellent traction of modern Fcars.

So I would say it's not good for the aerodynamic design of current Fcars to have air redirected out from the sides of the car.

 

Thank you for the knowledgeable analysis and simple explanation that anyone can understand. I'm curious and can't resist to ask you how do you rate the Portofino design in comparison with the 812 ?

 

Great discussion!

My guess is they did this to help create some negative space to capture light and to add distinction to the area, otherwise it would risk being a bit slab sided looking.

In any event, I think the Portofino looks great.

I will observe that 3 box designs are for the most part getting the cold shoulder by car buyers and thus designers. Most are designing 2 box type designs. Even a car that should be a 3 box design like the Tesla Model S, is in fact a 2 box design.

I'm not an absolutist, so I would not say that every hatchback = inexpensive and functional only vehicle. For example, my F12 is a hatchback...

Anyway, I'm really excited to be placing an order for a Portofino. They took the car in a direction that made it more desirable for me. I think its really good looking.

 

Micheal, what you describe is the typical arrangement of generating down-force by accelerating the air underneath the car - something being done by most sports cars and race cars.

Even though the objective is to accelerate the air that enters the gap between the bottom of the car and the ground, too much air can be detrimental as it may build positive pressure and require a larger diffuser and throat area downstream. Front splitters control flow to the underside while venting into the low pressure area behind the front wheels reduces the amount of air - and pressure - under the car before reaching the diffuser. This feature can be seen on anything from an LMP1 car, GT car and even an F1 car with their barge boards and turning vanes.

The most extreme example of this on a "road-going" car is the A-M/Red Bull car, clearly showing the turning vane directing air to the outside of the car and away from the floor behind it.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The hatchback/fastback 2-BOX form brings the car closer to the modern design language of the in-house Ferrari designs. While hatches are inherently functional designs the Portofino does not actually have one, it just has a roof line that suggests it has a hatch, partly to echo the beautiful lines of the F12. You can say this is actually like the 3-BOX retro form of the Cali echoing the 3-BOX form of the original 250 GTO spider.

I also suspect Ferrari tried to mitigate the hatch appearance with the small buttress "bumps" on the rear deck, with some success.

I think the Portofino looks good from most angles and probably and its 812-ish frontal presentation is probably the best-looking of all the current Fcars. Given that it also has a retractable metal roof and that it's virtually impossible for most buyers to get a 812 without waiting several years, the Portofino is going to sell very well.