The Enzo reimagined.... Jim's Ferrari P 4/5 by Pininfarina

When they want to I'm sure the mods will split it off as they did to the thread that was started in this one and became the P 4/5 Competizione Thread.

What do you all think about this direction for our next project?

 

This is reported to be PF's latest "Sergio" that will debut in Geneva.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

This project is not using the design you've mentioned previously that felt was as good or better than the P 4/5?

 

That looks incredible, light and purposeful.

 

I wanted to say this earlier but I was a bit hesitant. Since you asked though, here we go. Why use a TT engine with such low weight? Turbochargers add weight and complexity. Is it a restriction imposed by the engine manufacturer?

 

We're looking at proposals from several designers. I'm very optimistic that this one will be a stunner but keep in mind that any design will have to live on the much smaller platform we're developing.

Think of the size difference between Dino Competizione and Ferrari P 4/5 by Pininfarina.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Because we still want a lot of HP. We're considering several engines. TTV8's, TTV6's and even TTV4's. TTV8's will probably be too big and heavy but we're looking at a lot of possibilities.

 

Ok, so you might hold on to that design that you mentioned before.

 

This will be a totally new design.

 

With the Dino as inspiration and those ideas this project will really be great. What chance you are going to possibly use the Maserati 3.8 turbo V8.....

 

That is one of the engines we're considering. We're also considering it for our next race car which will be a DP for GA/ALMS.

 

How much power if I may ask?

 

Those down here who drove the QP in Italy were quite impressed by the new TT motor. Out of interest I assume any TT engine you use would be tuned to deliver a great sound?

I would imagine that engine is fairly detuned for the QP and could deliver quite a bit more power.

 

In endurance tune about 620HP from the TT 3.8. The others would be less but
would weigh less and be smaller as well.

If we can get down to 1800lb 400hp would be fine.

 

No matter what we'll have great sound.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8uVDN3tMIU]Ferrari P4/5 Competizione LOUD Sound! - YouTube[/ame]

 

a few days ago you mentioned in another thread that you quite enjoy driving in spiders. will the car have any kind of a removeable top?

 

That's a good question. The new Avevtadore Spyder is stiffer than the coupe with roof panels clamped down so I'm considering it.

One amazing design only works as a coupe so I'm not yet sure.

 

Getting a car that light yet strong enough to handle that kind of power to meet safety specs should be a challenge.

 

Jim--

Love the stated direction for the project, but what are your thoughts re: the industry's perception of the final result?

I think this is fair to ask because P4/5 generated such a sensational public response, and also, particularly, because Ferrari as a brand responded both negatively (failure to support P4/5C // CM) and positively (design inspirations for F70).

By building P4/5, your team redefined the industry's integration of aerodynamics and design. Will the driving dynamics/performance of this new one-off have the same effect on the industry with regard to its specific superior characteristics? Do you want it to effect that type of change change?

Sorry to be lengthy; your influence in the automotive world is unique and I believe that whatever you do from here on out will generate a large response.

 

In regards to changing industry direction: I really hope it would inspire other manufacturers to make some quality small sports cars.

A good looking quick 4 cylinder(possibly even a smallish 6 cyl) with awesome tech would be really cool. So far all we have is Sub/Toyota BRZ at the cheap end of the market and Lotus/Alfa 4c at upper end.

Lotus is way outdated in looks and the 4c could be a little more aggressive imo......

 

Here's the thing. Hypercars today have massive HP and are very complex. F70/P1/918 are hybrids and that has added a lot of weight. P 4/5 C is a Hybrid and as a race car worked well but it too gained weight and complexity. Frankly in racing I think KERS and TERS as being used in F1 will work but on the street I'm not convinced that it's the best solution for sports cars. My desire is to go back to a more basic sports car. Lighter, simpler and smaller. When I drove the Historic Targa in Ferrari P 4/5 by Pininfarina I loved it's ability to pass at will but not it's size in the twisty mountains. Nimbleness is very important and when I drove Dino Competizione and Jesse's 208 GTB Turbo there I enjoyed the twisty roads more and actually think I was faster.

The difference between P1/F70/918 aero wise intrigues me. P1 wing and DRS vs F70's active aero and rear spoiler. (Remember a wing is a surface where air flows on both sides of the surface unlike a spoiler where it acts on one. F70 may have flaps that are semi wing like but P1 and 918 have WINGS) What we're trying to develop is a design where the wings are incorporated into the beautiful shape of the entire car. Think of Dino Competizione with front, roof (Dino Competizione does not have a roof wing) and rear wing integrated smoothly into the body and I mean wings that air flows under and over.

This one will be wild...

 

Needs a windshield, no??

What I love about PF is they hate to be boring. Good approach!

I believe that the mclaren/tesla approach to reduce much of the UI to software is fundamentally correct as a design approach. Change sw and you can tune/retune/feature enhance as needed. Even sell tuning development kits especially if standard component interfaces can be used. Obtain second sourcing of screens, cameras, lighting that help the design and operations supply chain. Agera looks like they do similar things with an impressive in house capability...

SV

 

Outboard wings like an F1 design? Or active surfaces like pagani?

Sv

 

Neither. Surface shapes that air flows over and under with controllable airflow stall/DRS without movable panels to reduce weight and complexity.

 

If you texture a surface in certain ways it makes the air less likely to dissipate off the surface and more likely to follow contours, within reason of course.