296 GTB weight

Interesting. The 296 is the only hybrid in the group?

Not surprised by the Maserati. I’ve seen the MC-20 up at Road Atlanta, it’s a large car.

 

Yeah, I was surprised at the Maserati. A good looking car, but boy does it appear a lot larger in person. I didn’t see the reason for it being that large.

The 296, OTOH, even though a bit smaller than the F8, is (IMO) well proportioned.

I suppose all these hybrids will struggle with their weights. The 296 manages to hide its weight well, it didn’t feel heavy to me on a spirited drive.

 

it's a classic ferrari thing to lie about the weight of their cars so not suprised at all

the mc20 deserved car of the car imo

 

Anybody think the 296 would be better without the electrics, even if notionally slower on paper.
The MC20 is really a Gt car, still that CF tub does nothing, a Cf tubbed car should be more like 3000lbs.
Good news, these cars are not really that much lighter than what a z06 vette allegedly weights.
GT4Rs is the daddy, sub 3000lbs, the only one thats really trackable..

 

All supercar manufacturers quote dry weight, in the lightest possible configuration (i.e. alla light weight options). That 's not lying.

And yet the others would run rings around it...

 

For 3 fast laps till they fade or melt their tires and brakes losing their pace, weight comes at a massive price on track. Theres a reason no one really tracks the others, even those with unlimited budgets. Its a function of mortals having the skill, and the $ and performance cost of weight over many laps.
This year I saw one 458 at the track not necessarly quick but thats was the driver. There were two 458 challenge cars and one 488 C that didnt rate for speed. All very well to have the machine, but once gain, the skill to extract all it has on track is another story, and if you dont come to these machines with the years of track skill, their ability will just be a crutch which prevents you from getting really good.
There was a 765 lt which did demolish everything else, for a massive daily ruining price of something like 15K according to the owner, i have no idea if he was using all the car had and it was not sustained laps, more like 3 or 4 and then pit in.
So yes its possible to run a supercar on track, but really sorta pointless if youre doing more than a casual De event for thrills.

Those with the means this year seemed to be runing new Gt3 cup cars or Gt2Rs club sports. BTW they were not he fastest traffic out there, that was a heavily modded 996 GT3, something about skill and momentum ie not slowing down for corners, he was running into the 1.50's at the glen.
Notable was a Camarao ZL1 1lt that ran just under 2 mins on road tires at the Glenn. So heavy cars are not necessarily a no way. Camaro owner said tires last 2 days and the iron rotors a season, plus they're inexpensive to replace.

The 296 is magnificent as is the Mc 20, they are first and foremost road cars and engineered as such. The 296 looks fantastic, sounds great and is art in motion, as a ferrari should be. By alla counts it is a phenomenal experience at all speeds on road, and no doubt for a few laps on track can give most anything a go, but it is too heavy soft and overpowered to sustain, its simply not a street legal track car, its a road car.

The title of street legal track cars belongs to the Gt series porches, durable all day every day on track, and fast lap after lap after lap. Im wondering who on this site can drive a GT4Rs at its limit and track sustainably. Could one of us in 765 or 296 pass that person in a GT4rS on a straight, of course, but for 10 full tilt laps no.

Horses for courses, if you're going to track Ferraris are simply not engineered for it, to date the same applies to corvettes, no matter how fast the c7 ZR1 could crack off 1 hero lap.
We'll see how the new z06 does, but it looks to be 800lbs heavier than the Gt4Rs.

A few fast laps is one thing, fast all day another.

Saw an aventador SVJ rolling down the road past my table at dinner last night. A simply magnificent machine, just not for track beyond a few laps of fun, but that takes nothing away from the car or intended experience..

 

You are selling these cars short, sir. Even with a 599, we could empty the tank. before it had any serious brake issues. Tyres needed cooling every 2-3 laps though, but that was to be expected with road tyres.

 

Sorry I drove a 599 in anger on track, I thought it was crap. Motor was great but the brakes truly sucked, lacking power or modulation, and it really didnt want to turn in. I guess it is all a function of how hard one pushes on track. I fairness tot he 599 the 458 I drove had crap brakes too, heard the same from others. Could be just the road pads they fit, but then a more aggressive pad will probably eat those ceramic rotors fast, and given the cost of the rotors, we an see the issue.
Supercars are cool, but theyre for the road and the pose, they're not really serious if youre a track person. The closest I've seen is the Maclaren 600lt, and even then consumables were extreme.

You can see the racing version of the 296 dispenses with the electrics, dropping a ton of weight in that alone, plus it then has endurance on track due to weight and being pure Ice.

The GT series P cars from what Ive seen. you can lean on them all day and it all lasts including tires.. The regular non Gt series porches porches, like the rest they are mush and burn up bits like brakes fast.

In the interest of objectivity, I track a lot and coach on track, I don't own a porche but I sure respect what that company does in terms of product engineering for those who do buy a Gt porche for the track. Juts look at how active and full POCA track days are, compare that tot he ferrari club, true theyre are a lot more porches, but even still its not even close. Or put another way, porche makes relatively few Gt3s and Gt4s, probably less than ferrari makes of its mid engined cars. Go to a non porche track event, you're lucky if you see one maybe two exotics(maclkrean ferrai lambo) but there will be 10 or so porche(sometimes it feels like 50%). people buy what works, and the p cars work, you dont even have to buy ceramics on the Gt cars, thats serious use spec then not pose. Ironically this year was the year of the camaro, for 75k you can buy a car that while compromised maybe too much on road, really works on track.

Ferrari could engineer such a car, they just dont, given the customer base and the profit from fripperies why bother.

But Kudos to you tracking one. The more that happens the more people want that the more the product will improve .

 

I am not prefessing to being a great track driver, even though I have had some success in track day timing runs. Both our 599 and 430 were turning better lap times than the 997 GT3s; all cars being on stock material. Granted though, different drivers, and we all did 4-5 hot laps, before a cool down lap. The track was also relatively short (the longest straight was 800 metres).
I don't know what would have happened over 20 hot laps, nor do I care. Over a lap though, the Ferraris were easily quicker than the stock Porsches. A tuned 996 TT with some 600 BHP. was quicker, till a tuned F40 (about 580-600 HP), on slicks, showed up. That F40 was an ex "Jigger" (5-6 times Greek Rally Champion) and was driven by a French gent who won Le Mans. He blew all of us away, obviously... He then drove the Le Mans Pescarolo-Judd prototype and annihilated the lap record for that particular circuit.

My discussion with Emmanuel was enlightening, but I learned more from the Pescarolo engineers that day.

 

Actually to compare the MC20 correctly to the 296GTB you have to consider the number for "measured" weight to be 1700 kg and not 1770 kg. In the video one can see that with driver the weight was actually 1780 and without driver it was 1700. This 1700kg number is comparable to the 1660kg for the 296. That is actually a 40kg difference.
Still disappointing though for the MC20 in my opinion.
What is true is that if the 296 can hide is real weight well (I test tracked it for about 10 laps at Varano) so does the MC20. I drove the MC20 on regular small Swiss roads and it was really "fun" to drive it. Just like the "fun to drive" 296? Maybe...

 

I am so far from being expert on the subject that I feel awkward to say to an expert that he is right... but at least I can say that I could not agree more with the fact that weight matters. I would add that it matters not only on the track but also on regular roads.
I own a 488 and a Porsche Taycan Turbo S. Let me choose which car to drive for a "spirited" drive up and down some mountain road and every single time I will take the 488. The Porsche is unbelievably fast and "fun" to drive but one thousand kilo difference between the two cars is quite a "handicap" even if you are not tracking...

 

Agreed, amongst oter things it affects the desire of the car to pivot. To certain degree tech such as braking the inner wheel and 4ws can fake pivot, but even then its filtred and synthesized.

of course one needs to be blessed with access to the right conditions for a "spirited" drive up and down some mountain road" that would be exactly the area where a ferrari would excel over other cars. A pity so few are used in this manner.

 

288 Gto F40 AND f50 were alas aberrations for ferrari. Really powerful raw cars with close on zero attention paid to comforts. By the time of the enzo they were going in a different direction.
Too bad they dont make a regular car in that mold.
Imagine a lightened 296 to the bones, some cf bodywork like doors hood roof etc keepign that classic beautiful shape, no electrics, well below 300lbs, harder more aero, that would then be a machine you could really track. With that turbo 6 motor they could even do a manual option as there is the Tq there to make sense of that. Since all the pieces exist, shouldnt be too hard to do, its the modern rendtion of say the 288.. Closer then to the ideal of what Gordon Murry is doing with his new cars. Thats a ferrari I and others would find compelling over aGt4 Rs.

 

Incorrect. They showed the weight without the driver at the end. The Maserati is heavy, but that doesn't mean it is not a great car.

Well, you might like such a car, but I don't. Seems most Ferrari clients don't care for it either, otherwise Ferrari would build it.
I would never consider a new manual car with over 500 HP (obviously classics are excluded). Changing gears manually is just a distraction from the actual process of driving (following the correct driving lines, braking points and how to balance the car mid corner and then power off onto the next straight). I have come to the conclusion that it is a cultural thing. In Europe we have all been driving manuals since we were teens. In the US a manual is considered exotic, because most cars are automatics there. My 69 year old mother drives a manual, it is no big deal for us Europeans. Ferrari (and Lamborghini and McLaren for that matter) make cars that are technically advanced and derive their speed not from their simplicity, but their engineering prowess. Today even an F1 car weighs about 900 kilograms fully fuelled.
PS: I have never liked Murray myself../.

 

Sorry, but you are incorrect about it. Look again the recap table at the "measured" weight (incorrect for the MC20 only) and the "calculated" weight (correct for all cars including the MC20). The measured weight for the MC20 was 1780 (with driver inside) in the video and for some reason 1770 (a clear typo for me) in the table where all cars weight were without (80kg) driver inside. The MC20, in the table, is the only car that drops more weight than its weight of fuel in its "final" calculated real life weight... not going to argue more with you. Just the facts...

 

On the photo of the weight at the origin of the thread, it s 1669 kg with 50% of the gas tank, so 1700 kg real with the full tank.
The reason it hides its weight is the steering calibration, and it remains a pure artifice.
When I say it s a completely artificial automobile consumer car, I am reprimanded by some, and yet it is the truth, even if we refuse to see it !
a fact is a fact...

 

Unless they are lying, this is the table:

https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/attachments/9a8850009a8e69e58b69580fc626d3c3-jpg.3458018/

 

Not arguing about the real weight of the 296... 1660 or 1700... to me, it is a relatively heavy car for a sports/trackable car. Maybe by 100 to 150 kg... and for sure "real" weight should account for fuel to be in the tank. We could further argue that the amount should be the same (liter wise) to make a fair comparaison between cars vs. a % of each car fuel capacity.
Just saying that the comparaison with the MC20 was wrong...
Potentially and probably the 296 and the MC20 weigh about the same...
Does not speak well for the MC20 that markets itself as a light supercar.

 

You have some sort of problem with the reality, or is it a language barrier?
The 296, as all cars, was brimmed to the full.

 

Just look at the video at around 27 minute and 40 seconds you will see the MC20 weight while on the scale with and then without driver... 1780 and 1700 respectively.
Nobody is lying. Just a compounded mistake in the table...

 

Okay, we were referring to different things.

 

Everyone should calm down, no?
We are just talking about the weight of cars here.
Thanks to the OP for real life data. And EVO is simply confirming the number. And allow us to make relevant comparisons across nice cars we may be interested to know more about...