Ferrari 400 wanted for Motor Trend Classic story!

Hi Blake!

Big thank you for recognizing the amazing Ferrari. We have always wondered why this Ferrari has so little fans. Unknown is unloved. I love mine, it fits my personality perfectly. The 400 is fast, comfortable and very very reliable. A true joy to drive.

Hope you have a fun day. I am sure you will find a member that will help out.

Sound teaser =>

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjLTO_be0_g[/ame]

 

What a wonderful news !

Paul
European Ferrari Club 400
www.f400club.com

 

Flinch,

Please tell me that the video is not of your car. That is about the dumbest thing you can do to a cold Colombo V-12. It was painful for me to watch.

Regards,

Art S.

 

First, who's car is going to end up in the MT article? I would really like to read about it.

Secondly, Art, what temp should the engine be, BEFORE going to higher RPM, water temp? Oil Temp?

Lynn

 

Oil temp should be at normal operating temp. You want to make sure everything is warmed up and expanded. Then, rev away.

Regards,

Art S.

 

Oh, man, that was truly painful to watch! We should find out the serial number of the car so that potential future owners will have an understanding of what the engine has been through.

My operating rule is keep it under 4,000 rpm until the oil temperature has moved well off the peg and and then nothing over 5,000 rpm until the water temperature is up to 90 degrees C and the oil temperature is up to full normal operating level of 80 C in the winter and 90-100 C in the summer.

 

John,

I have a relatively similar rule, but I try to keep it under 2500 until the water temp guage is off the peg (I'm probably too conservative though).

Regards,

Art S.

 

+1 to the both of you!!!

I'm right there w/you, conservation is your best friend.
I 'do' keep it under 2500 until the peg moves & even then, the R's increase slower than the H2O peg...I wait until the oil is straight up before the 4000+ zone is ventured into.
With the tach bouncing to 8K, couldn't you possibly throw a rod?
This isn't the 1st time I've seen over-revving on a cold Colombo V-12 on u-tube, it kind of assures me a little bit more about the "bulletproof" synonym that's often heard.

 

Yep, good rule. The water temp is the first to move off the peg and I'm short shifting around 2500 rpm until then. I do try to make sure not to lug the engine because that is just as harmful for a cold engine as over-revving.

Also, I prefer to warm the car up while driving carefully rather than sit and wait with the engine idling to warm it up. It warms up faster that way.

So the routine is start the car up, back it out of the garage, do a quick walk around to check tire pressures (either visually or with a gauge if I think something looks off) or to see if anything else unusual is going on, get in, buckle up and go.

 

Bruce,

I've heard stories... On a cold engine they are bullet proof until they let go in a quite spectacular manner. Even if you don't blow the engine, you putting unnecressary stress and wear on components. This stress and wear adds up over time - it does not go away.

The whole TR diff issue is due to a similar mentality as exhibited in the video - these cars are not meant to be operated like a 454 Chevelle with an M-22 rock crusher.


John,

Our proceedures are pretty much in line.

Cheers to both,

Art S.

 

To warm up engines in a perfect manner, it's always a question of "keeping the middle way" of neither revving up to early nor keeping the revs to low.

Especially in the latter case, you'd experiencing corrosion of the cylinders, called 'riccardo corrosion', because of the incomplete combustion which leaves corrosive gases as well as condensed corrosive liquids in the cylinders after each combustion cycle.

So, my personal consequence is as follow:
revving up to 2.000 until the water gauge shows a first movement
up to 2.500 - max 3.000 (in rare cases!) until the oil temp gauge moves
Now that the oil temp gauge is starting to move it's important not to hold back your throttle too (!) much.
This is because now is the most dangerous time:
- water temp should rise as quickly as possible because the higher the water temp, the lower the danger of riccardo corrosion.
- oil temp should rise as calmly and smoothly as possible to lower the strain for the moving parts.

But, at the end of the day, it's really easy: just treat her with love and understanding without forgetting you're a man )

 

Are we talking of the infamous Ricardo Souto?
I'll be the first to admit that I don't have a hankering for biology/chemistry. What about the corrosive protection in antifreeze you hear them talking about?

That's exactly what I do.

I have to apologize for not being clear.

We're all aware how long it takes for oil to come up to temp. vs H2O, & keeping the r's @ 2K is a good one until the H2O peg moves. Once it starts moving, it's not long before it's straight up. And while the H2O is increasing to 90c, I gradually bring the R's up from 2K to 4k max in a light-pedal action (lean--not dumping fuel). I'm thinking that lugging the engine is 1500 rpm in 4th or 5th gear but @ 3K-4K, you're half way in the operating range. Once the oil's @ 12 o'clock, it's fair game.

After purchasing the 400, I pulled the plugs as they tell a pretty good story-line. Peering into the chambers, I noticed the piston tops carboned up pretty good. I'm assuming that the heads/valves are likewise so I checked the balance & CO of the 2 banks. They were balanced & at 2% (which is w/in the manuf. range of 1-2%), rich for my taste & I'm thinking that combining that w/stomping on it could quite possibly load up those cylinders. So I leaned them down to 1.5%. Shortly after, I replied to a thread w/a ? about ways to remove carbon. Iirc, rifledriver said no easy way...remove heads & pistons. Another poster mentioned spraying H2O in the induction side (w/filters removed, of course) while keeping the engine alive (3K+ R's) to steam off the carbon w/results as dramatic as a 'pow' from the exhaust system out the back side w/major carbon particles all over the place. My exhaust system is shot right now. So I'm thinking that this would be a good time to conduct an experiment if I were to do so. Anybody hear of this technique??

Speaking of experiments...
I took an '88 Subaru w/100,000 carefully driven miles since new (25K+ mi/yr.) & began putting the pedal to the metal on it a lot (& I mean 'a lot'). I ended up retiring it for a new '94 Subaru ($500. trade-in) @ 144K mi.. It was done for.
This time around, I light-pedalled it...never exceeding 1/2 throttle (& rarely @ 1/2). I exported it to my island home several yrs. ago w/160K mi., all original except for a new battery & that thing runs like a top. It's @ 169K+ mi. now & I feel it still has 90-95% of the power it had when it was new. It loves sea level, blasts down the hwy @ 80 w/ 1/4throttle, light-pedalling it all the way.

Race cars are constantly being torn apart & rebuilt, I just don't have the 'where for all' to do that. Now real estate & investments, that's a different story.

 

Even not a native speaker, I see your irony (especially after googling for this guy Souto) ;-)

Well, in this old german coursebook for mechanics from the early 70ies, they talk about "Riccardo Corrosion" when they refer to incomplete combustion and the following effects. This technical term doesn't seem to be still widely spread. The effect itself, I think, should be still the same as described.

 

Holy Dead Thread Revival, Batman!

This old thread from 2004 in the general Ferrari Discussion section was revived yesterday and is very relevant to the warm-up issue:

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9552

Actually amused to see that my warm-up procedure is still the same as it was 8 years ago! Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds I guess.

 

Holy cow Batman, you working the night shift?? Holding some late hrs. over there.
Reviving that thread when this subject is active here is something, huh? After reading the posts, there seems to be some confusion as to what 'warm up' means...warm up before you start off or warm up before you hop on it.
I'm not a fan of leaving a motor idling for any length of time except for that one minute @ initial, those damn 'stop' lights (as opposed to traffic signals) kills me, I'll drive out of my way to avoid them! I've always heard to keep the R's fluctuating.

That's a first for me w/that thread, I don't think I could have quoted you any closer.
& w/oil temps in the 70's during cold weather, it's imperative that you drive for an extended period of time to steam off moisture. B.

 

Guys, guys, be gentle. The car had been running for 30 minutes to adjust the ingition timing and some carbtuning. All temp sensor wires were disconnected and still hooked to a calibrated unit to measure oil and watertemperature, allong with the temp sensors at the manifold. Thanks for thinking I am stupid, you all should know better. Took the video off youtube, as I even got hate mail during my holiday last week apparently whahaha. Jundging people, always fun.

Anyway, any updates on the MT article

 

Peter, we saw nothing that said it was your car and we most certainly saw nothing in there to indicate that the reason that the temperatures were on their bottom pegs was because the gauges were disconnected.

So we weren't calling you stupid because we didn't know the situation and we certainly had no way of knowing that the temp. sensors were disconnected. What would you have thought in the same situation?

You can say we all should know better but we are not mind readers. We only have the available evidence to work with.

 

Very true, but never cry wolf because of a video. And certainly never call out to hunt for the serial numbers as that my damage the history of a car. Everyone can track down a YT-user ID, I even found hate mail in my personal emails today about this clip. Good thing though is that most of us here have warm feelings about the care on any 400

 

Peter,

I see that you have removed your video - I didn't know it was yours until now. You had posted the video for us to watch so that we could enjoy the sound. It consisted of someone starting a car and revving it well past redline. The guages read cold. I found the video painful to watch and made a note of it here. Now you are criticizing us for judging? I'm glad that not all was as it seemed but I still don't understand why the guages were disconnected - I fail to see the benefit.

Regards,

Art S.

 

You are being overly sensitive and unrealistic.

You should not be blaming us for reacting to what you posted, especially if it was not a true picture of what was going on and you did not disclose those important facts.

I ask you what would any rational observer have thought about what you posted and how could you act surprised at that reaction? It would have been more surprising if people didn't comment on an apparently cold engine being revved well past redline.

Anyway, thanks for the explanation even if it was late in coming.

 

Just me maybe but when I saw the video I imediately knew Peter would not do that to a cold engine so didnt give it another thought.

It is fantastic what he has done for 400s with his exemplary rebuild.

Peter has responded to your 'hunting down' very gracefully and your critisizing him for being too sensitive!!!!!!

Give the man a break try an apology after all it was your mistake.

 

He didn't tell us it was his car and not some video pulled off the internet and he also didn't tell us that the gauges were disconnected and it is our mistake??

Give me a break!

 

No way, the hunter has become the hunted your not getting away with it your wrong. It clearly states who has sent each post at the top left hand side of each post. To now say you didnt know whos car it was seems to be a little feeble. Now be a big boy and apologies to Peter.

 

You are not serious are you? Of course I know who made the post, what wasn't disclosed was where the video came from. You do realize that we all can post up videos from anywhere on the net and You tube don't you?

The fact that several people on this thread were concerned about the video and apparently several others on Youtube were as well tells me that the source of the misinformation was Peter. Not necessarily bad and easily cleared up without accusing everyone of a witch hunt. We all are not mind readers, you know.

You are being petty and I frankly don't know why you care so much about this. It is not a big deal, certainly not as much as you are making it. I would think that Peter doesn't even think it is a big deal now that we all know the story. It was clearly ineffective communication and we should now think that what ever you guys post on here is your own material and that, no matter how bad it looks, you are sacrosanct and without fault.

I have nothing to apologize for, so stop asking and let's move on.

Matter closed, as far as I am concerned. Please feel free to take the last word if it is that important to you.