Here you are! Has been presented today in Maranello [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqxOYqK2SVg[/ame] Best
I can't believe how well this thing can tackle different terrains, it's really awesome to see it on that ski slope
As a Ferrari enthusiast I watched that video and felt rather sad. Why do I say this, well, how many Ferrari owners drive on snow, how many drive on dirt roads and lets be honest here how many drive in the rain. Sure make the car usuable but its sad that Ferrari chooses to emphasize these attributes to sell the product to the world. More sad still is the design just doesnt look good in my eyes, there is nothing special about the shape, nothing that says oh wow. As it stands its superb technology trapped in a ugly dress, a great sounding engine, a nice interior but the concept I just cant understand, why build a car to do things few Ferrari owners actually do. I may feel different when I see the car in the metal but at the moment its just sad that the true 2+2 has turned out this way. Why four wheel drive, if off roading was the idea, why not just build a true 4X4. Perhaps I am wrong and Ferrari have created a masterpiece, or perhaps they have created a frog, a car that will go down in history as one the least attractive ever to appear out of those green gates. I full realize many are going to disagree with me here but these are my feelings at this point in time, seeing the car in person may change them and I may get used to the shape in time but even the pictures in the factory make the car look too high, too MPV like. Of course the world will lap this car up, or will they, time will again tell but perhaps this car really is a crossroads in Ferrari's history and perhaps the biggest question of all, despite its performance figures can the FF be considered a supercar?
This is the first time Ive looked at the car, but what struck me was the trunkated rear end, the asymmetric sloping roofline, the wide low hood, high door beltline, ....quite similar in design to the shelby cobra coupes that kicked ferrari around in the late 60s. Look at the progression of the Cobras, and its similar design. Granted this is a much better package, but if the intent was to mimic (history) that design, they did it in a nice way. nd
Interesting that Ferrari didnt choose to locate the Jankel/Chinetti Daytona....would have certainly made an interesting picture.
I think you have to remember that Ferrari has never produced a car that could really drive on snow/rain/gravel. I don't think it's necessarily that they didn't want to, but didn't have the capabilities. Of course discussing design is all opinion so pointless to really get in to, I however think it's a beautiful design and still carries the Ferrari magic and passion in it. The 4WD system was designed so that the rear wheel drive nature that Ferrari has always had is still there, but when it does rain or when you are on the snow you are in complete control. I'm sure you could hear from owners that would have liked a little extra stability in a situation like that. The FF is a 2+2 GT car that has the performance of a supercar, of course it's not a supercar, that's what the 458 is for. Ferrari has done a great thing with this car, no it's not for all, but the four seater Ferrari's never have been. This car opens up new markets and a new customer base, similar to the California. I for one can't wait to see it in person
Great post because you have just illustrated what a confused concept the FF is, its not a 4X4 its not a supercar, its not a station wagon, it may be a high peformance 2+2 with questionable styling, the presentation harks on time and time again about rough roads and rain, I would be interested in the customer surveys conducted which gave us a car like the FF... Yes, I would like to see it in the metal too, but in isloation, not next to a 458 or a 612 because it cant compare to those car in beauty. Look I may be totally wrong, the sales figures may prove me wrong but the real test of the FF will be time itself.
I don't think it's a confused concept at all, I think the problem for you is the styling and that carries into why you don't like the other aspects of the car. I love the styling and love the capabilities of this car, for me a GT car needs to relieve frustration and be able to take you anywhere on long journeys, the FF can accomplish that no matter what the weather. No Ferrari 2+2 GT car has ever been a supercar, but because they are Ferrari's have supercar performance. I think a major problem with the 599 was that it was a GT car and not a supercar, obviously the GTO was to change that but to be honest people haven't accepted it into that category very well.
In looking at the video, I get the impression that Ferrari is trying to sell the FF as an everyday car. As explained by Ferrari, 80% of the Ferrari customer base uses thier cars only on sunny days and likely only on weekends. Ferrari has broken off the branch they were standing on with the FF and taken a great leap of faith that they will attract new customers for this car. The all weather, all wheel drive, 660 hp car does, in fact launch this vehicle into the supercar catagory. A 208 mph top speed is supercar territory. The extra travel in the suspension will allow long distance high speed travel even on the poorly maintained roads of North American. I think Ferrari is going after all the deep pockets who currently drive Astons, Bentley Continental GT's, Audi V10's, BMW V10's, Masserati Quattroporte's, Jag 4 Doors and other high speed touring cars. The novelty of sitting in the back seat of a Ferrari may be enough to forgive the lack of rear doors of any type. This may wear thin over time, but the initial purchase decision may favor the FF given the rationalization that inevitably occurs when making the choice between sensible and impractical. The FF is almost practical. Married guys may be able to make the case for the car to thier significant others because the car looks funny to everyone, including hot babes who may not be immediately attracted to the driver, even if it goes like snot. I think that may, in fact, be the target market. If current Ferrari owners are the top of the marketing pyramid, the next level down is a big market segment with lots of money to throw around.
Perhaps you are right but I am understanding why a company with such a glorious history of pretty 2+2 cars(think 456, 365 2+2, Superfast) needs to package the car in this manner, the 612 didnt exactly lack rear seat space so why package, why court controversy with the looks, doesnt make sense to me but most of all looking at the presentation they seem to really feel the need to "sell" the car more, its as if Ferrari itself isnt sure if this design was the right path to follow. Make no mistake the technology is awesome, it really is, the engine sounds superb, the interior looks good its a just shame its not pretty, a shame its so upright in design. Make no mistake it will be superb to drive but will you have little kids shouting, pointing, screaming Ferrari...I suspect not.
I still see this as Maranello"s extension (updated w/modern technology and a rear seat) of a concept similar to the Jaguar XK Coupe- Its not a "shooting brake" but a hatch back GT super coupe. And the Jag--12 cyl as well--has become a classic though when it was originally introduced and sold the car was considered "weird", ungainly and not of a style befitting Jaguar. I really look forward to seeing it in the buff...whether I'd buy it instead of a Panamera or Aston Rapide, is still unclear.
Spot on! I was planning to replace my current DD with the new gen Bentley SS that's going to be introduced next year. The FF seems even more practical,with gobs of better performance (similar power but dramatically lighter),also AWD and similar pricing. No brainer....
Couple videos released today [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDcuH3wkF6w&feature=feedu[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqeW3X0FTKQ&feature=feedu[/ame] That figure is still incredible for a NA engine, 386lb ft @ 1k RPM