Why No Ferrari Production Mid-Engine 12 Cylinder

Interesting thread, but my question is "Why no convertible front-engined V12 cars aside from very limited production runs?" I currently have the variety of an old(ish) mid-engine V12, a decade old V12 GT, and a late run NA mid-engined V8. (My wife thinks too many F toys...) Each of the three has a different feel and purpose - Saturday morning drive for the fun of it car, weekend DD and road trip car, and the "I need to get this on a track more often because on the street the posted speed limits are 30+ MPH too low" car.

I've spec'd out a Portafino as a replacement for the 599, after finally coming to grips with the "You have four 2-seat sports cars and none of them are convertibles. Why not?" complaint and thinking, you know, she might have a point... BUT if they made a convertible version of the 812... sigh...

 

I don't think you do, or this thread wouldn't have gone on for so long. Ferrari tried the mid-V12 production car. It WAS either/or because they actually stopped making front V12 two-seaters then. Lots of unhappy campers in those years, so Ferrari eventually saw both the error of their ways, and the fact that from a packaging and practicality standpoint, the front-V12 was superior. The F50 was the beginning of recognizing that from a pure PERFORMANCE standpoint, the mid-V12 was the ultimate.

That is why only the hypercars have mid mounted V12's now. There will most likely never be a regular production mid-V12 again (And for the technical perfectionists, take your front-mid argument and cram it).

 

i can see it happening. The v12 of today is shorter and lighter than the one of years ago. The transaxle issue is nto hard to solve, the ferraris transaxles are already outsourced, and the prvious ford Gt had a great one. One can use the 488 replacement as a base. then we will have the rumored ttv6 version, the TTv8 version for ultimate perfromance and the v12 manual version for classic tastes.

Hoever ferrari/masser/alfa again stated this week no mnuals. And ferrari is going to be developing the FF into a Fuv not figuring out how to put a v12 into the 488 replacement body.

 

I think it would be really difficult and possibly a slippery slope for Ferrari to make a 'regular production' rear mid V12. They are already having to be very careful of the rear mid V8 not out performing the hypercar rear mid V12. Anyone remember the rumors of the 458 being quicker than the Enzo and that the 458 Fiorano track times where false as to not upset Enzo buyers....? As much engineering that would need to go into it would be very tough to make it as fast as possible and then engineer and V12 hypercar faster yet. They've already said they didn't feel they improve enough to justify releasing a hypercar every ten years or so however I think Ferrari's recent proclamation of seeing the next hypercar sooner than the typical 10 years or so will bridge some of the gap. Also in regards to price it would obviously need to be more than the front mid V12's so it would be priced in the 650-750 range so it could still be below the hypercar...? They are already up to their neck with direct 488 competitors and then adding this rear mid V12 would add this new direct competition with Lamborghini product and possibly dilute the value of rear mid Ferrari V12's as they would become more common. Look how many 599 and F12 and FF their are on the used market. They may not feel it's worth it.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-ferrari-hypercar-be-revealed-‘three-five-years

 

The rear mounted 12 cylinder engine solution for Ferrari race cars was relatively good in competing against other layouts (like V8) till the mid 80's. Perhaps this situation helped a bit with the production BB's and Testarossa's because of the perceived relation with race cars. The competition environment moved on (F1 in particular) quite a lot engine-wise since the 80's. I believe a rear mounted 12 cylinder engine car today would not benefit from the perception of sharing part of the design of a Ferrari race car like it used to be the case for BB's. Could this be a factor in the lack of motivation?

 

Those are hypercars.

 

Yes, my 456M was a supercar. The fastest four seat automobile in the world, when it - the original 456 - was introduced. The F40 and F50 sold alongside those two models were the hypercars (Or halo cars, if you prefer).

 

Not in line with Ferrari’s own terminology. They are referring to the Laf as a supercar, the 488 as sports car and the Portofino as a GT.

Otherwise you are right.

 

I certainly understand the appeal as an owner of a Lamborghini Diablo Roadster....it has everything you want in a great weekend car.

 

I think key to the question about a mid-engined V12 is the question of Ferrari’s future engine strategy. How do they want to design the next V12 in context with a hybrid system? Will we see a smaller engine paired with an electric motor? What will the performance comparison with the TTV8 look like? It could be well possible that the TTV8 will be the more powerful engine in its top version. So at the end the next hypercar might end up using that V8. Then a mid-engined production V12 doesn’t seem that far off. Lots of question marks but worth of thinking about it.

 

Not to divert an interesting discussion but given the issue of drivetrain length why was the transverse layout for the V8 abandoned after the 328?

 

I owned a Testarossa and then I traded it in for a 612. The differences are night and day. Some of that is attributable to the passage of time and the advance of technology. But some of it is the inherent nature of these two different layouts. The TR was not the first mid-engined car that I have owned. I found the TR to be very noisy in the cockpit for a supposed GT car. The cockpit was cramped and the luggage compartment a joke. The area behind to seats to put briefcases and other necessities was extremely limited. Also the transmission linkage wasn't as crisp as in a car with the tranny under the shifter. Of course, the TR was stunning to see, and turned heads on the road or the parking lots. I was driving on the Ohio Turnpike one day, and a cargo van pulled alongside of me in the fast lane and the sliding door opened, and a fellow inside pointed a camcorder at me and shot footage of the car -- that was a real hoot. But in the end, my wife never liked having to twist into and out of the TR. Nor did I. The 612 is truly a luxurious GT car, and really fast. All of the things that were unpleasant about the TR disappeared when I made the switch.
I agree with the reader above who pointed out that the 488 is plenty fast for those who want a sports car. For those few who want a GT with a 12-cylinder rear engine, let them pay north of $1 million. The rest of us who want actually to drive our Ferrari frequently, with our significant other in the passenger's seat, can enjoy the better comfort of the current crop of "production" V-12's.

 

Nobody who wants to share some speculative thoughts on the engine strategy?

 

A mid engined v12 is a "classic series" car. A paddle tt v8 will outperform it due to power weight etc.

Plus ferrari is all about superlative Brandi g even if it's at the expense of superlative cars.

Luca laid out the profile, calis at the bottom
For people who want the badge but can't really handle the rest. The v8s as the exotic performance choice and the front engines v12s as range topper gt's.

A mid engined v12 confuses this strategy.

Meanwhile many of us would love a tourquey sonorous mid engined v12 with a stick.

Hey the f50 didn't suck and modern tech should easily be able to offer this package in a production car. But the plan and hierarchy upon which all that cloying and false scarcity along with millionaires standing in line for the honor of being on list is at risk if ferrari just starts making a range of great cars.

That which is desirable but unattainable becomes all the ore desirable, and that's ferrari marketing in a nutshell.

There is a balance they strike between the premiums they earn and volume. The company operates in a branded sweet spot.

Competition is changing the game and one day ferrari may offer choices to compete for customers but we're not there yet.

Technically a mid engined na v12 is not hard to do and all the necessary pices already exist.

 

If Ferrari won't build you one, then why not build your own

That's what I am doing.

Also I agree, there is still a great desire out there for a go kart like Ferrari with a mid mounted v12 and a stick shift, but probably not enough for Ferrari to take the leap.

 

Sounds interesting
Care to share details about what you're building ?

 

Take a stroll down to the special projects section at the base of this forum, its been a journey but now coming together

 

So I used this thread as my first concept for a new type of editorial loosly called "Ask the Community". I took some of your posts and turned them into an article. Our friends over at Motor1 published it for us.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

(https://www.motor1.com/features/237828/ferrari-no-mid-engine-v12/)

 

Well, in the 612 the transmission is not under the shifter either, as the gearbox is at the rear axle.

I suppose that 20 years and probably the weird Testarossa packaging (gearbox lower than the engine) make the difference.

 

Not a bad read although not sureof the line about the Testarossa not selling as well as a GT car. It is by some distance the biggest selling 12 cylinder Ferrari and unless Ferrari radically changes its model cycle policy probably always will be. That was as much a product of the times and Ferrari could have sold pretty much anything with a prancing horse in the second half of the 80's.

My 2p worth on the general question. When the Boxer and Testarossa were in production tyre technology was not as advanced and more importantly electronic driver aids did not really exist. As a result a mid-rear configuration was the best option for traction and handling, and the buyer had to accept the compromises of reduced cabin / luggage space and heat soak into the cockpit (especially on the Boxer).

As electronic aids and tyre tech advanced they negated a lot of the advantages of a mid-rear layout in performance terms and allowed the Ferrari to move to the front-mid layout for the 550 and onwards. A few weeks ago I got to have a drive in an 812 Superfast as part of a group test for Enzo magazine with my Daytona, a 550, a 599 and an F12. In performance terms it is so far beyond what is needed for the road there would be no point in compromising interior space by having it a mid-rear car instead. Even on a track I would want a very very large piece of empty tarmac before considering turning off the electronic aids.

Oddly one thing about the 812 compared with the other GT's in the test was that the styling with its slits and vents was a lot more in your face than the other cars. I suspect the fact that the 812 was yellow had a lot to do with that but even so it seemed to me that Ferrari was once again building a more 'look at me' 12 cylinder car like the Testarossa was.