RE: Ferrari California T Handling Speciale pack

[nickfrog]

He has also decreed that Adele couldn't sing because he is married to a music teacher. Maybe he is also married to Ron Dennis ?

[bertie]

RoverP6B said:

I report only what I see. No, the California doesn't interest me in the slightest. I could never live with the looks or the sound. I'd much rather have an XKR or DB9.

If you've not driven one or been in one, them I'm sorry but I fail to see how you can be so judgemental.

The original '09 California was not a great looking car I agree, and I've seen and been in a few, the new California T is a colossal improvement in terms of looks, performance and handling.

As I say I daily drive the FF and I stepped from that into the California T and was impressed.

Conversely dad has just got rid of his XK8 and I thought it was dreadful, and I've driven many DB9s.
I found the both felt very old and heavy.

Maybe it's just that older stuff suits you, each to their own, boring world if we all liked the same.

[RoverP6B]

Looks, image and sound are important to me, and I understand the physics of different engine configurations in terms of balance, vibration etc. I don't like the twin-four-cylinder noise of flat-plane V8s. I do like cross-plane V8s and I like V12s even more.

My critical comments of Adele were made because she can't sing, not because I'm married to a musician.

[bertie]

So you've not driven one?

Have you sat in one?

But you have heard and seen a California T yourself then?

I'm just trying to understand what you base your view on, own experience or what you've read and seen on the net?

[jamieduff1981]

RoverP6B said:

Looks, image and sound are important to me, and I understand the physics of different engine configurations in terms of balance, vibration etc.

You are in no position to criticise a car you've never touched. You cannot call a California "flabby" from the experience of some beat up old E39 5-series. Sorry - you just can't. It's ridiculous.

I too understand the physics of different engine configurations. Lots on Pistonheads do. What many others have that you lack is direct experience of how these theoretical issues manifest themselves. You seem slow to learn because I've already lectured you on this before - it makes very little difference in reality. Telling the difference in refinement between a 12 cylinder engine and a 3-pot from a Toyota Aygo is one thing. Rubbishing Ferrari engineered 8-cylinder engines which you've never experienced because an inline 6 is easier to resolve 2nd order vibrations with is silly. All these posts of yours do is advertise what little knowledge of interesting cars you really have.

Forming opinions by proxy based on books, magazines and videos is what most people do. Few have driven everything and are genuinely in a position to make direct comparison. You're not alone. Loads on Pistonheads regurgitate utter ste they've picked up 2nd hand. Few fabricate negative opinions and reasons to support them that are so far out on a limb from what their actual knowledge base - and crucially - then try to defend them with more made-up-bks, as you do.

[doolanj]

Categorically, you don't have to drive something to have an opinion but...

I love the maserati brand and am a former owner and expect to be lucky enough to own again. In choosing my car i drove maserati gt sport and california 30 and a california 30 handling speciale.

In the flesh, in a dark colour, the ferrari looks great, even greater than the maserati. In driving it, there is absolutely no way it was originally conceived as a maserati. Is the handling speciale more dynamic; definitely. is the engine great and does it sound great; definitely. Do the back seats have isofix for my sons car seat; definitely. Is the boot bigger than the maserati roof closed and nearly as big roof down; definitely. Not sure if i am some sort of exception, that is benefiting from some kind of marketing fluke but for me this car covers so many different bases.

It is my only car.

[RoverP6B]

I called the California flabby on the basis of its looks, not how it drives.

You cannot engineer out second-order vibrations with a flat-plane V8. It will always do as the configuration dictates. I suppose you could add balancer shafts, but that's just creating another problem in attempting (and failing) to fix the first.

A V12, straight six or flat six will always be the best choice for a sports car engine.

[bertie]

RoverP6B said:

I called the California flabby on the basis of its looks, not how it drives.

You cannot engineer out second-order vibrations with a flat-plane V8. It will always do as the configuration dictates. I suppose you could add balancer shafts, but that's just creating another problem in attempting (and failing) to fix the first.

A V12, straight six or flat six will always be the best choice for a sports car engine.

So your beef is theoretical?

And now extends to all 8 cylinder engines?

Presumably by the same theory all sports cars should be mid engines and rear wheel drive?

I personally fail to see how this looks flabby but an XK doesn't..




As I say I'm just trying to understand where your views come from.

Edited by bertie on Wednesday 27th January 19:30

[GreatPretender]

bertie said:

RoverP6B said:

I called the California flabby on the basis of its looks, not how it drives.

You cannot engineer out second-order vibrations with a flat-plane V8. It will always do as the configuration dictates. I suppose you could add balancer shafts, but that's just creating another problem in attempting (and failing) to fix the first.

A V12, straight six or flat six will always be the best choice for a sports car engine.

So your beef is theoretical?

And now extends to all 8 cylinder engines?

Presumably by the same theory all sports cars should be mid engines and rear wheel drive?

I personally fail to see how this looks flabby but an XK doesn't..




As I say I'm just trying to understand where your views come from.

Edited by bertie on Wednesday 27th January 19:30

I can't believe this is still ongoing.

Bertie: nice motor, mate; I hope you enjoy it.

The one thing I learned about this place is that when you take on a bottom-feeding moron, you may well take him down time and again with any logical counter-argument, but in reality, you both lose. Him, for being that guy who picks fights through his keyboard (I bet dinner conversations at home are riveting) and you, because you've come down to his level and wasted your time doing so. No good can come of it.

Unfortunately, this world will forever be filled with under-achievers.

[Adam Ansel]

Out of the current Ferrari range the California is the one to have.
There is nothing more special for an enthusiast on a sunny day.

The rest of the Ferrari range are nothing special. Expensive toys for rich kids to show off in with over twitchy steering, old technology and dodgy construction.
They have become parodies of themselves.
Thirty years ago Ferrari was the king of the castle for a motoring enthusiast, now other people do it better.
Model for model McLaren utterly destroys Ferrari as a driver's car, for instance. The gulf is enormous.

But the California is altogether more grown up. An object of desire for the discerning.

[GreatPretender]

Adam Ansel said:

Out of the current Ferrari range the California is the one to have.
There is nothing more special for an enthusiast on a sunny day.

The rest of the Ferrari range are nothing special. Expensive toys for rich kids to show off in with over twitchy steering, old technology and dodgy construction.
They have become parodies of themselves.
Thirty years ago Ferrari was the king of the castle for a motoring enthusiast, now other people do it better.
Model for model McLaren utterly destroys Ferrari as a driver's car, for instance. The gulf is enormous.

But the California is altogether more grown up. An object of desire for the discerning.

Oh yes indeed. I mean, that F12, what a piece of st! And don't get me started on the LaFerrari.

Pffft!

[RoverP6B]

To my eyes, the XK is a much tauter, simpler, nicer-proportioned shape.

I don't have any problem with cross-plane V8s, I just dislike flat-planes.

F12, LaFerrari - by modern standards I quite like them. The styling is a bit fussy but they're fairly well-proportioned and make a good noise by modern standards.

[bertie]

RoverP6B said:

To my eyes, the XK is a much tauter, simpler, nicer-proportioned shape.

I don't have any problem with cross-plane V8s, I just dislike flat-planes.

F12, LaFerrari - by modern standards I quite like them. The styling is a bit fussy but they're fairly well-proportioned and make a good noise by modern standards.

Have you driven or have any first hand experience of a modern Ferrari flat plane V8?

Let's say 458 onwards.

[RoverP6B]

Not driven. Passengered, heard outside. I just dislike the noise they make. I think it's a dreary drone, like a synced pair of I4s. Gimme anything with six or twelve cylinders or a crossplane V8 instead.

[bertie]

RoverP6B said:

Not driven. Passengered, heard outside. I just dislike the noise they make. I think it's a dreary drone, like a synced pair of I4s. Gimme anything with six or twelve cylinders or a crossplane V8 instead.

You don't like the noise, fair enough.

I thought there was more to it than that.

[nickfrog]

RoverP6B said:

Not driven. Passengered, heard outside. I just dislike the noise they make. I think it's a dreary drone, like a synced pair of I4s. Gimme anything with six or twelve cylinders or a crossplane V8 instead.

E39?

[RoverP6B]

I also strongly dislike the California's looks, proportions and driver image.

Nickfrog, what about the E39? BMW has never put a flat-plane V8 in a road car. The only flat-plane V8 it ever made was that in the 2006-9 Sauber F1 cars. The E39 came with a range of inline sixes and cross-plane V8s - and the odd tuner-fitted V12. I think there was a 4-cylinder E39 520d as well, but it was never officially imported to the UK.

[bertie]

I give up.

Clearly a 15 - 20 year old medium sized saloon is the best car ever.

[RoverP6B]

I'm not trying to argue that at all, although I'd much rather have an E39 M5 as a weekend GT than this. What I am actually saying is that all of the factors which should make one want an expensive sports car/GT - pretty, good noise etc - are missing from the Cali.

[bertie]

RoverP6B said:

I'm not trying to argue that at all, although I'd much rather have an E39 M5 as a weekend GT than this. What I am actually saying is that all of the factors which should make one want an expensive sports car/GT - pretty, good noise etc - are missing from the Cali.

Well it's what I want, I do think it's pretty, and sounds good, and it's quick, and exclusive...

To me this isn't a hard choice...each to their own.

Edited by bertie on Friday 29th January 15:09