Stock 488 v stock 12C
Discussion
isaldiri said:
how often were you on 7th gear on a fast country road as that's the only time you are getting all 670 hp given the torque is limited on the lower gears..... the 488 is certainly a bloody quick car but most of the time it absolutely is not able to put down all the quoted headline hp.
Absolutely right. This 670 headline figure is always quoted and the lower power figs in the lower gears is spun as being a more linear and progressive power delivery to feel more like a normally aspirated car.With the McLaren being lighter and giving you the full fat experience as opposed to the skinny latte I bet the 488 is no quicker
0 -62 mph
LukeyLikey said:
Didn't find what they did when I drove Spider in the UK. The car was blisteringly fast and I hardly noticed any scuttle shake - certainly not enough to take my attention away from deploying 670hp through the rear wheels on the road. Occasionally you could notice a vibration in the rear view mirror but not more. I would NEVER be buying a 650 Spider over a 488 Spider, even though I chose a 12C Spider over a 458 Spider.
I think sometimes its difficult to fully appreciate the car that supersedes your existing ride.I never remotely liked the 360 after my F355 GTS manual. I waited to buy the F430 F1 spider and then 430 Scuderia and still to this day do not like the 360.
458 and 12C were very close for me but the 458 having the n/a V8 just edged it.
The 650s moved things on considerably from 12C
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5h8cx9BGR8
and that catapulted it in front of the 458 despite the N/a engine.
Now the 488 has lost that advantage the difference between it and 650S is minute and down to personal preference.
As Ive said already in coupe form I would take a 488GTB but in spider form it has to be the 650S spider because of the major advantage of the carbon tub
LukeyLikey said:
Come on, are you serious? It's a figure of speech - should I say "concentrating on deploying 453hp at 3,200rpm, rising to 632hp at 7,000rpm in 3rd gear..."?
Fact is, it is very very fast, fast enough that whatever gear you're in you have to fully concentrate if your foot is flat on the floor.
My point is that the headline hp number on the 488 widely claimed by various people including yourself is one that is not achieved outside of 7th gear. I tend to pick up on blatantly inaccurate claims and I didn't disagree the 488 is bloody quick if you read my post.Fact is, it is very very fast, fast enough that whatever gear you're in you have to fully concentrate if your foot is flat on the floor.
Rambo you might want to rethink your opinion the 488 isn't faster up to maybe 100mph. the gearing on the ferrari is a lot shorter than the mclaren.
isaldiri said:
My point is that the headline hp number on the 488 widely claimed by various people including yourself is one that is not achieved outside of 7th gear. I tend to pick up on blatantly inaccurate claims and I didn't disagree the 488 is bloody quick if you read my post.
Rambo you might want to rethink your opinion the 488 isn't faster up to maybe 100mph. the gearing on the ferrari is a lot shorter than the mclaren.
Well I did say the 488 would be no quicker 0 - 60 than the 650s so I wasn't wrong but hands up I didn't realise the Mac was still faster to 100 mph as well. Thank you for pointing that out.Rambo you might want to rethink your opinion the 488 isn't faster up to maybe 100mph. the gearing on the ferrari is a lot shorter than the mclaren.
So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
Incredible - I knew it was an awesome machine from day 1 and ahead of its time but to beat the 2 year newer, so called leading supercar manufacturer, Ferrari puts that into perspective.
I could see an argument where someone would say buy a 458 over a 12C because of the N/a V8 engine and sound but I see no good reason to spend £100k more to buy a 488 over a 650S
RamboLambo said:
Well I did say the 488 would be no quicker 0 - 60 than the 650s so I wasn't wrong but hands up I didn't realise the Mac was still faster to 100 mph as well. Thank you for pointing that out.
So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
Incredible - I knew it was an awesome machine from day 1 and ahead of its time but to beat the 2 year newer, so called leading supercar manufacturer, Ferrari puts that into perspective.
I could see an argument where someone would say buy a 458 over a 12C because of the N/a V8 engine and sound but I see no good reason to spend £100k more to buy a 488 over a 650S
So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
Incredible - I knew it was an awesome machine from day 1 and ahead of its time but to beat the 2 year newer, so called leading supercar manufacturer, Ferrari puts that into perspective.
I could see an argument where someone would say buy a 458 over a 12C because of the N/a V8 engine and sound but I see no good reason to spend £100k more to buy a 488 over a 650S
Can't read Italian but I think I know what the figures say. Still, as you say, not a good reason to choose a 488 over a 650. How about if someone likes the 488 more - does that work?
RamboLambo said:
Well I did say the 488 would be no quicker 0 - 60 than the 650s so I wasn't wrong but hands up I didn't realise the Mac was still faster to 100 mph as well. Thank you for pointing that out.
So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
I don't know whether you are intentionally misunderstanding my post or was I not clear. To state it very clearly for you, up to 100-maybe 120 the 488 will be quicker than a 650 as the gearing of the Ferrari is a lot shorter.So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
RamboLambo said:
Absolutely right. This 670 headline figure is always quoted and the lower power figs in the lower gears is spun as being a more linear and progressive power delivery to feel more like a normally aspirated car.
With the McLaren being lighter and giving you the full fat experience as opposed to the skinny latte I bet the 488 is no quicker
0 -62 mph
If you are content to drive the 488 below 6500 rpm then yes the torque is limited in the lower gears. Above 6500 rpm all the torque, and therefore all the power, is available in every gear. So if you really want a 'full fat' experience you can have it, you've just got to be in the correct gear. Too lazy to be in the correct gear - then you really just wanted a skinny latte.With the McLaren being lighter and giving you the full fat experience as opposed to the skinny latte I bet the 488 is no quicker
0 -62 mph
isaldiri said:
RamboLambo said:
Well I did say the 488 would be no quicker 0 - 60 than the 650s so I wasn't wrong but hands up I didn't realise the Mac was still faster to 100 mph as well. Thank you for pointing that out.
So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
I don't know whether you are intentionally misunderstanding my post or was I not clear. To state it very clearly for you, up to 100-maybe 120 the 488 will be quicker than a 650 as the gearing of the Ferrari is a lot shorter.So not only does the 650S chew up and spit out 458's it does the same to the newer generation replacement 488.
RamboLambo said:
I thought all performance figures were irrelevant at this level and margin of difference.
What isn't irrelevant though is a CARBON TUB in a spider. Nothing inferior about that unless you can prove me wrong
It wouldn't be the deciding factor for me. The roads in the English Riviera must be especially bad. What isn't irrelevant though is a CARBON TUB in a spider. Nothing inferior about that unless you can prove me wrong
Same old boring s
te being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.
Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of fks this stupid discussion right up eh.
As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
I've spent enough test days pushing supercars driven by nubbers round Silverstone, Snetterton and other circuits in my Ginetta race car with 135bhp to know BHP means jack st.
te being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of f
ks this stupid discussion right up eh.As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
I've spent enough test days pushing supercars driven by nubbers round Silverstone, Snetterton and other circuits in my Ginetta race car with 135bhp to know BHP means jack s
t.
_Leg_ said:
Same old boring ste being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.
Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of fks this stupid discussion right up eh.
As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
I've spent enough test days pushing supercars driven by nubbers round Silverstone, Snetterton and other circuits in my Ginetta race car with 135bhp to know BHP means jack st.
What a beautiful shape. Never tire of looking at that. I sometimes think the 250 California is the most beautiful, then the E-type, then the 250 Lusso. In the end who cares. That picture is one of the main reasons I love cars - you can just lose yourself in its design and curves for ages. Amazing to think it was styled by a man with a hammer!te being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of f
ks this stupid discussion right up eh.As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
I've spent enough test days pushing supercars driven by nubbers round Silverstone, Snetterton and other circuits in my Ginetta race car with 135bhp to know BHP means jack s
t._Leg_ said:
Same old boring ste being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.
Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of fks this stupid discussion right up eh.
So I got to thinking about this. Would I trade my Speciale for a 250 GTO if they were worth the same (imagine Ferrari made several thousand GTOs so they were common and cheap!). The answer is no. The GTO would of course be on my wish list but not at the top ... I'm going to run for cover now ... te being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of f
ks this stupid discussion right up eh.
_Leg_ said:
As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
Got to agree with this. To properly appreciate a supercar one needs to spend some time on a circuit sampling its cornerning abilites - then whether one has 500, 600, or 700 bhp matters not one jot.boxerTen said:
_Leg_ said:
Same old boring ste being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.
Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of fks this stupid discussion right up eh.
So I got to thinking about this. Would I trade my Speciale for a 250 GTO if they were worth the same (imagine Ferrari made several thousand GTOs so they were common and cheap!). The answer is no. The GTO would of course be on my wish list but not at the top ... I'm going to run for cover now ... te being discussed I see. On the upside, that means I can post the same old reply.Still the car you would rather own, regardless of value. No carbon tub and only 296bhp. Kind of f
ks this stupid discussion right up eh._Leg_ said:
As for what is faster 2 important things seem to have been forgotten. 1. Corners and 2. The driver.
Got to agree with this. To properly appreciate a supercar one needs to spend some time on a circuit sampling its cornerning abilites - then whether one has 500, 600, or 700 bhp matters not one jot.That's not to say I think we should all drive old cars, old cars are simply an extreme example. I also don't mean that the latest cars are rubbish, I own an F12, an overpowered, paddleshift car in the extreme.
What I mean is that just because say, my F12 is more powerful and advanced than say, my mk1 Escort RS1600 doesn't make it a better car. It's just different. The joy of managing the thing through a series of B road corners with a manual 4 speed, 3 pedals and that engine is a world away from the joy of doing the same thing in the F12.
Neither is better. They're all different.
I'm off to Norway in January with some mates in our 4x4s. For that trip none of my cars hold a candle to my Merc GL but by any PH measure it's a crap car compared to some I own. But it isn't, not in the right context.
Regards to the 2nd point. Time on track helps. Time with an instructor makes the real difference.
As I posted in another forum, there are 2 types of Supercar buyers:
Type1: Want the latest, best, fastest, most high-tech car, i.e. they want it for how other people will see them.
Type2: They want the the car for the involvement, the passion and how it drives, i.e. for how it makes them feel.
In general, most Type1 people buy new, and most Type2 buy 2nd hand.
Most of the people posting on here are Type1. _Leg is Type2. Type1 and Type2 will never see each other's side of the argument.
Type1: Want the latest, best, fastest, most high-tech car, i.e. they want it for how other people will see them.
Type2: They want the the car for the involvement, the passion and how it drives, i.e. for how it makes them feel.
In general, most Type1 people buy new, and most Type2 buy 2nd hand.
Most of the people posting on here are Type1. _Leg is Type2. Type1 and Type2 will never see each other's side of the argument.
Gassing Station | Ferrari V8 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff