Friday 7th May 2010

Carbon Fibre Confined To Top-End Ferraris

Ferrari says more research on carbon fibre is needed - but next Enzo will get it

---

Ferrari says it won't make extensive use of carbon fibre in its mainstream road cars just yet.

McLaren might have gone to full-on carbon fibre for its forthcoming MP4-12C, but Ferrari will reserve the extensive use of such exotic materials for low-volume specials such as the next Enzo, due in 2012.

"The fact is that nobody today has a real understanding of what happens if you damage a carbonfibre structure," Ferrari CEO Amedeo Felisa revealed in an interview with Autocar. "After 20 or 30 years of use, who knows what state a carbonfibre structure will be in? Only the airplane industry has a long-term understanding of using carbonfibre, and there the usage is very different. Unless you have a really big accident, it is possible to repair a Ferrari today, and we don't want to lose that."

Felisa also suggested that the next Enzo will get a twin-turbo V8 rather than the force-fed V6 that some reports have hinted at: "There are no plans for a six-cylinder engine today. Ferrari will not build a six-cylinder engine until customer attitudes towards smaller engines change. The perception today is that the number of cylinders equates to the possibilities of the car."

[soad]

I wonder how much different will the new Enzo look. Afterall, there's almost 10 years between them.

Prefer n/a to turbo charging myself. Not that I'm ever likely to be able to afford one.

[barks]

I don't know what happens to carbon fibre after 20-30 years but most of the 20-30 year old cars with steel chassis have rusted to bits! You just have to make a continual assesment as you go along.

[E21_Ross]

barks said:

I don't know what happens to carbon fibre after 20-30 years but most of the 20-30 year old cars with steel chassis have rusted to bits! You just have to make a continual assesment as you go along.

well, bare in mind rust protection has come a long way in the last 30 years, i think most cars today will die before rust gets them, unless they are uncared for. but yes, there aren't very many 30+ year old cars out there. mine is nearly...2 years yet

[snorkel sucker]

otherwise translated to say that they cannot afford the extensive costs associated with the continuing development of such a material for use on their entire range. Who can blame them though when compaines such as pagani are introducing carbo titanium as a new material.

Bit strange was the comment r.e. damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

still, glad to see they are sticking to their morals regarding engines...for now at least!

[E21_Ross]

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

think the point was that the carbon fibre on those cars is not very old at all, and i suspect different in structure (?) to the road cars. the question is will the properties of the material have changed in 30 years time after being subject to use and abuse.

[tegwin]

I guess the issue with CF, is that if you have an accident you can not easily assess the chassis for damage etc... CF does not deform like steel does, it just cracks internally..which could lead to catastrophic failiures...

But agree... they are just pulling away from the enormous cost for tooling etc...

[Gridl0k]

Wop Donkeys said:

"There are no plans for a six-cylinder engine today. Ferrari will not build a six-cylinder engine until customer attitudes towards smaller engines change. The perception today is that the number of cylinders equates to the possibilities of the car."

Translation - "we remember the Jaguar XJ220"

Edited by Gridl0k on Friday 7th May 13:01

[TheRoadWarrior]

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Any CF item damaged in F1 would simply be discarded.

Trouble with a road car with a carbon tub is if you put a crack in it, what do you do? Force the customer to have an entire new CF tub? Even on something as expensive as a fezza thats still a big ask for the customer

[snorkel sucker]

E21_Ross said:

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

think the point was that the carbon fibre on those cars is not very old at all, and i suspect different in structure (?) to the road cars. the question is will the properties of the material have changed in 30 years time after being subject to use and abuse.

you are of course correct (my comment was slightly tounge in cheek) they can however, as with any material, do accelerated degredation tests and such like. I guess with supercars though, many are not driven with the frequency of "normal" cars, so while its all well and good doing such tests, it may be that CF performs worse in an environment where not used that much e.g. sat in a garage for months and coming out only in summer months

[Fury1630]

I wouldn't have a CFC chassied car if you gave it to me - speaking as an aircraft designer. Any impact on the surface may - or may not cause invisible internal damage. On a plane that's really only operators dropping tools on it, hailstorms & birdstrike so it's a known event & can be ultrasonically tested. A car gets thousands of small impacts a year from stone chips etc, so to make it damage tolerant you'd have to make it so thick that an aluminium tub is actually lighter. A minor crash (like Top Gear's Konigsegg off) could write a car off quite easily because the cost of stripping the car to LOOK for damage would be prohibitive.

Now add to that that CFC absorbs water, becoming both 25% heavier & 25% weaker & those little stone chips don't seem so minor. Ferarri is absolutely correct in my opinion.

Make no mistake, CFC is NOT just like fibreglass only lighter & black!

Oh, it burns beatifully too.

For bonnets, doors, that sort of thing yes, primary structure no.

[beez]

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Edited by beez on Friday 7th May 13:17

[TheRoadWarrior]

beez said:

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Edited by beez on Friday 7th May 13:17

Hehhe-he thats funny.

[Mikeyboy]

Gridl0k said:

Wop Donkeys said:

"There are no plans for a six-cylinder engine today. Ferrari will not build a six-cylinder engine until customer attitudes towards smaller engines change. The perception today is that the number of cylinders equates to the possibilities of the car."

Translation - "we remember the Jaguar XJ220"

Edited by Gridl0k on Friday 7th May 13:01

actual translation. Americans' don't get small engines and we can't annoy them.
Ferrari don't make sports cars they make baubles for the American rich. they just happen to drive well these days.

[Fittster]

Mikeyboy said:

Gridl0k said:

Wop Donkeys said:

"There are no plans for a six-cylinder engine today. Ferrari will not build a six-cylinder engine until customer attitudes towards smaller engines change. The perception today is that the number of cylinders equates to the possibilities of the car."

Translation - "we remember the Jaguar XJ220"

Edited by Gridl0k on Friday 7th May 13:01

actual translation. Americans' don't get small engines and we can't annoy them.
Ferrari don't make sports cars they make baubles for the American rich. they just happen to drive well these days.

The importance of the US is on the wane:

"In the middle ’90s, the United States was by far the largest market for Ferrari, along with Germany and Italy. That accounted for 60 percent. Today, we will sell close to 300 cars in China, we sell a lot in the Far East and Middle East. The United States is still our largest market, but we have far more of a worldwide presence. We will open in a couple of years India; that could be a good market in the future, but we have decided not to open it yet. My program is to maintain exclusivity but to increase the volume due to the new markets. We will increase the total volume thanks to China, thanks to Abu Dhabi, thanks to Brazil, thanks to India"

[Mikeyboy]

Fittster said:

Mikeyboy said:

Gridl0k said:

Wop Donkeys said:

"There are no plans for a six-cylinder engine today. Ferrari will not build a six-cylinder engine until customer attitudes towards smaller engines change. The perception today is that the number of cylinders equates to the possibilities of the car."

Translation - "we remember the Jaguar XJ220"

Edited by Gridl0k on Friday 7th May 13:01

actual translation. Americans' don't get small engines and we can't annoy them.
Ferrari don't make sports cars they make baubles for the American rich. they just happen to drive well these days.

The importance of the US is on the wane:

"In the middle ’90s, the United States was by far the largest market for Ferrari, along with Germany and Italy. That accounted for 60 percent. Today, we will sell close to 300 cars in China, we sell a lot in the Far East and Middle East. The United States is still our largest market, but we have far more of a worldwide presence. We will open in a couple of years India; that could be a good market in the future, but we have decided not to open it yet. My program is to maintain exclusivity but to increase the volume due to the new markets. We will increase the total volume thanks to China, thanks to Abu Dhabi, thanks to Brazil, thanks to India"

yes everyone is saying that these days, there is as much good PR in saying that as much as it actually being true, the fact is in reality the part where he mentions India is more how they really feel. i.e. They'll buy the cars anyway, and keep them in their second homes in the US or Europe so as yet they don't actually have to cater to those markets yet.
The thing is it will take so long to come on stream in the local BRIC markets to anything like the level that the US provides in sales that the US is still the market they aim the cars at in the design and engineering process.

[snorkel sucker]

TheRoadWarrior said:

beez said:

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Edited by beez on Friday 7th May 13:17

Hehhe-he thats funny.

no need for the fire brigade to cut you out of wreckage i suppose...

[JumpinJack]

Fury1630 said:

I wouldn't have a CFC chassied car if you gave it to me - speaking as an aircraft designer. Any impact on the surface may - or may not cause invisible internal damage. On a plane that's really only operators dropping tools on it, hailstorms & birdstrike so it's a known event & can be ultrasonically tested. A car gets thousands of small impacts a year from stone chips etc, so to make it damage tolerant you'd have to make it so thick that an aluminium tub is actually lighter. A minor crash (like Top Gear's Konigsegg off) could write a car off quite easily because the cost of stripping the car to LOOK for damage would be prohibitive.

Now add to that that CFC absorbs water, becoming both 25% heavier & 25% weaker & those little stone chips don't seem so minor. Ferarri is absolutely correct in my opinion.

Make no mistake, CFC is NOT just like fibreglass only lighter & black!

Oh, it burns beatifully too.

For bonnets, doors, that sort of thing yes, primary structure no.

+1 Even if you have a light bump, in a CF bodied car, you have to send it to be X-rayed... I'd prefer not to have that hassle. However, if I could afford a CF car.. I'd probably have a few at my disposal. The cost to put a CF body into production would be huge! And when weighed up against the new Aluminium innovative bodies, I'm guessing, is nowhere near worth it.

[turbo-ww]

TheRoadWarrior said:

beez said:

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Edited by beez on Friday 7th May 13:17

Hehhe-he thats funny.

Although the picture makes the point well I'm not entirely sure I would describe it as 'funny'

[scubadude]

beez said:

snorkel sucker said:

damage to CF - they've crashed enough F1 cars to assess that, surely?!

Edited by beez on Friday 7th May 13:17

I realise the point you're making but isn't this picture of the Chump who cut and lengthed his ex-works Ferrari so he could race it in a classic series (possible an Amercian?)
Therefore it doesn't really make much comment on the strength of old CF only the strength of old CF tubs that have been cut in half and glued back together by a complete muppet :-)

I'm surprised they don't think the airline industries use of CF is of any consideration- surely aircraft wings get bent and tortured with hugoe loads with massive hours of usage, i would have thought knowing how aircraft CF aged would be beneficial to road/race car CF use.

[130R]

Putting a V6 in Ferraris flagship?? Thank God they appear to have binned that idea.