RE: Ferrari California T: Review

[FrankUnderwood]

Once again, what on earth is the point in quoting dry weight?!

[E30Addict]

"Proof, as in the case of National Socialism, that popularity is a poor denominator of quality."

[Luca Brasi]

Complaining about a Ferrari being too loud Chris?

My neighbour across the street drives a 430 Spider, oh the noise on cold start ups in the morning

[stuart-b]

So essentially, find a mapper who can break the ECU, get equal torque in all gears, kicking in earlier, with stickier tyres, and get an instant acceleration boost with no change in peak power?

[f328nvl]

This review drips with mean spiritedness, can we get over and move on from the Chris Harris/Ferrari thing? They are possibly the world's biggest car brand with arguably most important history in high performance motoring.

Chris Harris is a reasonably well known journalist in England and writer of articles on a popular web site who always quotes miscellaneous technical data for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the vaguely snide tone before I got to the real impression of the car. All we want to know is: How does it make you feel and is it any good?

[edo]

I have been lucky enough to drive a California (first gen), and it's a lovely car. Coming into sensible money now, and much more reasonable to run with the longer warranties and dual clutch box (which is a peach compared to previous gen F1 boxes.

Also the first car I have been in that I got propositioned in at a petrol station

[slippery]

I like it. I think it's quite a sensible proposition as Ferraris go.

[custardtart]

f328nvl said:

This review drips with mean spiritedness, can we get over and move on from the Chris Harris/Ferrari thing? They are possibly the world's biggest car brand with arguably most important history in high performance motoring.

Chris Harris is a reasonably well known journalist in England and writer of articles on a popular web site who always quotes miscellaneous technical data for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the vaguely snide tone before I got to the real impression of the car. All we want to know is: How does it make you feel and is it any good?

You're wrong fella, Chris is the best car journo out there at the moment and I like the fact he doesn't kiss their arse. Of course he's mellowed a touch because he wants to be able to drive new Ferraris and that's fine with me cos it means we get to see his fantastic road tests.

[iloveboost]

I agree that the facelift has helped it look more modern now it looks less like old bits and new bits of Ferrari stuck together. I think they've also made the rear look a bit less tall and square which is a good thing.

Its looks like they've improved the interior quality as well which is good. When I went to Goodwood a few years ago I was a bit surprised at how cheap some interior parts of the California/F430 looked. I mean no dis-respect to Ferrari I love their cars.

The other day I went for a walk in a town near me and right by the river there was a red F430 Spider shiny and spotless. I tried to be cool and not start running like a man being chased by a raptor. I then walked around it dreaming of driving off. Right then I didn't care what some little plastic bits were like it looked great.

[405dogvan]

The biggest problem with the old Cal was it's proportions - it was tall/chubby on the hips/outright ugly at the back.

It's good to see a simpler looking Ferrari and it's certainly prettier - their rush towards 'shouting at you' styling (458, LaF in particular) is going to date those cars pretty quickly

Remember tho - they once made the 456 and the 355 at the same time and they'll never better that ;0

[PunterCam]

I just want Mr Harris to have a go one day.

This is the end of the naturally aspirated engine. For ever. After the 991, porsche will not make another n/a gt3. Ferrari will not make another naturally aspirated v8. I'm not even sure they'll make another v12 car... Perhaps "LaFerrari" was apt after all... McLaren don't make n/a anything. Koenin.....whatever don't. Pagani don't. Lambo are staggering on, which is great, but I wouldn't be in the slightest bit surprised if the facelift huracan is an audi turbo... These are the last moments. Lets all act like children for just a minute, and say fk the turbos. Especially turbos which are so anally mapped and sanitised, then re-injected with "character" in some kind of half arsed attempt to make a turbo car feel like a naturally aspirated one. It's fking insane. All because of some little emissions law, which turbo engines and automatic gearboxes happen to be better at sneaking passed.

Unquestionably, knowing what's going on in any machine makes a huge difference to how you perceive it. It's for this reason that I'd never, EVER tolerate a car that played fake engine noise back through its stereo, even if it sounded 100% genuine and magnificent. Knowing is enough for the mind to sabotage the enjoyment.

So for Chris to say the torque limiting/shaping isn't a problem because the car drives very well... Well that doesn't sit with me. That engine map is fake. It's not real, it's not natural. And just knowing that I'd be revving the car out not because the power was up top, but because computer programmers had decided that was what I should do... Nah. No thanks. If it's going to be turbocharged, let it be turbocharged. Make a feature of it, don't hide it. That lump of torque in an sl63 might well end up in tyre smoke - at least that's real (ish - torque limiting is everywhere of course).

[jacksparrow11]

f328nvl said:

This review drips with mean spiritedness, can we get over and move on from the Chris Harris/Ferrari thing? They are possibly the world's biggest car brand with arguably most important history in high performance motoring.

Chris Harris is a reasonably well known journalist in England and writer of articles on a popular web site who always quotes miscellaneous technical data for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the vaguely snide tone before I got to the real impression of the car. All we want to know is: How does it make you feel and is it any good?

Following the bite the other day we can expect more fishing like this.

[V8 FOU]

edo said:

Also the first car I have been in that I got propositioned in at a petrol station

What, by a Petrol Pump?

[Dagnut]

Terminator X said:

Twin turbo V8 how long before they drop the 4 pot on us though

TX.

Why would they? you still need the displacement if you want big power without serious lag and a decent spread of torque..I don't know of any 4 pot capable of 500bhp without serious compromise

[carnut360]

so love the old one, just waiting for them to be cheaper than the 430 then job done..where do I sign!

[DeltaEvo2]

It's "capisci" not "capiche" apart from that, great review and great car.

[chelme]

f328nvl said:

This review drips with mean spiritedness, can we get over and move on from the Chris Harris/Ferrari thing? They are possibly the world's biggest car brand with arguably most important history in high performance motoring.

Chris Harris is a reasonably well known journalist in England and writer of articles on a popular web site who always quotes miscellaneous technical data for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the vaguely snide tone before I got to the real impression of the car. All we want to know is: How does it make you feel and is it any good?

+1 He fawns over anything from Munich and Stuttgart but can't help but have a dig at Maranello, but hey, he is only human, something some followers here seem to have forgotten.

[TWW]

chelme said:

f328nvl said:

This review drips with mean spiritedness, can we get over and move on from the Chris Harris/Ferrari thing? They are possibly the world's biggest car brand with arguably most important history in high performance motoring.

Chris Harris is a reasonably well known journalist in England and writer of articles on a popular web site who always quotes miscellaneous technical data for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the vaguely snide tone before I got to the real impression of the car. All we want to know is: How does it make you feel and is it any good?

+1 He fawns over anything from Munich and Stuttgart but can't help but have a dig at Maranello, but hey, he is only human, something some followers here seem to have forgotten.

Come on... If we're going to discuss the objectivity of the reviewer, can it not be somebody who doesn't own (at last count) two of his own Ferraris?

The most interesting comments here were ones that defended the original, like TREMAINE- incidentally, was it your great write up in the forums?

I think the old one looked great, and unfortunately, never having driven it, can't defend it's poor reputation. But from what I've read elsewhere (and from TREMAINE) it's more of a GT than any other- and this should always be celebrated.

As for the review, and I don't write this just to avoid the wrath of Mr. Harris on the forums, it was genuinely informative, clearly-written, and presented a balanced view to the debate of n/a Ferraris, not 'snidey' - I think someone's atrollin'.

For the record, I think they're a bad thing, the only one I've driven is a 458, and I found the engine to be too dominating on British roads anyway, it would bother me if their flagship 'sport car' was turbo'd.

But for their entry-level one, if it keeps the internal-combustion engine here a little longer, I can't complain...

Thank you for the review

[TREMAiNE]

TWW said:

The most interesting comments here were ones that defended the original, like TREMAINE- incidentally, was it your great write up in the forums?

I think the old one looked great, and unfortunately, never having driven it, can't defend it's poor reputation. But from what I've read elsewhere (and from TREMAINE) it's more of a GT than any other- and this should always be celebrated.

Oh you're making me blush!

Though, I don't think that write up was mine - I've not done a full on review of it yet, as I've only done a morning at Bedford Autodrome in it, however, I have done a good thousands miles as a passenger in it now. But I did do a very brief first impressions when we first got ours: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

At the end of the day, the California is categorically a GT car with a big heavy metal folding roof it does have a 50:50 weight distribution and it really does corner quite well for its size – even on a track its no slouch; the California will do a lap of the ‘Ring as quickly as a 360 Challenge Stradale which whilst having 40bhp less is also close to 500KG lighter and is of course specifically designed for the track.
Also, comparatively its 1 second behind a 430 and a whopping 17 seconds behind a 430 Scuderia.

The California's 460bhp doesn't really sound like a bucket load for an 1800KG car when you look at the rest of the Ferrari range but in the real world it is plenty and it works very well as a GT car - you don't want rock hard suspension for travelling across Europe do you!

To be honest, whatever Ferrari you buy, you're going to love it, regardless of its reputation. If someone was to give me a Mondial or a 348 tomorrow, I'd be chuffed, regardless of how they're some of the worst Ferrari's ever made.

Edited by TREMAiNE on Tuesday 3rd June 21:46

[Thom]

Chris Harris said:

So this really is some trickery - artiicially limiting the performance available in lower gears to give the sensation of needing to rev the motor out above 6,000rpm to enjoy peak power. It sounds a bit contrived because they've actually shaped the torque curve of every point in every gear to give the feeling they're looking for. The conundrum came in the higher gear:s, where they've chosen to let the turbines properly breathe, leaving the car with potentially similar roll-on acceleration in several gears.

In my humble experience mapping several turbocharged engines as a DIYer, a turbo will always load the engine harder in a taller gear, if the same fixed boost settings apply in all gears. When using a suitably-sized turbo, it will always build boost sooner in the RPM range and torque will almost always be higher mid range in the tallest gear. There is no trickery in this, it's just engine physics.

In fact, in order to reach the best engine efficiency and highest/flattest/broadest torque band possible, the art of programming the boost curve consists in mapping boost delivery so that torque delivery remains as much as physically possible the same in all gears. This is the opposite of what Ferrari seem to have done here, and thankfully so, as the typical super flat, modern TDI-style torque delivery makes for mega fast but equally boring engines that accelerate the same pretty much regardless or RPM. To avoid that electric motor feel, its associated wheel spin at lower gears and simulate the lively power delivery of NA engine, we do not want too much torque in the lower gears. Would be cool to know the spec of the turbos used here.

Edited by Thom on Tuesday 3rd June 21:42