RE: New Ferrari Portofino revealed
Discussion
MikeGalos said:
Snubs said:
Eh? The F40 meets neither of those criteria, but i doubt many agree it should have been called a Dino...
It also wasn't a true "road car" but a "special".Ferrari himself said that Ferrari road cars had 12 cylinders to use the name.
812 Superfast should be Ferrari 540 Superfast
GTC4 Lusso should be Ferrari 540 GTC4 Lusso
488 GTB should be Dino 398 GTB/T
488 GTS should be Dino 398 GTS/T
GTC4 Lusso T should be Dino 398 Lusso T
California T should be Dino 398 California T
Even the Ferrari page now splits cars into 12 cylinder car and 8 cylinder car sections.
I must be getting old. I used to see things like this and get all excited, but now, I'm just a bit... meh.
Yeah, okay, new Ferrari, probably goes okay for a car weighing whatever this will weigh (guessing a lot). Interesting to hear from a poster about driving a Lotus prior to testing another Ferrari. Doesn't bode well, does it? Or maybe it just says how well Lotus are doing?
I really, really like what is coming out of Lotus lately. They seem to be the brand that I used to think Ferrari was all about, ie amazing handling, and wonderful performance in a street car for the track day inclined.
Yeah, okay, new Ferrari, probably goes okay for a car weighing whatever this will weigh (guessing a lot). Interesting to hear from a poster about driving a Lotus prior to testing another Ferrari. Doesn't bode well, does it? Or maybe it just says how well Lotus are doing?
I really, really like what is coming out of Lotus lately. They seem to be the brand that I used to think Ferrari was all about, ie amazing handling, and wonderful performance in a street car for the track day inclined.
hondansx said:
Great looking car. Ferrari on a roll with their styling.
Not sure if serious...The current crop aren't beautiful in my eyes - certainly not compared to what came before.
Technically they are good but personally I think they are at an all time low point in terms of design aesthetics.
Current line up vs oldies (not entirely fair to compare but I'll do it anyway)
VS:
JuniorD said:
It's like the child of a Corvette and an MX5.
The very boring, unremarkable child at that.
I wish my car was as exciting as yours, so I could find a 600bhp car that accelerates to 60 in 3.5 seconds "boring". It might not have the engagement and character of a 355 but I think boring is probably overstating it.The very boring, unremarkable child at that.
Looks like a generic, slightly chunky, modern sports car. Doesn't scream "Ferrari". Not so long since I saw a California T in slow moving traffic coming the other way and thought the same. It was about as exciting as a Jaguar F Type. Nothing wrong with the F Type - lovely car - but a Ferrari should have had me bouncing around like an eight year on a sugar overdose ... like seeing a Testarossa or a 328 would. The older Ferraris look almost shocking when juxtaposed with ordinary cars. Current ones merely look like they're at the nicer end of the mediocrity spectrum.
Don't like it (or the general Ferrari styling) at all I'm afraid.
Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
Bencolem said:
Don't like it (or the general Ferrari styling) at all I'm afraid.
Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
Racist Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
dme123 said:
JuniorD said:
It's like the child of a Corvette and an MX5.
The very boring, unremarkable child at that.
I wish my car was as exciting as yours, so I could find a 600bhp car that accelerates to 60 in 3.5 seconds "boring". It might not have the engagement and character of a 355 but I think boring is probably overstating it.The very boring, unremarkable child at that.
Bencolem said:
Don't like it (or the general Ferrari styling) at all I'm afraid.
Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
But haven't most Ferraris had sharp creases and round tail lights for ages - Daytona, 355, 400/412, 308/328 ?Ferrari's used to have beautiful organic shapes.
Nowadays they rely too much on fussy details, sharp creases (and then round taillights) and not enough homogeneous design. The front end looks Korean somehow.
Particularly as it's intended as a GT car, I'd pick a DB11 volante (when it comes out) over this (and I don't think the DB11 is a patch on the DB9).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff