Perhaps sir would like one in yellow (Enzo)

Perhaps sir would like one in yellow (Enzo)

Author
Discussion

manu

768 posts

233 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
Had to add:

I think if I gently moseyed past you in a Rosso Ferrari Enzo, your thoughts about how ugly it is would fairly rapidly evaporate as you picked your jaws up off the floor.
And remember moderns Ferraris looks are partly determined by the performance aspect. I think if any of us drove one all criticsm would go out the window.

jhoneyball

1,642 posts

246 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Had to add:

I think if I gently moseyed past you in a Rosso Ferrari Enzo, your thoughts about how ugly it is would fairly rapidly evaporate as you picked your jaws up off the floor.
And remember moderns Ferraris looks are partly determined by the performance aspect. I think if any of us drove one all criticsm would go out the window.



there is no question that the Enzo is a great piece of technology. and that it will be blindingly fast blah blah blah blah

But it is ferrari -- it is *supposed* to be all those things.

And Ferraris are *also* supposed to be staggeringly beautiful. And, at least to my eyes, the Enzo looks like my worst kitcar nightmare come true. If it had a beetle engine under the back, I wouldnt have been surprised.

Ferraris have been staggeringly beautiful in the past -- 365gtb4, 512bb, 308gtb, gto (both, of course), 275gtb, 246. Even those cars which made a design statement have been handsome -- the 400/412 has a crispness and elegance of line, the 512TR has a swooping design and very integrated whole.

In my eyes, it started going down hill with the F40 -- the rear 3/4 view is inspired, but the bonnet section is not, and does not fit well to the center cabin section. The F50 was a pastiche. The 355 recovered things greatly after the awkwardness of the 348, but the headlight styling, the "face", of recent ferraris (360, 550 and now 575) look thrown together. They are not horizontal aligned, nor vertically aligned, nor edge aligned, nor even front/back aligned. they are just plonked in there.

All in my opinion, of course :-)

manu

768 posts

233 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
First thing I NEED to say is:
a) Have you seen the Enzo in the figurative flesh?

I haven't - but I recognise that pictures convey about 25% of the visual appeal of a car like the F50 - it's the same for pretty much any other Ferrari. Until then I'll reserve *complete* judgement.

b) Want pop-up headlamps, swoops, curves, supposedly cohesive design (in your opinion), and gently sublime beauty????? That's FINE - just don't expect to get it ALONG WITH a car that can pull 1.36 Lateral G on road tyres and does 0-100 in 5.9seconds.
It's not possible - and I agree - for 400,000, downforce and time-warp performace come first, not instant and highly subjective beauty judgements.

Clearly Ferraris market research into the 350-odd Enzo buyers indicates that these guys also put performance first above "classical" automotive beauty - hence the final look AND spec of the car (AND being the operative word - Times have changed - this isn't the 1960's - these two things are utterly and irrevocably related).

After all Grand Prix cars don't look gorgeous.

jhoneyball

1,642 posts

246 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

First thing I NEED to say is:
a) Have you seen the Enzo in the figurative flesh?



No, not yet. But there are areas of the design that look stunningly clumsy. Like the join from the rear of the doors to the rear section

quote:

I haven't - but I recognise that pictures convey about 25% of the visual appeal of a car like the F50 - it's the same for pretty much any other Ferrari



I agree wholeheartedly that supercars are very difficult things to photograph, and photograph well.

quote:

b) Want pop-up headlamps, swoops, curves, supposedly cohesive design (in your opinion), and gently sublime beauty????? That's FINE - just don't expect to get it ALONG WITH a car that can pull 1.36 Lateral G on road tyres and does 0-100 in 5.9seconds.
It's not possible - and I agree - for 400,000, downforce and time-warp performace come first, not instant and highly subjective beauty judgements.



Except, in my eyes, the McLaren F1 is staggeringly beautiful and complete design. It is cohesive, it has flow. It has considered design, form and shape. It looks fab in print and in the flesh.

And it is faster than the Enzo. And does everything dynamically that the Enzo does, and more, according to Ferrari's claims.

So there is the proof, surely, that you *can* have great design *and* mind-bending performance? :-)

quote:

Clearly Ferraris market research into the 350-odd Enzo buyers indicates that these guys also put performance first above "classical" automotive beauty - hence the final look AND spec of the car (AND being the operative word - Times have changed - this isn't the 1960's - these two things are utterly and irrevocably related).



I think you have a rather rose-tinted view of the market research process that is done for hypercars. Speaking as one who knows the Aston world very well (and I cancelled my Vanquish order because it simply wasnt good enough), there would be a significant number of people who will have one just because Ferrari can be bothered to make it. And for many, I fear the big selling thing will be the clever steering wheel with all the Schumacher-esque buttons. And the row of LEDS at the top of the wheel.

If I was to believe that these buyers were *truly* buying their Enzo to have a mindwarp driving sensation that beats all else, a road and track performance par excellence, then we wouldnt be seeing row upon row of F40 for sale with 5k miles on the clock after 10 years and 5 owners, surely? And that is not an exceptional thing, it seems to be typical for the 288GTO, F40 and F50. Which I find really rather sad, to be honest. I mean, wouldnt *you* do more than 500 miles per year in an Enzo or equivalent? I know I would...

After all Grand Prix cars don't look gorgeous.

456mgt

2,488 posts

236 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:
Except, in my eyes, the McLaren F1 is staggeringly beautiful and complete design. It is cohesive, it has flow. It has considered design, form and shape. It looks fab in print and in the flesh.

Ahh. Therin lies the rub with subjective arguments. You see I don't agree with you. The first time I was in the presence of a Mac F1 I walked past it twice before I realised what it was. No question about it, it's a great car, but in *my* opinion, it looks nothing special. Supercar buyers will want many things from their cars, but anonimity is rarely one of them. Take a look at the Murcielago, Pagani, Veryon, Enzo; one thing that links them is extreme design. I think Ferrari know their market very well.

Different people want different things. Live with it.

And I would buy a Vanquish for it's looks and it's exhaust note. They probably won't hold their value and sooner or later one will drop into my garage- the one attached to my house, not inside my head.

jhoneyball

1,642 posts

246 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

And I would buy a Vanquish for it's looks and it's exhaust note. They probably won't hold their value and sooner or later one will drop into my garage- the one attached to my house, not inside my head.



And then you will find that the exhaust note is basically fake. Its there when you are on power, and it completely disappears when you lift the throttle. Why? Cos the noise regulations nonsense means all those little valves have to be closed off whenever possible. Its bizarre driving through a village a 30mph in 2nd gear going on and off the throttle and having exhaust noise there and then not there, and then there again.

Well, *I* found it bizarre

456mgt

2,488 posts

236 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

quote:

And I would buy a Vanquish for it's looks and it's exhaust note. They probably won't hold their value and sooner or later one will drop into my garage- the one attached to my house, not inside my head.



And then you will find that the exhaust note is basically fake. Its there when you are on power, and it completely disappears when you lift the throttle. Why? Cos the noise regulations nonsense means all those little valves have to be closed off whenever possible. Its bizarre driving through a village a 30mph in 2nd gear going on and off the throttle and having exhaust noise there and then not there, and then there again.

Well, *I* found it bizarre


Exactly the same system on the 360. All it takes is to leave it in 2nd or disconnect that little vacuum hose.

Tubi? Maaannnnnuuuuu!

Thom

2,745 posts

243 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
Some other pictures here, if you like:

http://jeanmarc.boulier.free.fr/mondial2002.html

manu

768 posts

233 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
The McLaren F1 is actually no match for even a Ferrari F50 let alone an Enzo - around the twisties. It's nothing but a straight line rocket - the F50 which gives away so much in power, torque and excess wieght will destroy an F1 in anything but a straight line.
The "staggering beauty" of the F1 - has led to a shape where you cannot sink the throttle in any of the lower gears through lack of grip and downforce - not even in a straight line.
NO - I haven't driven one - so I'll report the results of those who have.

It produces a pathetic amount of downforce (gimicky Murcielago-style adjustable wing) and to be honest I think that for 630,000 it looks dull... Why? I've seen two on the road and I can tell you that a Ferrari 308 is more exciting to look at.
Many people criticise the 360's front end - in fact the headlights and air vents are pretty much the same as the "beautiful" McLaren......?? I don't get it?

In fact Talacrest also have a Michelloto Ferrari F40 in their showroom that I was shown on Thursday. It's been lightened and made more powerful (and sits on a Tubi ) - even this 12 year old car will thrash the hell out of F1 - in fact this one will do it even in a straight line.



manu

768 posts

233 months

Sunday 29th September 2002
quotequote all
Also - not exactly sure that "row upon row" of F40s are for sale...
Even so the reason that sooo many *may* be for sale is that when the great car was released it was bought by people who didn't give an F**K about cars and driving for purely speculative purposes. Loads were put in storage and NEVER used...
Fast forward to today and many people got burnt and many people didn't know how to get out of a bad trade and cut their losses....
X number of years later people are STILL dumping their investmens - why the hell wouldn't they? F40s were selling for 800,000K in the 80's - I think many people would agree that it *CAN* take 12 years to get out of a trade that has lost you 650,000.

Kevin - don't you know someone that has put 18,000 miles on his F50? I know of one guy that parks his F50 out on the street (!) and uses it all the time - this takes GUTS - In fact there are plenty of F40/F50 owners who thrash the SHITE out of their cars and it's these guys that want the Enzo - I KNOW this.

It's more than a little unfair to say "a *significant number* will have it just because Ferrari can be bothered to make it" - THOSE days are pretty much over - see F40 comments above.

I am a MASSIVE fan of all sports car make (Dazren and Dom have really reignited a pssion of Porkers in particular) but it's a sad fact that when it comes to "hypercars" pretty much no-one wants anything that doesn't have a prancing horse at the front. When the McLaren F1 came out they could barely sell 65...

nevpugh308

4,382 posts

239 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

It's really not pretty is it? Hope it's just the colour/angle...



All I can say is, dont comment until you've seen one in the "flesh". Some of the photos I've seen make the car look awful, but I saw several red and one yellow one at the factory a couple of weeks ago, and they're completely different face to face ..... absolutely gorgeous !

ajaym

188 posts

232 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
I disagree with peoples comments that the Enzo looks ugly or Ferrari have lost their edge in design.

Ferrari have always been one step ahead in terms of design IMO. When the 348 came out over a decade ago the press commented that the car looked too radical and wouldnt sell! (I still have the articles at home in my library ). Well we all know the falsehood of that critical statement.

What you have to remember is that Ferrari build cars that are pleasing to the eye, cars that are beautiful yet may also be radical in design concept but they always manage to achieve a fine balance of the two. This is the difference between them and Lamborghini. You cannot say the Diablo looks beautiful or has a beautiful interior, but it is definitely a radical design perhaps a bit too radical IMO.

The Enzo looks radical yes but not ugly. Wait until you see one on the road or in the flesh and I bet you that the car will start to grow on you and you will appreciate what Ferrari have achieved with the design. Remember when the 360 came out? People were raving on about how bad the front end looked and now you must appreciate that the car is an excellent accomplished car both in terms of performance and design. You only have to see one on the road to say "Wow the car looks great" - and sounds great (with a Tubi ofcourse! )

>> Edited by ajaym on Monday 30th September 11:22

nevpugh308

4,382 posts

239 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
Do you think we get used to car design ? We get "told" what is "beautiful" by the designers ?

When the Focus first came out, I thought it was the ugliest thing going, now I find myself reading EVO and looking at the RS Focus thinking "actually .... that's not too bad ... "

Anyone remember when the Sierra came out ... everyone slagged it off for it's "bubble" looks, but what became the norm for just about all cars from the 80's and early 90's ?

Now everything seems to be following Ford with this "new edge" angular look .....

trackdemon

11,070 posts

231 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
Absolutely true Nev - I even quite like the Ford Scorpio these days. And its successor, the Jag S-type.

PS, Manu / Kev : You still talking to me?

rthierry

684 posts

251 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
Well, I thought I'd throw in my 2p...
First of all the Enzo is not a normal Ferrari, but a landmark in the company's history, hence the name! Therefore, using traditional Ferrari design cues would have been rather inappropriate. The Enzo cost 4 times the price of a 360, so the last thing you want, is buyers to think they both look the same. Personally, I don't find the Enzo aesthetically nice, but even through pictures I can feel its presence.

Some comments were made in this thread about previous Ferrari faux pas... Quite how one can consider a Testarossa or a 348 as a faux pas is beyond me. Bloody hell I had a poster of the Testarossa up on the wall when I was a kid!

The only Ferrari that has disappointed my somewhat design wise is the 575 - I much prefer the 550.

For the time being all I can do is talk about Ferrari, hoping that one day I will have one in the garage. Errr I'll have to get a garage first

Voila

R


>> Edited by rthierry on Monday 30th September 12:11

>> Edited by rthierry on Monday 30th September 12:12

nevpugh308

4,382 posts

239 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
R, I agree with you. Thing is, these things were fashionable when they were NEW .... take the Testarossa, perfect in it's day, but STYLING wise now less so ..... but still a LOT more attractive than Don Johnson's white suits !!!

The only one that seems to buck the trend is the 308GT4, which was lambasted in it's time, but is now getting quite a following. Mind you, saying that, they sold enough of them, so they can't of been that badly regarded .....

456mgt

2,488 posts

236 months

Monday 30th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:
PS, Manu / Kev : You still talking to me?


Of course My car on the other hand thinks you're a bd who's only after one thing. And as soon as you've got what you want you won't ring any more, send flowers or anything. It's not her fault she's got wide 'ips y'know; she's just big chassis'd and I keep her on a high calorie Optimax diet too

Getting just a bit toooo anthropomorphic for comfort here.....

308gt4

710 posts

230 months

Tuesday 1st October 2002
quotequote all
quote:

The McLaren F1 is actually no match for even a Ferrari F50 let alone an Enzo - around the twisties. It's nothing but a straight line rocket - the F50 which gives away so much in power, torque and excess wieght will destroy an F1 in anything but a straight line.
The "staggering beauty" of the F1 - has led to a shape where you cannot sink the throttle in any of the lower gears through lack of grip and downforce - not even in a straight line.
NO - I haven't driven one - so I'll report the results of those who have.

It produces a pathetic amount of downforce (gimicky Murcielago-style adjustable wing) and to be honest I think that for 630,000 it looks dull... Why? I've seen two on the road and I can tell you that a Ferrari 308 is more exciting to look at.
Many people criticise the 360's front end - in fact the headlights and air vents are pretty much the same as the "beautiful" McLaren......?? I don't get it?

In fact Talacrest also have a Michelloto Ferrari F40 in their showroom that I was shown on Thursday. It's been lightened and made more powerful (and sits on a Tubi ) - even this 12 year old car will thrash the hell out of F1 - in fact this one will do it even in a straight line.



Manu,

have to agree with every word you wrote as having spoken to one of the local Ferrari mechanics, who goes over to Maranello every year for the latest training, has had the opportunity to drive all Maranellos greats plus a few of their customers toys that have turned up and he says without a shadow of doubt that the F50 is the greatest car a performance dude could ever drive and it will eat an F1 on a track so God only knows how easily the Enzo would kill it.

I think that when you first see any new Ferrari you are tainted by the past and expect something similar, but when you see what they've come up with you think "uhoh, they've lost the plot".
Then some time later you see that they have designed something that grows on you like classical music does lovers of good music.Leave the pop cars to the kids, these cars are for mature lovers of fine machinery that only look better with age.

Anyone got the reports of the 250GTs when they first came out ? I'll bet if they had todays journos they would be bagged but time would tell the real story.

manu

768 posts

233 months

Tuesday 1st October 2002
quotequote all





I think that when you first see any new Ferrari you are tainted by the past and expect something similar, but when you see what they've come up with you think "uhoh, they've lost the plot".
Then some time later you see that they have designed something that grows on you like classical music does lovers of good music.Leave the pop cars to the kids, these cars are for mature lovers of fine machinery that only look better with age.

Anyone got the reports of the 250GTs when they first came out ? I'll bet if they had todays journos they would be bagged but time would tell the real story.




Damn right - DAMN right!!!


Oh and Trackdemon - No I'll never talk to you again!!
P.S. How is the missus mini?

trackdemon

11,070 posts

231 months

Tuesday 1st October 2002
quotequote all
Bugg8r off then. And the Mini's cool - great fun to drive. BTW, couldn't wait any longer, so I've had the exhaust *done*. Oh boy, you ought to hear it; sounds wonderful. In fact, you will hear it sometime soon if your at 20/10 VW (unless there's something happening before, any excuse to get out and play)