Ferarri FF - 4WD, 4 Seats.

you forgot the 400i ;)

me said:
In fact, any road-going Ferrari before the Dino and more than a few following the Dino's introduction.

;)

Firestar_3x said:
Yep, i've got very little interest in older Ferrari's My interest largely peaked and died with the 348 and 355.

So....because you personally have no interest in one, a Ferrari Daytona is not a proper Ferrari?

Oooookay....
 
I don't know what it is, but I really REALLY like that.

Interesting to see Ferrari heading down a bit of an alternate route.
 
;)

So....because you personally have no interest in one, a Ferrari Daytona is not a proper Ferrari?

Oooookay....

Cars are a personal and emotive art form, which leads to what in your mind may seem as an irrational viewpoint.

We have conflicting views on what constitutes a proper Ferrari, in my Opinion it has to be, two door, two seater, mid engined and rwd.

The great thing about other peoples views is you don't have to agree with it, this isn't a maths questions which only has one answer, its based on personal taste.

My view reflects MY TASTE.
 
Side profile reminds me of the Z3M Coupe...
The front looks like it has a massive evil grin. Rear looks quite disgusting.

I guess there must be a market for it though. :(
 
bmw-m-coupe_side.jpg


Just reminds me of the bmw M coupe

EDIT: But squished
 
We have conflicting views on what constitutes a proper Ferrari, in my Opinion it has to be, two door, two seater, mid engined and rwd.

So a 612 isn't a proper Ferrari? A 456? Infact none of the V12 Ferraris are proper to you then?

Whilst you are entitled to your opinion you can appreciate why eyebrows could be raised when somebody with a Passat Estate proudly displayed in his sig begins to sound off about what is and what isn't a proper Ferrari when Ferrari have been making FR cars since before any of us were born.

I'm still choking on my KFC over the idea that a 250GTO isnt a proper Ferrari, just a hilarious thing to say. It's about as ridiculous as me trying to argue that an E30 M3 isnt a proper M car because it hasnt got a 6 cylinder+ engine, and then justifying it with 'but i hate teh 4 potz'.
 
[TW]Fox;18280401 said:
Whilst you are entitled to your opinion you can appreciate why eyebrows could be raised when somebody with a Passat Estate proudly displayed in his sig begins to sound off about what is and what isn't a proper Ferrari when Ferrari have been making FR cars since before any of us were born.

Do you really want to do down that road, i'd think long and hard about that one before answering.

Perhaps phrasing it "proper Ferrari" was a bit strong, however i see the definitive layout as Mid Engined and RWD, i don't agree with front engined Ferrari's and never have.
 
Last edited:
We have conflicting views on what constitutes a proper Ferrari, in my Opinion it has to be, two door, two seater, mid engined and rwd.

Now, forgive me for going all Captain Pedantry here, but what you should be saying is that you prefer your Ferraris mid-engined, not that any Ferrari which doesn't conform to that layout isn't a proper Ferrari. Because that is a black-and-white statement, and completely wrong. A Ferrari Daytona is a car built by Ferrari, designed by Ferrari and Pininfarina, with Ferrari DNA right the way through it. It happens to be front-engined, so not one of your favourites. But it's still a proper Ferrari. It can't be anything else. As you say, your personal taste would be for a 355 or similar. Mine would be for a 365 GT4 2+2. But I wouldn't call a 355 'not a proper Ferrari' just because it's a V8 'middie' rather than retaining the original Ferrari layout of front-mounted V12.

This whole "ugh, that's not a proper x" thing just grates sometimes, because it's complete ********. At best, it's bad use of language. At worst, it shows a complete absense of brainpower. And I've been guilty of it in the past myself :)
 
This whole "ugh, that's not a proper x" thing just grates sometimes, because it's complete ********. At best, it's bad use of language. At worst, it shows a complete absense of brainpower. And I've been guilty of it in the past myself :)

Absolutely this. Nothing wrong with preference or thinking something is bad but the whole 'it isnt proper' thing is just ridiculous. I have no interest in classic Lambos at all. I'm not going to say that the Miura isnt a 'proper Lambo' as it isnt a 4wd monster. Yet Firestar is quite happy to say things like that.

Then he gets all aggresive and begins to warn me when I point out how silly he comes across.
 
Doesn't look bad, certainly something very different from Ferrari. I wonder how the 4WD will fare up.

Reminds me of the M-Coupe from BMW, doesn't look too bad. Since there is a LOT more compeition these days in the automotive industry they are having to make cars of this type. Look at the baby Aston Martin based on the Toyota IQ.
 
Now, forgive me for going all Captain Pedantry here, but what you should be saying is that you prefer your Ferraris mid-engined, not that any Ferrari which doesn't conform to that layout isn't a proper Ferrari. Because that is a black-and-white statement, and completely wrong. A Ferrari Daytona is a car built by Ferrari, designed by Ferrari and Pininfarina, with Ferrari DNA right the way through it. It happens to be front-engined, so not one of your favourites. But it's still a proper Ferrari. It can't be anything else. As you say, your personal taste would be for a 355 or similar. Mine would be for a 365 GT4 2+2. But I wouldn't call a 355 'not a proper Ferrari' just because it's a V8 'middie' rather than retaining the original Ferrari layout of front-mounted V12.

This whole "ugh, that's not a proper x" thing just grates sometimes, because it's complete ********. At best, it's bad use of language. At worst, it shows a complete absense of brainpower. And I've been guilty of it in the past myself :)

Yes lax wording on my part, "not my prefered choice" would have been better.

[TW]Fox;18280439 said:
Then he gets all aggresive and begins to warn me when I point out how silly he comes across.

Wouldn't bother with the wounded kid act either, you out of all people should know how stupid it is to pull someone’s personal car into a conversation to try and bring additional credibility to a point.
 
You've got to admit how hilarious it looks to see you sat there judging what is and isnt a proper Ferrari. I'm sure many actual Ferrari owners would disagree with you.
 
[TW]Fox;18280506 said:
You've got to admit how hilarious it looks to see you sat there judging what is and isnt a proper Ferrari. I'm sure many actual Ferrari owners would disagree with you.

Like i've already stated, the wording "not a proper Ferrari" came from my view on what constitutes one, looking back yes worded too strongly, what i actually meant was "not my prefered choice". I have no intention of arguing against Ferraris heritage and the production of many front engined models.
 
Back
Top Bottom