Ferrari will ban me too for uploading this

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Sorry I did it twice...idiot.
 
Sorry I did it twice...idiot.

So did Ferrari. They went through the same machinations with a F430 (IIRC) in an Autocar group test, long after CH had departed. Disappeared with the car, returned it with softer rubber - and then it set fastest lap...
 
So did Ferrari. They went through the same machinations with a F430 (IIRC) in an Autocar group test, long after CH had departed. Disappeared with the car, returned it with softer rubber - and then it set fastest lap...
This is all quite an eye opener, although I assumed car manufacturers tried to supply something that would not break down during road tests I also assumed editorial integrity amongst the testers and their various magazines.....all a bit irelevant to me though, as having watched James Mays programme on the making of the new Maclaren I'd already decided to make it, not a Ferrari my first supercar purchase!
 
It's like the author states though, Ferrari don't need to do this kind of thing... so why do they? People really won't care if theres a lambo thats a second quicker than the Ferrari (Unless you religiously follow the Top Gear laps board).

For me it would be about the prestige and experience of owning the car, not how quick I could lap it.
 
This is all quite an eye opener, although I assumed car manufacturers tried to supply something that would not break down during road tests I also assumed editorial integrity amongst the testers and their various magazines.....all a bit irelevant to me though, as having watched James Mays programme on the making of the new Maclaren I'd already decided to make it, not a Ferrari my first supercar purchase!
Hi Stevie. They are basically just cheating as usual to command those ridiculous prices.
Ferraris are a bit soft. I can beat my 997 all day and night without an issue but my friend who has a 360 is too scared to drive it like it should be driven. When he once did it blew its piston rings and started pishing oil everywhere. The Mclaren build quality looks truly awesome and depth of engineering is just as good as Porsche. Just look around, a 10 year Porsche is still perfectly thrashable whereas a !0 year old Ferrrari is considered a museum piece.
 
Hi Stevie. They are basically just cheating as usual to command those ridiculous prices.
Ferraris are a bit soft. I can beat my 997 all day and night without an issue but my friend who has a 360 is too scared to drive it like it should be driven. When he once did it blew its piston rings and started pishing oil everywhere. The Mclaren build quality looks truly awesome and depth of engineering is just as good as Porsche. Just look around, a 10 year Porsche is still perfectly thrashable whereas a !0 year old Ferrrari is considered a museum piece.

Great points well made, a Maclaren for me, a silver one with red leather and mats.
 
Last edited:
Great points well made, a Maclaren for me, a silver one with red leather and mats.
Charcoal grey and tan inside for me....when they are less than a quarter of their new prices and less again..stop dreamin you idiot. LOL
 
I guess most of you know about this.
 
Ferrari cheating... surely not :D

Like Stevieb15 and HB I'd rather have a McLaren as well, also not likely.
 
I guess most of you know about this.

Not really. I read the recent Autocar group test in which they commented (without opinion) on the Ferrari staff being present, and their intervention - and it seemed odd. Your thread here lets us all see that whatever we have heard are not isolated incidents but Ferrari policy.

I have to compare this to the early road tests of the 'prepped' E-Type though! But at least Jaguar handed the car over. Then went home...
 
I have to compare this to the early road tests of the 'prepped' E-Type though! But at least Jaguar handed the car over. Then went home...

I don't think it's just cars either.. the Westland Lynx that made the record books as the world's fastest helicopter may also have had a little work under the hood, or so I heard ;). Comparisons to the Jag were made..

The problem with Ferrari is that it's not a nudge, nudge, wink, wink thing any more.. bending the rules can be tolerated by most but blatant cheating appeals to no-one..

Cheers,

Gaz
 
You would think that they had a line-up of disgruntled customers who, for some obscure and strange reason, can't get their cars to match the one they had for the test drive.

Or are all owners blinded by that whole 'Ferrari is a Deity' crap to the degree that they don't, or won't, notice?

I have long held the opinion that if ever I was in the market for a car of this kind (fat chance, I know...), Maranello would never feature in the running.
 
You would think that they had a line-up of disgruntled customers who, for some obscure and strange reason, can't get their cars to match the one they had for the test drive.

As an E-Type owner/enthusiast, I'm sure I don't need to remind you that Jaguar weren't averse to tweaking the XKE so that it could achieve 150mph when tested by the motoring press.

Perhaps that's where Ferrari got the idea from...
 
Erm... Yes, well...

I think a lot of manufacturers help themselves out on occasion. It's well known that engines which are going to be subject to tests, etc, are carefully blueprinted and assembled outside of normal production methods. All to help the figures and test results along.

The difference here is that no one would really disagree that this level of interference and control-freakery is much more sinister and insidious than what has gone before.
 
Even British Leyland, that paragon of "Can't be ars*d, you'll get what you're given" ethics managed to provide some warmed up Maestro Turbo's for the launch.

None of them lasted very long before going pop, but they were blisteringly quick up until that point :D
 
There's a pretty well documented case of the early Octavia VRS that Skoda loaned to Autocar which was supposed to be running standard 180bhp but they were fairly certain that it had the 225bhp version of the same VAG engine as it recorded such startling numbers.
 
Even British Leyland, that paragon of "Can't be ars*d, you'll get what you're given" ethics managed to provide some warmed up Maestro Turbo's for the launch.

None of them lasted very long before going pop, but they were blisteringly quick up until that point :D

I seem to remember that the motoring press picked on a single performance stat about the Maestro Turbo, it might have been 50-70 in top or 30-70 through the gears or similar, that showed it was quicker than a contemporary Aston Martin. :dk:

I may have got some, or all, of that wrong. It was twenty years ago!
 
I think the W203 C32 AMG provided to Autocar for the Road Test must have been a particularly, ahem, healthy example. They timed 0-100 mph in 10.8 seconds, just 0.2 seconds slower than a W211 E55 AMG. :crazy:
 
It's like the author states though, Ferrari don't need to do this kind of thing... so why do they? People really won't care if theres a lambo thats a second quicker than the Ferrari (Unless you religiously follow the Top Gear laps board).

That's not the way it is though, we see it on this very forum with the AMG brigade.
Owning one is all about playing Top Trumps and seeing who can piss highest up the pub loo wall.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom