Ferrari 456 - Il Cavallino's last great Gran Turismo
Monday, April 11, 2011 at 9:31AM Every time I look at the new FF, I think how Ferrari's design standards have fallen from the peak of taste and restraint they reached in the mid 1990s. After the excesses of the 308/328 and Testarossa era (aka the 1980s), Ferrari offered the more refined, if less exciting 348, and finally some superb designs like the 456 and the F355. The 456 in particular oozed desirability and exclusivity, but had a particularly Italian sense of purity and restraint that enhanced its exoticism rather than detracted from it.
You look at a 456 and can't help but picture a wealthy Milanese gentleman clad in cashmere sweater and his elegant wife stepping out of it at their Lake Garda weekend home. Today's Ferraris...well, can you picture anyone other than a douchebag getting out of one? The interior of a 1990s Ferrari is also far more sober and clean-lined than the more elaborate confections being dreamed up today--it emphasizes the luxury of the materials used, rather than the styling. But that brings me to my real questions here: Has Ferrari's taste atrophied? Or is their current design direction just a response to a shifting customer base in new markets? Were the 456 and F355 anomalies, or do they represent the last vestiges of the true spirit of the marque?
Reader Comments (31)
I actually think that the California Spyder is car most in line with the look of how Ferrari's should look. I know it is not well liked by the automotive press, but the design is classy and not a Fast and Furious shoutout.
I think that the 575M was the last beautiful car Ferrari have built in a long time. The current line-up:
458 Italia - Too feminine. Fast, but it just doesn't do much for me.
599 - The front and rear don't seem to align - I really hate the lower valence of the back, the front is way too raked.
612 - This should have just been a Maserati - the body is too long, the nose doesn't look proportionate and it looks very bland.
California - it has fake exhausts, looks too raked and looks shoddy. I can't say why but it doesn't appear as well-built or the materials seem inferior to existing Ferrari's. It's trhe SC430/Soarer of Italy - and that's bad.
FF - Probably the best looking car they currently have. I can stare and stare at that car and the lines do not get old to me. It's very different but refreshing for its segment.
I think that they've got some decently styled cars but none that appear particularly special. As I stated, I think the 575 was one of the best looking, best-proportioned GT cars to come out of Maranello - the 355 was so good other car companies stole design elements! The FF gives me hope that they're aware of the need to change direction.
I personally hate the California. The front view is ok, but there isn't a single line on the side that i like. and the rear is a mess.
I agree with Murph that the 550 and 575 Maranello was a nice looking car overall. But to me if you look at each detail of it, it's not as well resolved as the 456 is. I always disliked the 360 and 430. To me those cars have nothing going for them. The 599 and 612 both have bland front end design, but aren't actually BAD. I think of the current Ferraris they are the most tasteful. I still say the 458 is the best thing Ferrari is making right now. I gotta disagree on the FF, Murph. It's hideous! :)
yes the 456, F355... and the earlier ferraris just reeked with passion and character and hence were loved so much but the current line up just looks too desperate.. and i dont understand why ferrari is trying so hard because they already have what it takes in their DNA.. all they have to do is chill out and have fun making cars.. instead they have "ferrari stores" now where they sell teddy bears and jazz.. its just annoying.. i know its a little off topic but still.. the expression on the FF's face is just horrible, ferrari's had a smiling face but never grinned this hard.. 458's keeping the brand name up but the next one better be good..
@ Bradley & Arun - the face of the FF is definitely a brown-bagger. It looks goofy with a sort of smiley,chromey grill. Other than that, I really like the shooting brake look and I think the lines a very interesting. It's not beautiful but it is very different and stands out. A Lambo, Ferrari and McLaren (MP4/12) sitting next to each other look basically the same. Swoopy lines, mid-engine and big wheels with a severely raked nose. It's just refreshing to see a very different approach to the prototypical modern sports car. I'd probably buy the FF over the 458 - I'm also a fan of the 250 GTO Breadvan too!
http://www.supercars.net/cars/3181.html
As for the rest of the Ferrari line-up - the designs just feel played out or stale. I don't know what but I see one in person and I don't feel moved by the design. Ironically, I think the 456 is one of the least attractive of the late 1990's Ferrari's. I don't like pop-up headlamps, the lines are fairly innocuous and with the 550/575 I just didn't see the point of the 456 - aside from a backseat, the 575 seems like the better GT.
I guess I'm just a Porsche/BMW guy at heart!
the last ferraris i truly loved: the f355 and the 550/575.
I still remember the first time I saw a prodrive 550 and it just bowled me over. What a beauty. Somehow, the long front overhang of the 456 always looked awkward to me, but the 612 has definitely grown on me completely. I love how the crest of the front wings dips straight through the lights and forms the bottom edge of the grill
Ok, MAYBE the 550/575 is the last great gran turismo, but to me it is a) less refined than the 456 despite its definite coolness and b) it seems more like a true sports car 2+2 than a true GT that can hold 4 adults.
Ferrari might have been leading the way for the agrument "a sedan can be a coupe and vice versa" for Mercedes/BMW/Porsche!
it looks like a Buick...
Syed hates Ferraris, everyone. Don't mind him. He'd rather have a Panamera!
I think you are missing the larger picture. Ferrari's approach to aesthetics is merely the manifestation of the company's philosophy to embrace progress. They have repeatedly demonstrated their forward thinking through their adoption of new technologies (manettino [adjustable electronic stability system], ceramic brakes, paddle shifters, electronic differentials, & aluminum construction to name a few) that have since become standard throughout the industry. Their approach to design is no different. Porsche, Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Bentley and Rolls Royce have remained stagnant in their respective designs since inception while Ferrari has been steadfast in their desire to redefine the sports car (as of late) and that requires stepping beyond convention. The FF is an awesome car because it is unlike anything before it. Isn't the insistance on pushing the limits at the core of motorsport's philosophy? Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but Ferrari's passion is evident to everyone.
I'm loving this discussion, guys!! Great to hear all these points of view!
Charlie, You articulated your points very well, but I think if you look at the history of Ferrari, they were until very recently often the LAST company to adopt new technologies and methodologies. Last to adopt disc brakes, last to go to mid-engined F1 cars, slow to adopt a monocoque chassis construction, late to the game on independent rear suspension, slow to appreciate the value of aerodynamics. Enzo dragged his heels a LOT in the old days. Also, in the modern era, Porsche had the tiptronic paddle shifters 2 years before Ferrari did the F1 trans. in the F355. And the FF, well, how many companies have mastered 4WD years ago?? Audi's Quattro, and Porsche's Carrera 4 allrad are both race and rally-proven systems. And now Ferrari is just getting into that game. So how are they ahead of the curve again?
Oh Charlie. Ferrari has brainwashed you good my friend! As Bradley mentioned---- Ferrari jumps on bandwagons after other carmakers do. AWD is the perfect example at the moment in the FF. Ceramic Brakes----Porsche, paddle shifters----Porsche, dual clutch gearboxes---Porsche and Audi, Electronic stability control----Mercedes & BMW, the list goes on.......and how in the world is the FF "unlike any other car"....Lamborghini has been building AWD cars for ages, and it should be entertaining to watch the Aventador walk all over the FF when it comes to performance-----
and looks of course---because the FF is simply ghastly.
I was just rewatching that old Top Gear bit for "Historic People Carrier Racing" and hammond points to the mid-engine layout of an old Toyota Previa as "like a Ferrari." he didn't say, "like a Lamborghini" or "like a Lotus". It didn't realy matter that Ferrari were late to the game and not very enthusiastic about it either, but the prancing horse seems to have made up for all of that. For all of their reluctance to adopt new technology, Ferrari still just manages to capture everyone's imagination of what the cutting edge is.
Nobody is denying that Ferrari has, in many instances, gotten by on name alone. I can only point to the huge dry spell in Formula One after Scheckter won the world championship in 1979 - it wouldn't be until Schumacher began to dominate in the late 1990's before they would see a resurgence.
Also, has anyone seen the 400i in person? Awful - it's completely worthless. But it had a a prancing horse so it was still expensive and fashionable. Ironically, the one Ferrari-influenced, non-prancing horse car, the Dino, was one of their greatest early mid-engined cars.
The reason it the FF is so compelling is its Ferrari going in a very different direction for them - without any need to from Lamborghini or McLaren. Perhaps a bit of pressure from Porsche with the 4WD 911's/Panamera's but it is definitely unique for them and I would hope more people embrace the design rather than a 4,000th iteration of the 599.
The FF is nothing more than a wannabe Lamborghini (Murcielago + classic cues from the Espada)--------not sure how this is an evolution at all.
I'd still rather drive the Z4 M coupe the FF is copying...
Also, I happen to like the 400i. But I know I'm in the minority on that one. Still it has the V-12, a classy interior and it has aged rather well.
The FF isn't an evolution - how could it be of a lambo? That doesn't make any sense...my point states that its different them anything ferrari attempted before and that there its little to no pressure from their existing market to build such a car. So good for them trying something outside the norm for them.
And yes, the m coupe is prettier.
Bradley,
Thank you for recognizing the effort I put into writing my earlier comment. I should have clearly stated that I was only discussing road-going Ferrari's from the 456's era to today's offerings. I briefly alluded to this when I said, "Ferrari has been steadfast in their desire to redefine the sports car (as of late)" with "as of late" being the key term.
I see Ferrari's entry into the AWD as more the result of them having developing an AWD system which fit their criteria (lightweight & compact) than merely adding a conventional system because other manufacturers offer AWD. If the FF was RWD, I can say with relative certainty that we wouldn't hear anyone complaining about its lack of AWD. In sports cars, even one as large and plush as the FF, I have never considered AWD a necessity. Even Lamborghini now offers a Gallardo with RWD!
Syed,
Being an early adopter is not the same as being the first to market. I never said that Ferrari was first with any of the earlier mentioned technology. Rather, I was highlighting the fact that they have consistently been faster to wholly embrace new technology than most manufacturers.
Your comparison between the FF and Aventador doesn't hold much ground. The FF is a gt car while the Aventador is a mid engine sports car. They are not competitors in much aside from price. If the Aventador doesn't beat the FF in driving dynamics than Lamborghini has bigger problems with the Aventador than the fact that their designers merely stretched the Gallardo design to Mucielago proportions.
Murph,
I couldn't agree more with your take on the FF.
saw a prussian blue FF, a bit darker actually with black rims in maranello.. heard the sound and turned to look at it hence skipped the front of the car, which is probably the most hideous part of the car but i have to say it looked decent.. but i still dislike it to the core.. AWD, shooting brake.. not very ferrari is it.. and i hate it when people tell me that a brand has to evolve and hence cant stick to their roots and have to try and develop a new style.. when a brand like ferrari has NAILED the proportion, detailing and every other formula needed for a " sex on wheels " kind of a car, whats the point of trying so hard?. all they have to do is let it age.. maybe im mental for having such an idea but boh..
Charlie I am not comparing the Aventador with the FF directly----however it is a representation of everything different at the moment between Ferrari and Lamborghini. I know for a fact that 3 years ago Lamborghini was working on a car EXACTLY like the FF-----and it was meant to be the 'modern' Espada.....i know because i am friends with the person who was at the meeting where it was discussed. THAT CAR would have been exactly what the FF is----an AWD, 4 seater GT car. It wouldn't surprise me that Ferrari stole this idea right from under Lamborghini when they decided to axe that plan for an Espada sequel. Either way----The Aventador is packed FULL of technology, more than the FF is----and the Aventador shows that Lamborghini is at the heart of embracing technology at the moment----Ferrari are definitely not the only ones OR the unique ones in any way.
Syed are you talking about the Estoque?
no, not the Estoque-----this car was specifically put on the table as a sequel to the Espada with designs resembling the Espada....2 door, 2 + 2, except this would be AWD as all Lamborghinis have been since the Murci. It was a green light for a while, until they abandoned the project....