How Ferrari spins (article/rant)

Discussion in 'European Cars' started by lucky strike, Feb 15, 2011.

  1. #176 Guibo, Feb 23, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    It doesn't have to be a "coincidence." See Car Magazine's Chris Chilton's comment on the PH forum:

    "No 12C group tests in this issue of Car I'm afraid - or any of the other mags this week/month. Ferrari locked down the press fleet just to make sure, and time at the launch was so limited."
    http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=964881&d=11368.58250&nmt=

    Why didn't Harris proclaim outright that the McLaren was surely better than the 458 when he clearly had the chance?

    Car was not the only mag to say the Ford GT beats the 360CS (and you are lying if you said it's because it's faster on the straights). Evo mag said the same thing (it beat out not just the 360CS but also the F430). So did Car & Driver. Speaking of which, this article is directed at Corvette fanboys, but it applies very well to you:
    http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q3/how_to_deal_with_your_car_losing_a_c_d_comparo-feature
     
  2. Yet he's saying the same things that other sources (Autocar, Evo, C&D, Car, AMuS) can confirm to be true. Do you not recognize that what he's saying just might be fundamentally true?
     
  3. Jason Plato, who you mentioned as a reviewer you actually respect also races BTCC cars for Chevrolet. By your logic he shouldn't be allowed to do any reviews either. Harry Metcalfe owns a Zonda C12S, maybe he should be banned from reviewing cars too. Gordon Murray designed the McLaren F1, why is he allowed to be a contributing editor to any magazine? Martin Brundle has driven for loads of different manufacturers, who can trust his opinion on cars?

    The fact is almost any well qualified reviewer you can name will have or has had a close association with one manufacturer or another, or several. They wouldn't be in the position to give such informed reviews if they didn't.

    I also think it's hilarious that in your opinion "the biggest Ferrari hater in the world" is a man who has actually owned more than one Ferrari. Someone who has also written within the last week that he'd probably rather own an F40 than the new McLaren. Maybe I'm crazy but I'm pretty sure there are plenty of people out there who like Ferrari a lot less than Harris.
     
  4. holy shit you are a #$%#ing toolbag
     
  5. Plato : I have never seen him doing a comparisson test between a Cevrolet (Daewoo) and a similar priced car/competitor because that would actually be a problem.

    Gordan Murray: Are you kidding? He designede th F1 almost 20 years ago and he's not employed with McL anymore.

    Metcalfe: Yep he owns a Zonda but that's a car he bought for his own money. You can't say he has commercial interests in Pagani. Mr. Harris has in Porsche as he's trading them.

    Brundle: Has not been racing for many years nor ireally nvolved with any car company with a commercial objective therefor he is OK (even though he really loves the smell of his owns farts just like Harris)

    "biggest in the world" is a term that can be used to make a point clear.

    Harris @ McL vs. 458: The article has several examples of Harris being biased. Example:

    "The new McLaren MP4-12C, rival to the Ferrari 458 Italia, offspring of Ron Dennis. It costs £168,500, so is cheaper than the Ferrari, too." ... ehh the Ferrari is 169.000 AND comes with CCM brakes where the McL has iron stoppers ...

    Obviously a cheap argument agains tthe Ferrari for the sake of it.
     
  6. ShInp, you look like a fool now.
     
  7. #182 mafalda, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    I'm not a liar: damon hill said "360 CS is perfect on track, Ford GT is more use friendly"... but Car claimed ford GT the winner cause "less prince and more performance".
    and I repeat: I cannot find the "shock": ferrari claimed 425ps, 370 Nm and 300Kph, Ford GT 330 Kph, 550ps and >600 Nm.....
    autocar did a similar thing with M5 and F430....
    I cannot find similar (stupid) first pages from italian magazines, and you will not find on the italian car magazine-websites silly polemics against the MP4.
     
  8. i dont even know what you're complaining about here - do you?
     
  9. Actually, you are a liar. And here's how I know: First, you say they picked the GT because it was faster in a straight line. Now, you say it's because of less price and more performance. Backpedaling are we? I think anyone with even half a brain, who has actually read that article without his F-car blinders on, would know there were MANY reasons why they picked the Ford. I know you won't post them up because you're a biased prick, but here goes:

    "The GT rides better, and is a far more comfortable road car and long-haul companion.
    The Ford feels more linear, more measured, has a handling set-up finely tuned by many engineers and computers. There is a German predictability about the way it handles. But it's still thrilling, because it is just so fast...
    Says Damon, diplomatically, 'For me, there is no winner, no loser. As a road car, it's the Ford. As a racer, it's the Ferrari.'
    But we need a winner, and we pick the Ford. It's close. The Ferrari is magnificent. But the Ford is faster. Easier to use. Rarer. Less expensive. And, we decide, more beautiful too.
    It's a suite of skills that not even the fabulous Ferrari can better."

    Do note that Damon didn't like the paddleshifters on the 360CS, while Car liked the gearshift on the Ford: "Easy clutch, easy six-speed gearchange and a lovely little gearknob of solid aluminum."

    So there are multiple reasons why the Ford won. Not just one.


    Answer the question: Why didn't Chris Harris come right out and say in no uncertain terms that the MP4 flat demolishes the 458? You insinuated that the timing is "coincidental" when it doesn't appear to be coincidental at all. There has been a long history of Ferrari going to unusual lengths to manipulate the outcome of a test. Chris Harris didn't work for C&D when they wrote the F50 article, nor was it Chris Harris who took the picture of the Ferrari mechanics under the hood of the 599 GTB in AMuS. And it wasn't just Chris Harris who was turned off by Ferrari's whining about a customer 599 GTO being used in twin-test; same time of the article, Evo's Nick Trott wrote he had a falling out with a major manufacturer: "Press officer wouldn't speak to me at the Paris show. Arguments rumble on about using non-press cars in features."
    Now, at the release of the MP4-12C, we have Car's Chris Chilton saying Ferrari have locked down their press cars. Hmmm. This raises 2 points:
    1) Why would Ferrari do that?
    2) Isn't it entirely possible that Evo or Chris Harris also tried to arrange a twin-test, but got the same answer? If you answer "yes" to that, then you can see how your hair-brained conspiracy theory about "coincidences" is just garbage.
     
  10. "The Ferrari is magnificent. But the Ford is faster. Easier to use. Rarer. Less expensive. And, we decide, more beautiful too. "
    Faster: according with my post (and according with claimed figures)
    easier: according with my post
    rarer: CAR lies (not me): ford GT more than 4000 units, 360 CS less than 1500
    less price: accord with my post (and with official price)
    you can see, I was right, and you fail <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
     
  11. Uh, no. Look at your original post:
    "1. CAR 'Shock: Ford GT beats 360 CS' (written with abnormal characters). reading the article, the reason was 'ford beats ferrari because it is faster on the straights. '
    ....Can someone explain me where is the surprise (or even the shock), if Ford had a supercharged 5.4l with 550ps and Ferrari had only a 3.6l atmo with 425ps?"

    First of all, it's not a shock that the Ford GT beat the 360 CS. The shock was that ANY Ford could beat the 360 CS, itself already a high performance version of a high performance car. And on UK roads, no less. Read the title of the article that you yourself posted again.

    Secondly, you didn't mention anything else except "faster on the straights" until I *after* I called you on your BS.

    As for rarer, the Ford GT is not based on another vehicle. Its chassis, body, transmission, interior, etc. are not shared with other vehicles. The 360 CS, however, is based on the standard Modena of which, what, 12k+ were built. 4k trumps 12k for rarity, and perhaps with only 28 GT's sold in the UK, it is more rare in their market. Do you think the 360 CS is more rare in Italy (or the rest of Europe) than the Ford GT? Did you honestly think they were writing that article with the perspective of the American market in mind?
     
  12. glad i posted this rant
     
  13. (yಠ,ಠ)y
     
  14. Halfway there
     
  15. ya waht a biased guy, not like me, the guy with the italian name and ferrari avatar posting in away while ignoring the mountain of evidence against my beloved brand
     
  16. I thought that was done on the first page.
     
  17. Show me evidence that Ferrari press cars are tuned. Bring it on.

    PS. I can be biased. A journalist can't. Then he's not doing journalism but endorsements.
     
  18. Maybe Ferrari don't tune their press-cars, but they have a ridiculous approach to the press.

    Like, like what happened with the in the eCOTY 2010, mechanics present at performance tests, mechanics changing tires of test cars during test, closing the press fleet during the McLaren luach etc.

    Now sure, it's their cars and their policy and they are certainly allowed to do that. But it dosen't change the fact that it makes Ferrari look like a bunch of pathetic, insecure cry babies. If they have such a great product like they claim to, shouldn't they let it do the talking without any childish pre-school antics?
     
  19. Like Nissan wih the GT-R.

     
  20. Um, both the article and TSCM have said they are.
     
  21. THE ONES POSTED IN THIS THREAD, YOU DUMBASS
     

Share This Page