2025 Ferrari EV

15,358
Antarctica
TRAPPIST-1g
ProjectWHaT
Ferrari confirms that their first full EV will debut in 2025



1721287198591.png


1721287206433.png


Ferrari will reveal its first electric vehicle before the end of 2025. We know little about it, and that will probably remain the case until it debuts—unless Ferrari wants us to know something. In the meantime, the automaker is making big, somewhat vague, promises to its customers about what they should expect from the new EV.

Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna told Autocar that its EV prototypes, with comically fake exhaust tips, have already completed over "several thousand kilometers" of testing, assuring that, "When we do electric cars, we will produce them in the right way." He called the car’s test drivers its "first clients" who have driven a lot of vehicles and can easily compare the EV to others. According to Vigna, people don’t buy a Ferrari for one particular thing—they buy it to have fun.


The Italian firm has yet to give any details about what form its first battery-electric vehicle will take, but Vigna confirmed it will be revealed late next year before going on sale in 2026.

Recent spy shots show what are understood to be Ferrari EV test mules using modified Maserati Levante bodywork and give some hints as to the form the final car might adopt. Whether it will be obviously comparable with the Levante in silhouette remains to be seen.

He added: “There is not a pattern really. People buy a Ferrari because when they buy a Ferrari, they have a lot of fun. They don’t buy a Ferrari because A, B, C, D or a single element. It’s a combination of things. When we do electric cars, we will produce them in the right way.

“Consider that we have prototypes already on the road that have done several thousand kilometres, and we have in our company very qualified clients: test drivers. The first clients of our cars are the test drivers. They drive a lot of cars, and they can easily make a comparison between one and another, so for us this is an important metric that we are making a reference to.”

A recent report by Reuters suggested that the new EV will be priced from $500,000 (£395,000) and claimed that a second electric model is already under development. Vigna called those reports “a surprise” and declined to confirm any of those details. He added: “The way we define the price of a car is one month before we launch it.”
 
If you'd said 15 years ago that Ferrari were about to bring out a £400k 5-door electric hatchback. I'm pretty sure i wouldn't have belived you. Yet here we are.

* edit * "using modified Maserati Levante bodywork" Okay. That makes sense. I thought something about profile was familiar. Still. Sounds like its not going to be far removed.
 
Last edited:
They'll have to sooner or later. Even without legislation to force changes, they won't be able to compete on performance against EV supercars, and Ferraris need to be at or near the top echelon of performance. They don't do MGBs or MX-5s.

The thing that gets me is the price. Lotus want £2M for an Evija. That's the same money as a piston engined limited volume hypercar, but something like a Chiron needs huge development and testing and expensive, exotic materials to go into the kind of piston engine and gearbox that can deliver that kind of performance. I am sure the engine is a huge portion of the cost. As far as I can tell, there's nothing exotic needed in the battery or motor of an Evija on a level anywhere near comparable to that of a hypercar ICE.

The rest of the car, drivetrain excluded, would be comparable in materials, development, costs... so the chassis, interior, bodywork costs would be similar whether the car had a piston engine or an electric motor. In short, I'd expect an EV hypercar to be less costly to develop and produce than a piston engined one (whether pure ICE or hybrid) and that Lotus are just pricing the Evija at 2M because that's what buyers are conditioned to expect to pay for that level of performance nowadays.

I thinks EV hypercars will be huge profit makers for their manufacturers (or huge ripoffs for the buyers if looked at from another angle).
 
Last edited:
The thing that gets me is the price. Lotus want £2M for an Evija. That's the same money as a piston engined limited volume hypercar, but something like a Chiron needs huge development and testing and expensive, exotic materials to go into the kind of piston engine and gearbox that can deliver that kind of performance. I am sure the engine is a huge portion of the cost. As far as I can tell, there's nothing exotic needed in the battery or motor of an Evija on a level anywhere near comparable to that of a hypercar ICE.
The Evija does have a bespoke motor developed by Helix who do motor development for AMG HPP and supplied the motors for The VW ID.R. So high end, cutting edge stuff. Pretty much the Cosworth of the electric motor world. I doubt that comes cheap or the development cycle any shorter than an ICE powerplant.
 
The Evija does have a bespoke motor developed by Helix who do motor development for AMG HPP and supplied the motors for The VW ID.R. So high end, cutting edge stuff. Pretty much the Cosworth of the electric motor world. I doubt that comes cheap or the development cycle any shorter than an ICE powerplant.

Fair point, thank you!
 
They'll sell like hot cakes. Even to the people who don't like 'em, Ferrari's inner workings for the "good stuff" rely on brand loyalty, and people will buy this just to start/maintain a relationship with their dealers.
 
They'll have to sooner or later. Even without legislation to force changes, they won't be able to compete on performance against EV supercars, and Ferraris need to be at or near the top echelon of performance. They don't do MGBs or MX-5s.
I question this, even if Ferrari agrees with you. That would be like saying Rolex needs to compete with Fitbit or something. Ferrari has the most brand cache of anyone in the business. I don't think Ferrari needs to make the fastest cars out there - they need to make the most desirable. Look at what Murray is doing with the T.50 or T.33 or what Pagani is doing with everything they make...none of them make a claim of being the fastest, it's all about building desire.
 
I question this, even if Ferrari agrees with you. That would be like saying Rolex needs to compete with Fitbit or something. Ferrari has the most brand cache of anyone in the business. I don't think Ferrari needs to make the fastest cars out there - they need to make the most desirable. Look at what Murray is doing with the T.50 or T.33 or what Pagani is doing with everything they make...none of them make a claim of being the fastest, it's all about building desire.

Which is why I said "at or near the top echelon" as distinct from the outright fastest. They've hardly ever been the fastest, but they've always been close to it, or a competitive product to whatever the fastest is. They need to be in the supercar group at least, not the sportscar group.

I can't imagine Ferrari wanting to make a Boxster, for instance. If they carry on building 800bhp V12 flagships while all their competitors are building 2000bhp EV supercars that completely run rings around Ferrari's finest, Ferrari will become irrelevant. Or they'll turn in to an Italian Morgan.. in market size as well as spirit. They have to go EV, and so do the rest of them. Otherwise the next generation of hypercars, or the one after that, will be exclusively new brands. A Ferrari needs to be fast and emotional, not just emotional.

My opinion.
 
Last edited:
I question this, even if Ferrari agrees with you. That would be like saying Rolex needs to compete with Fitbit or something. Ferrari has the most brand cache of anyone in the business. I don't think Ferrari needs to make the fastest cars out there - they need to make the most desirable. Look at what Murray is doing with the T.50 or T.33 or what Pagani is doing with everything they make...none of them make a claim of being the fastest, it's all about building desire.
I think it comes from the era of success Ferrari had in F1. The most successful F1 team "translating" to marketing the best sports cars. Michael started taking them back to winning titles in rapid succession & Ferrari started heavily bankrolling off of it. They didn't need to be the fastest cars, marketing just did a fantastic job that owners loved hyping the performance of their cars & the brand simply b/c the team (Michael) was "faster" than everybody else. Then, the success stopped & Ferrari didn't have much left to market F1 into the cars besides an Alonso Edition. They were successful in the FIA GT, but that wasn't their efforts (& I think there was resentment there hence why I don't think we saw any road models pay homage to those championships).

Now, the Pista Piloti & the 499P Modificata are probably the first cars I've seen Ferrari go back to using current motorsport efforts to sell the cars rather than resting on the fact of, "Hey, remember the Testarossa? No, no, the 250 Testarossa. Here's the Monza". And I think part of that goes with what kiseca is saying. Ferrari wants motorsport success so it can validate them building faster, premium (expensive) models which of course then means, the cars do need to be "at or near the top echelon" as he said, to justify the connection they will inevitably market between the race cars & your car (Ex: Drive The Legend - The highest-performance closed-wheel car that Ferrari has ever proposed for non-competitive use on the track derived from the 499P that triumphed at the 24 Hours of Le Mans). I mean, in retrospect, you're still 100% on building desirabilty.

As for Pagani, I think to their credit, they went straight off coach building & Horacio's attention to detail and customer service propelled them to success & desirability. "You want an alternative Italian supercar? That you can customize to your heart's desire & is more unique than everyone else? Just cut us a check of $3-5 million for starters. Trust me, you'll get it back even in just 2-3 years if you sell it."
 
Last edited:
The outcome of a Ferrari EV will prove once and for all whether the idea of "brand identity" can weather the EV storm. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that no, they won't. Brand identities will be relegated to the history books while the cars will simply all be different versions of one another. The only real difference will be how useful a particular EV is, or how efficient it is. Because they all perform the same, making an EV stand out amongst the crowd will typically end up making it a worse EV.

I highly doubt any reviewers are going to be able to justify whatever price Ferrari charges for this thing.
 
Last edited:
That's the problem. How do you distinguish your exotic EV from a regular one that gives the same performance? Ferraris are relatively fast cars. If everyone is building EVs that do 0-60mph in 3 seconds, do Ferraris need to be doing it in 2 seconds? If they aren't, what makes them better? As @TheCracker pointed out when I questioned the price of an Evija, there is indeed scope for exotic hardware when it comes to electric motors. Perhaps there is with battery performance too, with batteries designed to dump huge dollops of power on to the motor, focussing on performance rather than efficiency, or some lightweight battery technology whose price puts it out of reach of a £50,000 family sedan. It has to offer something performance wise that you can't get for less money. It's easy to see where that expense goes with an exotic V12, less obvious (to me at least) with an electric motor. But of course my lack of imagination in this regard doesn't limit the engineers working on it 😄

Maybe this was how ICE motoring was in the early days.

I agree Ferrari built their image and reputation hugely with the success of the F1 team in the early 2000s, but the momentum was already there from the 1980s, when Magnum P.I. and later Miami Vice beamed the Italian supercars into nearly every western family's living room. Ferrari had sustained growth and popularity from both periods.

I too think the landscape is going to shift as EV marketshare goes up. Tesla of course already grew into a giant out of almost nothing, Lucid grew out of Tesla and are redefining the supersaloon, Rimac might not go that far as a brand but their technology is spawning EV hypercars like the Pininfarina Battista, I think they will grow a big background influence.

Lotus, who never traded on their engines, should be the established sportscar manufacturer best placed to move into the EV sportscar and supercar space. They've got years of experience making cars that are engaging to drive without the benefit of a sonically marvellous, revvy V10 or V12. Noone buys a Lotus for the engine. But they seem slow off the mark and the Emira feedback shows that they still aren't able to build trust in the brand. They might just stay as they are now, a left field choice for those few willing to make larger than normal sacrifices in reliability, quality and customer support for the last word in steering feel and chassis dynamics.

I love the Evija even though I expressed doubt about the price. I think it looks fantastic, and I trust Lotus, above anyone else, to be able to make an EV sportscar that is engaging, communicative and fun to drive. But they need to leap ahead before the market is filled up with Porsches, Ferraris and Rimac offshoots.
 
Actual performance figures are a bit irrelevant these days. With the likes of Hyundai and Tesla producing relatively cheap, everyday practical vehicles that have, on paper, performance figures that run rings around traditional ICE performance cars, sports and supercar manufacturers have to just concentrate on what has always made their vehicles 'special' in the first place.

Take the Purosangue as an example. The SUV Ferrari said they'd never make. Less practical and probably not much faster than a Urus, Bentayga, Cayenne GT or Aston DBX. But what it does do better is translate 'Ferrariness' to that segment. It still feels like a Ferrari to drive. If Ferrari can nail that with an EV, then it doesn't matter if the figures don't make it it stand out in the way Ferraris used to.
 
Ferrari originally sold roadcars for no other reason than to fund their race team. It's business.

That said, a huge well done on making it a 5-door hatchbacky SUV thing.

I am aware that paragraph one is "that's what Ferrari does" and paragraph two is "that's what Ferrari shouldn't do".
 
The outcome of a Ferrari EV will prove once and for all whether the idea of "brand identity" can weather the EV storm. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that no, they won't. Brand identities will be relegated to the history books while the cars will simply all be different versions of one another. The only real difference will be how useful a particular EV is, or how efficient it is. Because they all perform the same, making an EV stand out amongst the crowd will typically end up making it a worse EV.

I highly doubt any reviewers are going to be able to justify whatever price Ferrari charges for this thing.
They won't have to. Ferrari can price it at whatever they want, my guess being at an entry level for a Ferrari, & it will sell alongside the Romas & the Purosangues. All Ferrari has to do is as @TheCracker said; make sure it feels like a Ferrari should.

The people who buy this will be doing it to be seen in a Ferrari & establishing their reputation with the brand/dealer. And I suspect Ferrari will instruct its dealers to remember these customers a little more when/if any of them want slots on the more popular, higher demand cars. Ordering one of these early will probably do you a favor if you're trying to get in on the 12 Cilindri.
 
Last edited:
Back