Ferrari Dino News: Ferrari Says No-Go, Again

[TheCracker]

No, but the Boxster definitely did. Before the Boxster, the 911 did not sell in significant numbers, mostly due to it's inconsistent handling (in the hands of the untrained). Cars like the 924 (all of which also failed to sell in large numbers) kept things alive so the 911 could evolve beyond the 964 series. In fact, the Boxster has often been referred to as the car that saved Porsche. Okay, that's not entirely true, but it completely changed things for Porsche. Prior to the 986 project, the non-911 cars had little resemblance to the 911 itself. The Boxster not only resembled the 996 911, but shared many components, not to mention a similar layout (albiet mid- rather than rear-engined), similar engine design.... It was almost literally a watered-down 911, far more accessible to the masses (including the untrained). Right on the heels of that, 996 sales went through the roof. That is the definition of "diluted".

The 911 has always sold very well and has never had 'inconsistent' handling. Some of the pre-1980's 911 were perhaps tricky for those who were not aware of how a rear engined car will handle in some situations, but the same could be said about the VW Beetle. If the Boxster did 'dilute' the Porsche brand then it certainly did them no harm at all!

No, they were too far off the map to be considered of any influence, good or bad. If anything, they diluted Lamborghini's funding.

I don't understand what you mean by this?

Unfortunately, this is where you're mistaken, and the answer is glaringly obvious. While the 206/246 is the direct ancestor of the 430, it was officially a Dino, but unofficially a Ferrari. The 328 was officially a Ferrari, and nicknamed a Dino. The difference is in the Dino itself: Enzo would not name a V6-engined car a Ferrari, let alone one powered by a Fiat (non-Ferrari) engine. The evidence is right in front of every Dino:

I think you'll find it's the 308 GT4 that was the only other 'Ferrari' to be badged a Dino. If your rationale for a 'Dino' is to be a small Ferrari with an engine designed by another company than the F430 should also be a Dino since it uses a Maserati based V8.

In fact the 'Dino' V6 is much more Ferrari than it is Fiat. The engine was designed by Ferrari but first used in a front engined Fiat 'Dino' road car for the sole purpose of homologating the engine for racing use.

 

[harrytuttle]

The 911 has always sold very well and has never had 'inconsistent' handling. Some of the pre-1980's 911 were perhaps tricky for those who were not aware of how a rear engined car will handle in some situations, but the same could be said about the VW Beetle. If the Boxster did 'dilute' the Porsche brand then it certainly did them no harm at all!

Do not be misled: after the initial sales rush of the 60's (which isn't much of a rush considering it was still a niche company back then), 911 sales declined slowly all the way through the 70's and well into the 80's. I repeat: people consider the Boxster "the car that saved Porsche" for good reason.

Sample sales stats:

Numbers built:
1987

930 ROW Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 720/69/142
930 Can Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 88
930 US Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 1605/87/183
930 US Slantnose = 200

1988

930 ROW Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 677/136/242
930 ROW Slantnose = 18
930 US Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 701/141/591
930 US Slantnose = 278

1989

930 ROW Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 857/115/244
930 ROW Slantnose = 32
930 US Coupe/Targa/Cabriolet = 639/109/600
930 US Slantnose = 147

^^ Sample aside, the 930 produced 21,589 over 15 years. If I recall correctly, "GT: Purely Porsche" magazine still publishes the entire 911 production in the back of every issue. I don't have a copy in front of me, though, so I had to dig up other sources.


Anything that increases sales is, of course, a good thing according to investors. Porsche is a very strongly-managed company and the 911 pretty much maintained its purity over the decades. Pretty much. But to think that the 911/930 (and 964...and a bit in the 993) didn't have problems with oversteer is the essence of denial. The 911's 40-year evolution is an engineering triumph. Few companies could take such a "flawed by design" car and turn it into the benchmark that it is today, despite being nowhere near the challenge that the earlier cars were.

So did the Boxster dilute the Porsche brand? According to the definition of "dilute", yes: far more cars on the road, all of which are easier to drive than any previous 911. The 911, in all its iterations, is still a fantastic car, but it's aboslutely not the hardcore lightweight it used to be.

And, uh, the Beetle was a very different car after 1965. You're thinking of the 356, and even then it was only the early ones that had performance similarities.

No, they were too far off the map to be considered of any influence, good or bad. If anything, they diluted Lamborghini's funding

I don't understand what you mean by this?

The cars weren't produced for free....

I think you'll find it's the 308 GT4 that was the only other 'Ferrari' to be badged a Dino.

Typo, but the 308GT4 was still officially a Ferrari. The Dino sub-brand was gone.

If your rationale for a 'Dino' is to be a small Ferrari with an engine designed by another company than the F430 should also be a Dino since it uses a Maserati based V8.

In fact the 'Dino' V6 is much more Ferrari than it is Fiat. The engine was designed by Ferrari but first used in a front engined Fiat 'Dino' road car for the sole purpose of homologating the engine for racing use.

If you read my post carefully enough, you'd have read that the decision had nothing to do with who made what percentage of the car, but the configuration. It was the first Ferrari mid-engined road car. If it turned out to be unstable, Ferrari's brand would be damaged. Enzo had also built a reputation of V8 & V12-engined cars, and felt that nothing less would suffice for a "true Ferrari". For those two reasons -- and they're pretty significant --the Dino brand was created.

This helped to distance Enzo's company from whatever disaster might have happened to the Dino. Of course, it turned out to be a fantastic success. The model was updated to include a V8 and a prancing horse was slapped on the hood.

 

[TheCracker]

Do not be misled: after the initial sales rush of the 60's (which isn't much of a rush considering it was still a niche company back then), 911 sales declined slowly all the way through the 70's and well into the 80's. I repeat: people consider the Boxster "the car that saved Porsche" for good reason.

^^ Sample aside, the 930 produced 21,589 over 15 years. If I recall correctly, "GT: Purely Porsche" magazine still publishes the entire 911 production in the back of every issue. I don't have a copy in front of me, though, so I had to dig up other sources.

Those are figures for just the 911 Turbo (otherwise known as the 930) - 21,589 units sold over 15 years for a flagship model is pretty damn good. 911's of any kind during the 1980's 'yuppie' years sold like hot cakes.

But to think that the 911/930 (and 964...and a bit in the 993) didn't have problems with oversteer is the essence of denial. The 911's 40-year evolution is an engineering triumph. Few companies could take such a "flawed by design" car and turn it into the benchmark that it is today, despite being nowhere near the challenge that the earlier cars were.

The 911 only had 'problems with oversteer' when driven on the limit, badly - just as any car with that much weight hanging behind the rear wheels would do. The fact that issues only occured in these extreme situations says more about Porsche's engineering ability than it does about any "flaws by design" ie it's layout.

So did the Boxster dilute the Porsche brand? According to the definition of "dilute", yes: far more cars on the road, all of which are easier to drive than any previous 911. The 911, in all its iterations, is still a fantastic car, but it's aboslutely not the hardcore lightweight it used to be.

I would argue that the term 'dilute' referes more to a 'thinning' of a brand - ie loosing the companies 'top quality sports car maker' image. In this respect the Cayanne has damaged Porsche's image far more than the Boxster/Caymen have. I would certainly agree that the Boxster has 'image issues' but this has nothing to do with how good or bad the product is, it's more of a problem with the sort of person who buys them. I've never read any review of the Boxster that doesn't praise the car to high-heaven. A great product can never dilute a brand.

And, uh, the Beetle was a very different car after 1965. You're thinking of the 356, and even then it was only the early ones that had performance similarities.

I was refering to the beetles similar ability to wag it's tail when poorly driven on the limit - no performance similarities were hinted at

The cars weren't produced for free....

It was thetoo far off the map bit that i didn't understand.

 

[McLaren]

TheCracker, he's referring to the fact that those Lamborghini models are so rare, and unheard of, that not a lot of people bought them to actually "dilute" the manufacturer's name.

 

[TheCracker]

They produced 1265 Urraco, Jalpa or Silhouette's in the Countach's production lifetime. They only made 2042 Countach - so i'd hardly say that the lesser Lambos were too far off the map !

 

[McLaren]

You're forgetting though that each model wasn't out at the same time.
Urraco P250 ('72-'76) - 520 units.
Urraco P300 ('74-'79) - 190 units.
Urraco P200 ('75-'77) - 066 units.
Silhouette P300 ('76-'79) - 52 (only 31 recorded) units.
Jalpa 3500 ('81-'88) - 410 units.

Now, let's compare the units of the more popular vehicles starting with the Miura. Given that the Miura was introduced in 1963 as the P400, it's success to '72 would help it stay famous. The closest model to these are the P400 SV introduced in '71 and ending in '72 with 150 units.

Now the Countach:
LP400 ('74-'78) - 150 units.
LP400 S ('78-'82) - 235 units.
LP500 S ('82-'85) - 323 units.
LP500 QV ('85-'88) - 520 units.
25th Anni.('88-'90) - 657 units.

Notice a pattern? When the '72 Miura ended, the Urraco P250 was the gap filler until '74 because out of all those V8 models, it has the most units excluding the Jalpa. When the Countach entered, the numbers dropped dramatically. Because the Urraco was still "big", it exceeded the LP400. When the LP400 S came though, the Urraco dropped from 190 to 66.

The Silhouette though, is undoubtly, a "forgotten" Lamborghini. 52 units in 4 years is not debateable.
The Jalp though is the only "known" one though it's only model took 7 years to gain it's number. The Countach was in cycles.

Countach + P400 SV: 2,035 units.
Urraco + Sil. + Jalpa: 1,238 units.

In these terms, the V8s don't look to bad, but go into years of models.
1972:
Miura - 75
P250s - 104

1974-1978:
Countaches - 150
Urracos - 265

1978-1982:
Countaches - 235
Urraco/P300- 90

1982-1985:
Countaches - 323
Jalpa 3500 - 184

1985-1988:
Countaches - 520
Jalpa 3500 - 184.

Notice that as the Countach got more popular, the others started to slow. Hell, compare a year by year production, and you'll still see the same results.
Urraco P250: 104
Urraco P300: 32
Urraco P200: 22
Silhouette P300: 13
Jalpa 3500: 46

Miura P400 SV: 75
Countach LP400: 30
Countach LP400S: 47
Countach LP500S: 81
Countach LP500 QV: 130

These are numbers per year. Notice that the Countach by year numbers have pretty much surpassed every unknown model except the Urraco P250. This however was the ONLY Lamborghini model at the time between the Miura and the Countach.
See, what he's saying is true TheCracker. Those models are unheard of. You can't just add them all together, and compare them to all the Countaches. You have to compare them by a model's year to another.

 

[harrytuttle]

Those are figures for just the 911 Turbo (otherwise known as the 930) - 21,589 units sold over 15 years for a flagship model is pretty damn good. 911's of any kind during the 1980's 'yuppie' years sold like hot cakes.

"Sold like hot cakes" in the same way Ferrari did back then. Sure, Porsche could sell everything and anything they bolted together, but that doesn't mean production was exactly high. The number produced in the last 10 years totally blows away everything before.

After some more reading (buyer's guide, other guide), I have come to the conclusion that there were a few factors that created the relative lag in sales. The first was the strange impression the early cars made. Another was the global recession starting in the 1970's and continuing in Germany into the 80's. The reunification of Germany in 1990 didn't help either. At that same time, Japanese cars (both economy & sports) were on a growing upswing. This continued well into the 1990's when Japanese sports cars were at their peak (well, previous peak).

This all changed in 1998, right when Japan's sports car industry all but dried up. That same year Porsche released the 996 911, which solidified their evolution and calming of the chassis. And the Boxster was released just the year before; this less-expensive Porsche perfectly filled the gap left by the then too-expensive Japanese sports cars.

To top it all off, the post-1997 cars have all been quite decent. Result? Sales boom; seven consecutive years of record profits. Side effect? Boxster is nicknamed the "wussy Porsche", and 911 purists claim a water-cooled 911 is not a true 911. If that's not the definition of dilution, then I think I should switch to examples involving vinegar and water.

The 911 only had 'problems with oversteer' when driven on the limit, badly - just as any car with that much weight hanging behind the rear wheels would do. The fact that issues only occured in these extreme situations says more about Porsche's engineering ability than it does about any "flaws by design" ie it's layout.

I've been wondering, have you actually driven a pre-993 911 at anything more than 7/10ths? Because if you had, you'd feel that rear end coming around eventually. This is not to say that anyone with decent driving experience can't handle the car; it's actually quite supple and predictable once you get used to it. That still doesn't change that it was a difficult car for the average buyer to get used to.

I would argue that the term 'dilute' referes more to a 'thinning' of a brand - ie loosing the companies 'top quality sports car maker' image. In this respect the Cayanne has damaged Porsche's image far more than the Boxster/Caymen have. I would certainly agree that the Boxster has 'image issues' but this has nothing to do with how good or bad the product is, it's more of a problem with the sort of person who buys them. I've never read any review of the Boxster that doesn't praise the car to high-heaven. A great product can never dilute a brand.

This may be the point where we disagree. Let's take this in two steps.

- Early handling problems created a certain image of the company: cars that were difficult to drive. This was eventually cured, but it took a good 25-30 years.

- Now Porsche produces cars that are both extremely capable and easy to drive. That means two things: sales go up, but the "edge" is lost. Hardcore fans grew used to the edginess; it was the core of the car's character. Much like a Truimph TR6's paper-bag chassis was the base of its "charm". Each successive release of the 911 was greeted with comments of "yes, it's better, but not quite as fun". If anything, that sounds like a car that's softening with age. It may take a decade or two for any heavy damage to be done, but it's damage nonetheless.

I was refering to the beetles similar ability to wag it's tail when poorly driven on the limit - no performance similarities were hinted at

If you can get the 1979 50HP Beetle to oversteer in the same manner as the 1979 200HP base 911...well, you deserve some serious 👍

It was thetoo far off the map bit that i didn't understand.

Thankfully, *McLaren* (Thanks!) cleared that up for me. I can't seem to find a reliable source of sales statistics for anything. I must need more books.

 

[YSSMAN]

**Uh-Oh**

Ferrari today shot down rumors that it was readying a new model positioned below the $170,000 F430 coupe. Speaking at a press conference today at the Los Angeles auto show, General Manager Amedeo Felisa directly addressed recent rumors in the automotive press about a new Dino.

He said the company has absolutely no plans for a "cheap" Ferrari. Felisa made it clear the company would continue to compete in its current markets, with no plans for high-volume or modestly-priced sports cars.

I believe this is the second or third time Ferrari has denied work on the Dino project. But we keep on hearing news over, and over, and over again. Hmmmm, either Ferrari is lying or we are over-guessing prototypes. The Dino project has been a rumor for what seems like six or eight years, and obviously something is going on over in Italy...

I'd like to know, but I'm content in not knowing as well...

 

[Tornado]

Perhaps harry said it best:

I trust the people who saw it firsthand, but couldn't this just be the 430CS or some other variant? Or is that in works somewhere else?

We may have jumped to conclusions.

 

[harrytuttle]

Perhaps harry said it best:

I trust the people who saw it firsthand, but couldn't this just be the 430CS or some other variant? Or is that in works somewhere else?

We may have jumped to conclusions.

Sometimes it pays to be a sceptic. Often disappointed, but never surprised.

 

[under18carbon]

I wanted to create a new thread but noticed this one, anyway, I was browsing FerrariChat and noticed this :



http://mag1.olivesoftware.com/am/ge...ollection=WRM_AM&ReaderStyle=WR&OnePageMode=1

You have to register to be able to read the entire article.

 

[Revolution.]

Looks remarkably like a Porsche Cayman crossed with a 599 GTB

 

[Gen.]

Looks remarkably like a Porsche Cayman crossed with a 599 GTB

Looks more like sex on wheels.

 

[YSSMAN]

I'd call it a modern-enough reproduction of a Ferrari classic, not overly so, but enough to say "Hey, that kinda reminds me of the Dino..."

I like it, but they are going to really try hard to convince me that it would be any better than the Cayman S or the 911, be it a Ferrari or not.

 

[niky]

That front grille looks remarkably like a bad photochop.

I'm kind of :/ on the picture... Ferrari may try to evoke images of Ferraris past with subtle cues, but they're not slavishly retro, thus, those cute little round lights (reminiscent of the original Dino) aren't something I'd expect to see on a modern Ferrari.

@Revolution: Good call on the Cayman... I suppose that's where the chop originated, with just a few accents on the front end... note the overly sharp headlights and unresolved side grilles...

Horrible work, really. And not the direction I'd expect from Ferrari.

 

[under18carbon]

That front grille looks remarkably like a bad photochop.

Just to clarify things for those who don't know (I'm sure all of you are aware that the image is indeed a photoshop), here's an example of the pictures they used. And yes, they are based off a Cayman.

 

[Revolution.]

Heh, I picked it from the roofline and the hips. Unmistakable Porsche.

 

[Pebb]

I would have to say the new Dino is the best looking Ferrari of the 21st Century.

 

[McLaren]

God, that's ugly. When people thought the 599 couldn't get any uglier, here comes this. I absolutely detest the interior. Once again, just a carry over from the 599GTB which was a carry over from the F430 which was essentially a carry over from the Enzo. It's disappointing for me, to see all the same techno gadgets in every car. I feel like I can't push the car and getting that fear you can find in a Lamborghini because with the flip of a switch or press of a button, you can go a bit faster.

Just look at it.
"Dino".

599GTB.

F430.

Enzo

Sure, there were some steering wheel changes, and a removal of the screen from the F430, but they are almost all essentially the same. Same layout with a steering wheel the controls all the performance so you can keep pushing it without any fear unless you know you'll crash. And yeah, even though the Dino is a chop, I wouldn't be surprised if it did turn out like that on the inside.

I never see this in Lamborghinis or even 911 Turbos and that I am glad. I want some fear in me when I push the car because I know there's not a little switch I can flip, and say, "Hey, let's go faster now!"


I guess Ferrari could be glad I at least have some liking for the 599GTB. But the rear still kills me, and this adapting it ruins it.

 

[harrytuttle]

"Dino".
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_422/car_photo_211019_5.jpg

599GTB.
http://www.fast-autos.net/data/images/18546.jpg

I kept looking back & forth between these two photos trying to make sure that they weren't the same photo, just re-colored. I'm convinced that the "Dino" image is well-doctored, not just re-colored. Everything between those two shots is identical, down the the angle it was taken at. Look a the center dash speaker; there's the same portion on the left & right sides of the steering wheel in both pictures. What are the chances of that exact angle being met both times? Everything else matches up, too: speedo', seats, dial positions.... And why would a "back-to-basics" Dino have the F1 transmission?

Basically, it's all fudge. Made up photos from someone who desperately wants a scoop. I hate stuff like this.

 

[McLaren]

I kept looking back & forth between these two photos trying to make sure that they weren't the same photo, just re-colored. I'm convinced that the "Dino" image is well-doctored, not just re-colored. Everything between those two shots is identical, down the the angle it was taken at. Look a the center dash speaker; there's the same portion on the left & right sides of the steering wheel in both pictures. What are the chances of that exact angle being met both times? Everything else matches up, too: speedo', seats, dial positions.... And why would a "back-to-basics" Dino have the F1 transmission?

Basically, it's all fudge. Made up photos from someone who desperately wants a scoop. I hate stuff like this.

Well, I did say even though the Dino is a chop (off the 599 obviously), I wouldn't be surprised if it looked like the 599. Even if the Dino is just bs, I still feel that way about Ferraris these days. Hell, the MC12 was intended as more a racer than the Enzo and not even it gives you the "aids" the Enzo has which is one reason I respect it more.

 

[Pebb]

God, that's ugly. When people thought the 599 couldn't get any uglier, here comes this. I absolutely detest the interior. Once again, just a carry over from the 599GTB which was a carry over from the F430 which was essentially a carry over from the Enzo. It's disappointing for me, to see all the same techno gadgets in every car. I feel like I can't push the car and getting that fear you can find in a Lamborghini because with the flip of a switch or press of a button, you can go a bit faster.

Just look at it.
"Dino".

599GTB.

F430.

Enzo

Sure, there were some steering wheel changes, and a removal of the screen from the F430, but they are almost all essentially the same. Same layout with a steering wheel the controls all the performance so you can keep pushing it without any fear unless you know you'll crash. And yeah, even though the Dino is a chop, I wouldn't be surprised if it did turn out like that on the inside.

I never see this in Lamborghinis or even 911 Turbos and that I am glad. I want some fear in me when I push the car because I know there's not a little switch I can flip, and say, "Hey, let's go faster now!"


I guess Ferrari could be glad I at least have some liking for the 599GTB. But the rear still kills me, and this adapting it ruins it.

I have a feeling it will grow on you over time, but at least it's not as ugly as the 612.

 

[McLaren]

I have a feeling it will grow on you over time, but at least it's not as ugly as the 612.

You must be joking. I'd take the 612 over this "Dino" photoshop any time. Yes, it DOES have the same interior, however, it was BEFORE all this "Let's make it the same" stuff I see in every single Ferrari after 2004.

And guess what. I actually LOVE the 612 design. It was hard to grasp at first, but I loved it. I don't know why everyone loves the 599 but hates the styling of the 612. The 599 is basically the same design hopped on steroids with a ugly back end.

 

[Casio]

Everything between those two shots is identical

Uh oh. There is one difference. I can't believe you didn't find it, because it's not subtle.

Look at the center console again

 

[Alex.]

I'd just like to state in my RIO prestige car hire booklet (the guys with a zonda and a 'segg) it says on their 'coming 2007' list, 2007 ferrari dino.

 

[harrytuttle]

Uh oh. There is one difference. I can't believe you didn't find it, because it's not subtle.

Look at the center console again

I did notice it: a poorly erased Ferrari logo. Everything else in those two shots are structurally identical. You can lay one right on top of the other.

 

[Tornado]

I don't know why everyone loves the 599 but hates the styling of the 612. The 599 is basically the same design hopped on steroids with a ugly back end.

If it is any consolation, I hate both of them. And the F430. And the Enzo. And the FXX. And this "Dino."