458 v. 488: Is this Ferrari progress?

[Hagerty]

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be. Or is it? As long as I can remember, automotive enthusiasts have gotten all teary-eyed about discontinued models. The new car lacks soul, character and driver involvement! BMW and Porsche fanboys are particularly prone to singing "Look what they've done to my car, Ma!"
https://www.hagerty.com/media/opinion/458-v-488-is-this-ferrari-progress/

[NAMiata]

I find this sophomoric writing strange for Hagerty. I had to check this wasn't an old Motor Trend article. Hope is was just an editor distracted by the apparently unlimited torque and guilt free motoring of a solar power charged EV.

[RobertFarago59]

Unlimited torque, sure. Guilt-free motoring? Only if you feel guilty driving a gas-powered vehicle and don’t take a comprehensive look at the environmental impact of an electric vehicle.

[hyperv6]

I think you really are missing what happen.

GM came out first with many technologies. The trouble was the GM engineers out pace the needed computer tech by 10 years in most cases.

Today these systems work well and many are used in F1 today so it would be expected in a Ferrari.

Many of these changes are expected in a car today of any name or brand.

While many like myself treasure a 59 Vette or 63 250 Lusso for their pure ness and lack of tech many cars today rely on it due to regulations or the threat of regulations be it safety or emissions.

If anything it has opened the door to more customers and sustained reliability.

Let’s face it most of the old cars were just old race cars with a need for great up keep. Today they still have expensive maintenance but it better than it was.

Want affordable buy a C8.

[seinfeldbasslin]

soccer mom thriller was my nickname in college. how's that for sophomoric?

always great to read a new farago piece. thanks for publishing.

[Oscar]

I caught that PJ O'Rourke quote, RIP. Technology and innovation is always a trade-off of some sort. Even the objective trade-offs have subjective valuations. I'd be fine with cheaper, lighter, more dangerous cars with less power, which is probably a less controversial statement here than in other places.

[Flashman]

I think your writing style is more refreshing than sophomoric, but FOAD is uncomfortably close to the limit. You make a good point about new technology always being problematic.

You missed "squeeze" from "suck, bang, blow".

[hyperv6]

The real story here is the owner of the 250 SWB after driving the 458 and finding it a pure disappointment. He will freely admit it is a more reliable and easier to drive car but to him reliability and easy we’re never part of being a Ferrari.

Look perceived ideas are one thing and survival of a automaker today is another.

Years ago the Ferrari was first a race car and second it was never expected to be anything else but fast.

Today these cars are built for a mfg to survive. They have to be safe, reliable, easy to drive, meet all the global regulations and still find a way to be fast.

Cars with names like Ferrari and Shelby are only names as they no longer represent the original ideas of their creators.

Now you have two choices accept the changes if you want the mfg to survive or stand your ground and let them die.

I feel the greater thing to damage Ferrari is that it is now a publicly traded company and now forced to bow to Investor wishes. If you thing Enzo had grown frustrated with Fiat you have seen nothing yet.

When they start building models just for pure money and profits it can really hurt the image equity in the eyes of the true enthusiast.

Ferrari also needs to make it easier to own a Ferrari. When someone like Jay Leno speaks out it says much.