[Lily]

Well, apparently Ferrari has finally seen the light.

And by “light,” I mean they unveiled the Luce (light, in Italian) yesterday, their first-ever fully electric car!

This is a huge step for a company that is well-known for their engines that run in high-octane premium unleaded petrol, and from what I've seen, they did all they could to make the car as sleek and fast as they could.

Here's some stats about the car:

• Four electric motors — one on each wheel
• 1,035bhp of power
• 0–62mph in 2.5 seconds
• 192mph top speed
• Around 330 miles of range on a full charge
• 122kWh battery pack
• 800V architecture
• Weighs 2,260kg

Of course, it already has lots of detractors, who think the famous brand has made a mistake. Ferrari knows they can't get stuck in the past but the jury is still out...

What do you guys think?

[olduser]

0 - 62 MPH in 2.5 sec, should have the fish and chips home before they are cold.

The front reminds me of a petulant teenager at about half pout, but at least the air dam won't catch on speed bumps or curbs.

The suicide doors for the rear passengers are just poor or irresponsible design.

I hope the demisters, and the wipers work well with all that windscreen at that angle.

Four motors should be good for traction, and will reduce the cost of the motor electronics, 800 Volts will keep the currents down but will be a problem in a crash unless the batteries, cables, and connectors, are well protected.

So, I look at it and its specification, and ask, why?

[Lily]

@olduser 😂 the fish and chips are definitely arriving hot. But I was wondering, where can you take a car like that where you can actually accelerate like fast? Besides de Autobahn...

Regarding the 4 engines, this is what Ferrari says about that: "The electric power source, Ferrari-engineered engines and advanced drivetrain affords a radically new architecture that uniquely combines extraordinary Ferrari performance with the luxury of spaciousness"

The Luce it's their first 5 seater too, so they wanted an electric and fast car but also spacious. Quite ambitious.

However, so far their gamble is not paying well, people online are already hating on the car and they've actually lost money: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy22rddy5no

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by Lily

However, so far their gamble is not paying well, people online are already hating on the car and they've actually lost money: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy22rddy5no

The car isn't even on sale yet, so it can't be blamed for their losing money.

As for people "hating " it, 99% of the online critics will never afford a Ferrari, and most of the people who can afford one probably have better things to do than comment on online forums,

[Lily]

@Beelzebub They lost money even when the car isn't for sale, because it affected their stock value as a company: Luce electric car reveal wipes £4bn off Ferrari stock value – and leaves former boss unimpressed 😉

And yes, most online haters must be people who can't afford the car 😂

[Drivingforfun]

Not trying to be pedantic but acceleration is something you can legally practise in any country. There's no restriction on how swiftly you can reach the speed limit. In this respect, electric cars are spot on: super acceleration, the drawback being a lower top speed but one that's still well above the speed limit

[NMNeil]

Originally Posted by Drivingforfun

Not trying to be pedantic but acceleration is something you can legally practise in any country. There's no restriction on how swiftly you can reach the speed limit. In this respect, electric cars are spot on: super acceleration, the drawback being a lower top speed but one that's still well above the speed limit

A top speed of 192 seems to be pointless, as you physically won't be able to drive that fast soon in the UK.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/u...speed-33269732

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by NMNeil

A top speed of 192 seems to be pointless, as you physically won't be able to drive that fast soon in the UK.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/u...speed-33269732

But not all driving is done on public roads, or indeed in the UK.

What do myou mean by physically?

[olduser]

I would not say I hate this car, to me the question with any car is what is it for?
Well it's mode of transport, simple.

But this gets complicated with ultra high performance cars, they have no real use they are like expensive jewellery, which of course has no real function other than to look nice, and to demonstrate how rich the owner is.

The Luce, on the little information available, has explored what can be done with electric power in terms of performance but still leave the driver with something to do, all regardless of cost.
I don't see Ferrari, making loads of money out the car but they should make some from the patents for years to come.

[NMNeil]

@Beelzebub By physically I mean that no matter how much you press the throttle the top speed will be physically limited by the software.
As for not all sales will be in the UK; speed limiters are mandatory for all EU countries and will probably be mandatory here in the US in a few years.
https://h-nec.com/speed-limiter-regulations/
As for not all cars being driven on the roads, all cars that are registered for road use require the speed limiters. Of course if it's only used on a race track then there's no need to have it registered for the road anyway.

[Rolebama]

0 - 60mph in 2.5secs is very close to blackout country, let alone muscle strain. I have spoken to jet fighter pilots who say that is why they have to be relatively superfit. I hate the thought of some of these overweight sedentary jobs types getting their hands on machines like this.

[olduser]

High top speed, to me, is one of those rewards that never delivers.
No matter how fast the vehicle can go, it would be better if it could go faster.

Actually, actual speed for most does not matter the 'thrill' is in the impression of speed, 30MPH, between high hedges, along a narrow road, can feel very fast.
Whereas, 80MPH on a not too busy motorway can feel like crawling along, unless the vehicle makes a matching noise or intrusively draws your attention to the speed in some way.

The Luce, pipes amplified and filtered motor and gearbox noise inside and out, which will serve as a speed indicator or warning.

Of course speed is dangerous because most don't change their driving to match the speed, those that do, usually don't drive that fast fast, it's very hard work...

[Rolebama]

@olduser I cannot agree that speed is dangerous in and of itself. It is as with all 'dangerous' items, or abstracts, only dangerous in the wrong circumstances. Those circumstances can include driver competence, vehicle condition, road layout, location, weather and a whole plethora of incidentals.

[NMNeil]

Originally Posted by Rolebama

@olduser I cannot agree that speed is dangerous in and of itself. It is as with all 'dangerous' items, or abstracts, only dangerous in the wrong circumstances. Those circumstances can include driver competence, vehicle condition, road layout, location, weather and a whole plethora of incidentals.

So if you want to own a firearm and keep it in your home you can't, because it's too dangerous, but if you want to own and drive a 190MPH car on the road that's just fine?
Makes no sense.

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by NMNeil

So if you want to own a firearm and keep it in your home you can't, because it's too dangerous, but if you want to own and drive a 190MPH car on the road that's just fine?
Makes no sense.

Just what we need. Advice on gun control from the US.😉

[olduser]

Rolebama, I agree with you up to a point, speed on a track is fine but again up to a point, speed on a track with only speed competent drivers on the track is OK.

Speed competent drivers, are past being motivated by thrill, they understand the behaviour of their vehicle at speed, and how to exploit it to remain in control, they have an understanding of the risks, and seek to minimise them, in short, they understand driving.

Speed on public roads, is a different game.
Going fast is easy (in/on most modern vehicles, just press the go pedal, and it will take you above the legal limit, and beyond the competence of the majority of drivers) but the risks increase almost exponentially in proportion to the difference in speed between vehicles.

Drivers who are paid to drive fast on public roads (hopefully) are trained to do so, and taking into account the conditions, they do remarkably well but it still goes wrong from time to time, then the speed becomes a big problem, high speed = high kinetic energy = much damage, and high risk of injury or death.
Modern cars try to absorb this energy but they cannot absorb it all, and bystanders are totally unprotected.

Much of the training for these drivers is about observation to enable anticipation, something that few drivers normally do.

So, 'speed kills' is maybe not too far from the truth.
I am pretty sure if you ask the driver of the new JCB car, hoping to break the diesel world land speed record, he will tell you that 'speed can, and often does kill' especially in the wrong hands.

[Rolebama]

NMNeill: I agree with your comment above, with a slight exception. When I first joined the Army and was in basic training, there came a day when we went to the ranges with GPMGs. For those who may not know, a General Purpose Machine Gun with a high rate of fire, which, when used in an infantry role, you usually lie prone with the thing on a forward mounted bipod. Anyway, it finally came to the turn of a particular character to fire it. He promptly jumped to his feet, snatched up the gun and began to fire it from the hip. It was agreed afterwards that it was probably the recoil which spun him in a circle, causing him to fire it in our general direction. Luckily one of the Range Officers was in a position to grab the gun and turn it down range while he fired off the rest of the rounds. (The belt only held 50 rounds, so was expended quite quickly.) As a result he was given a psychological discharge, and one of the Range Officers was demoted for 'allowing it to happen'. It seems that had he killed one of us, he would have possibly been prosecuted by both Civil and Military Courts, with a Military Court probably sentencing him to 10yrs with no parole. The only definite agreed at the time was that there would probably be an argument as to who prosecuted him first.
If he had been speeding in a car and killed someone he would possibly get a fine, and an endorsement, with an accompanying very high loading on any car insurance afterwards.
So yes, our laws are unspeakably stupid.

[Santa]

Many years ago, I went to a launch day at Silverstone. One of the perks was to be driven around the rally course by one of the students. It was then that I realised I was far from being the skilled driver I thought I was.

[Nick]

Some solid conversation here - however, let's keep things on topic please, in line with our Forum rules.

For what it's worth - my main thought on the Ferrari Luce is that it just doesn't look like a Ferrari - that front end just looks goofy, rather than elegant and sophisticated. I haven't read any reviews about how it drives etc, which are probably more relevant to how good a car it is, but I think people who want to drive a Ferrari, they want to drive a car that looks like one, as well as drives like one.

[Rolebama]

Not sure about the look either, but a number of cars have been so radical in appearance at first sight, soon to be accepted as the norm.

[olduser]

Originally Posted by Nick

Some solid conversation here - however, let's keep things on topic please, in line with our Forum rules.

For what it's worth - my main thought on the Ferrari Luce is that it just doesn't look like a Ferrari - that front end just looks goofy, rather than elegant and sophisticated. I haven't read any reviews about how it drives etc, which are probably more relevant to how good a car it is, but I think people who want to drive a Ferrari, they want to drive a car that looks like one, as well as drives like one.

I think, the none Ferrari looks is a defence mechanism, if it fails to sell it will not be remembered as a Ferrari.

The engine and suspension should have been the criteria in deciding to buy a Ferrari or that's what Ferrari would have wanted it to be.
This package would then be lovingly wrapped in a body which had to fit around the mechanicals, and in later years made a few concessions to airflow.

From the reviews, it seems the body was designed in a different place while the mechanicals were being designed at Ferrari, the batteries, and the decision to have four motors would have a big influence on the layout of the mechanicals.
It certainly would not add up to a Ferrari shaped car.

They could have started with a Ferrari, and converted it to electric with a single motor, that would have been a compromise but Ferrari and compromise don't fit together.