Should Ferrari make SUVs??

v12 · 21st February 2004, 13:28

Lamborghini has done it with the LM002. Porsche has done it with their Cayenne Turbo. Should Ferrari also join the bandwagon??? Should it create an SUV?? Imagine an SUV with 3.6 litre, 400 bhp, paddleshift, F1 sound etc. Amazing.
Priced at par with the Cayenne Turbo, it'll sell like hot cakes.

But NO. It shouldnt manufacture SUVs. A supercar manufacturer should manufacture ONLY supercars. A Ferrari SUV will spoil the image of Ferrari as a manufacturer as a supercars. Ferraris are not supposed to be sold like hot cakes. They shouldnt be common. They should be rare.

Post your views guys. Would your attitude towards Ferrari change if it started manufacturing SUVs???

Mine surely would.

GTO · 21st February 2004, 15:12

Luca di Montezemolo (Current President of Ferrari) once said that he would like to manufacture exactly one less Ferrari than there is a demand for...Porsche designed and manufactured the Cayenne to satisfy the growing SUV diet of USA - The largest car market in the world, by far. SUVs are high ticket items, and correspondingly high profit margins are the rule of the game here. Revvmaster will remember the very interesting discussion we had on the autocarindia forum about the for and against Porsches SUV decision. Though neither me and Revvmaster were all for the Porsche Cayenne, the company was bleeding and needed the extra funds which a high-priced and relatively broader appeal SUV would offer. Most Autocarindia forum users kinda understood the logic behind Porsches decision.

Ideally, NO. Ferrari should not even think about a prancing horse'd SUV simply because there is currently no need for such an atrocious machine from the Italian manufacturer. Every Ferrari ever manufactured has had just one aim - Driving Pleasure...and SUV's are hardly the choice of enthusiasts! Correct me if I am wrong, but Ferrari makes only 4000 - 6000 cars every year in order to maintain a certain level of exclusivity and premium for its lucky owners.

If today an SUV, what next? A four door Ferrari saloon...or worse yet...a Station-wagon?

GTO

v12 · 21st February 2004, 15:55

hmmmm.............a Ferrari Station Wagon...... That reminds me that the Sultan of Brunei has one.

v12 · 21st February 2004, 16:00

and a saloon.................. he owns a Ferrari saloon too

_Crazi4Speed_ · 29th February 2004, 04:06

Hey V12, you beat me to those 2..I was just going to give his example...I had read it some time back myself...

But i personally am for the SUV..I think porsche did a great thing..but ofcourse on design we could debate...

As for a supercar manufacture, y not..SUV is a car..a supercar is one that is super fast and has the finest performance..and who says you cant get that kind of performance and stats from an SUV, a carefully designed SUV can beat the best of the best super cars(imagine the challenge)..I might be wrong, but I remember BMW X5 Lemans edition run in mid 4s which is almost the same as a 360...so a little better engineering and more money into the building of an SUV can reveal a SSUV a super SUV..

So I think its a great idea..they should do the 1 less than required productuon on an SUV too, but people who like SUVs and are brand loyal would like to own SUVs of their fav brand which might be prosche, lambo or ferrari..and just imagine the design possibilities if these itallian designers get to work..i cant even imagine...I would love to own a sweet looking superfast SUV..

Anyhow this is my opinion...

Also as for a ferrari 4 door, maserati is basically ferrari..so quatroportte..can be considered ferrari 4 door with maserati badge..

Cheers

Dippy · 29th February 2004, 10:59

Interesting thoughts CFS

Well one can say Porsche was successful with their SUV attempt. I really wonder if Ferrari went in for it what would it look like ? A raised 360? I really wonder what a Blood Red Ferrari would feel like to drive?

Cheers

Aditya · 29th February 2004, 15:08

I don't think Ferrari should make an SUV. They're just not that kind of manufacturer. For me Ferrari is another word for supercar. It would disappoint me. Jaguar disappointed me by making a diesel to boost sales. The X-Type which took Jaguar to the mass market just to compete with BMW and Mercedes Benz was another disappointment.
I like it when a car manufacturer maintains a certain level of exclusivity.
Anyway, I can't recall an instance of any of Ferrari's sister manufacturers making an SUV. Fiat, Lancia, Maserati, Alfa Romeo,.... any of you know any of these ever producing an SUV?
Let me know if I've missing something.

Revvmaster · 29th February 2004, 20:12

Hey Addy

The Maserati Kubang is the latest SUV to come from the Fiat stable. Currently being market tested and being tested for all other purposes. BTW, yea i agree, Ferrari and SUV don't go together. Fine, BMW made the LeMans edition and Mercedes the ML55AMG, but hey, these were just one-offs to show the capabilities of BMW and Mercedes engineering.

Look at it this way, Porsche was in trouble. It was in trouble in 1989-92 since their Porsche 959 dream went bust (they went on to sell their 450 cars for nearly half the sale price, they lost 1,00,000$ on each car they sold!) and since the economies then went bust, having porsches was not the order of the day (remember XJ220? it pretty much got killed for the same reasons and jag decided never to build a supercar, ever again!). The problem with Porsche in the late nineties was the problem not of less, but want for more. Porsche needs to fund its racing activities, also it needed dough for the Carrera GT that you and I swoon over. So where do they get the money from? They probably can't sell 20% more boxsters in no time flat, and making a smaller sports car will give them volumes, but hey the margins would reduce and also who would they be competing with in a smaller Porsche. Toyota MR2, Mazda Miata???Brand image- pretty much outta the window and into the waste bin. So what could Porsche really have done? Well, build a vehicle that gives steady volumes, yet cheap to build and has good margins. Look around, and the word that keeps shouting outta ur corpus callosum has to be..... SUV.

Look at it this way, Porsche is selling Carrera GT and its already sold out. Did Cayenne affect its sales..... hell no! But should Ferrari build it? I really don't see why they should be, since they don't have a cash crunch in F1 and their other racing activities are minimal, so "overheads" are low. They have enough financial backing from Fiat (even if itself is in trouble), Porsche doesnt have that kind of financial muscle. Other companies are just jumping onto the bandwagon of SUVs with just the intention of making more profits, Porsche atleast has half a better reason than that.

Revvmaster

GTO · 1st March 2004, 01:51

In the United States, SUV's are high-volume and high-ticker items. The only reason Ford, GM and Chrysler still dont have the color red on their financial sheets is only because of the ever-growing appetite of the american consumer toward SUV's and pick-up trucks. Europeans, being more handling oriented in their preference toward cars, have not taken to SUVs the way the Yankees have. Also American freeways which are neverendingly straight suit the nature of this breed of automobiles, not the curvy and relatively narrower european roads. Butttttttttttttttt the best selling SUVs are in the 30000 - 50000 odd range. Not too many americans would pay 80000 + for an SUV, thus Porsche also launched a non-turbo version of the Cayenne which is a significant 20000 USD cheaper out the door.

The cheapest ferrari is well over USD 100,000. An SUV from the Ferrari stable would cost nowhere below 150000+. Forget even decent volumes, Ferrari would have a serious problem moving even triple digit numbers out of its warehouses. Not to mention, the dilution to its brand equity (remember every Ferrari is a brilliant drivers car) would be potentially worth in millions!

As revvmaster rightly mentioned, Porsche needed the dough from the Cayenne. Not only will these dollars please its investors, but it will lead to far better and more advanced sports cars across its range. Ferrari are in no such need, its Formula One operations are actually profitable despite having the biggest budget by far on the grid.

No, Ferrari would do better in staying away from the SUV route...utlititarian value (S ports U tlity V ehicle) and Ferrari's dont go together - Only passion fits in!

GTO

P.S. - Hey Revv didnt the Jaguar XJ220 really fail in the exotic market because it garnered a reputation as the worst handling supercar ever? I have a video from jeremy that testifies this.

Dippy · 1st March 2004, 03:24

Yeah GTO

Youre right bout the XJ220. I too have the same Clarkson video where he even said that car had brakes but they didnt work and it needed a parachuite to stop. But I think the handling issue was on the XJR15 and not the Xj220 if I remember.

Cheers

Revvmaster · 1st March 2004, 03:33

Hey GTO.

You are probably right about what you said, the XJ having not so great handling. I find that hard to believe though, since if you've seen Tiff give the XJ a thorough work-out in TG, u'll not find such problems on the face of it. Accepted the brakes are horrible. BTW, I have a book on sports cars which mentions the true reasons for the failure of the XJ. Markets had crashed, the yuppy crowd then went pretty much bankrupt. Sports cars really werent on their mind. (Remember, Porsche had the max. no. of accidents during the mid and late 80s.... why?, cuz stockmarket punters and financial honchos were buying Porsches like they were aplenty, but cudn't handle the nervous nature of the car.)The XJ was priced right, but came at the wrong time. Infact McLaren deferred its project by sometime, so that they cud beat the recession (which they did). Also Bugatti and the EB110 seemed a much better proposition at the time.

The XJ was a victim of unfortunate circumstances, where it was hardly at fault. Today XJs go for 30-40000 pounds, a supercar for E Class money. While 959s go nearly 2-3 times its original price. 2 victims of their times, one a great car which got hit by rule changes (959), the other cuz of an altogether new rulebook.

What you and I see today in supercars is this learning curve. Others have learnt from it (ala Porsche, Ferrari, Mercedes etc). With more supercars expected, its gonna get even tougher, but i see another XJ in the making from one of these. Only time will tell which one.

Revvmaster · 1st March 2004, 03:53

I think Dippy is right. Jeremy had a hard hard time with the XJR15 and not XJ220 in his supercars video.

GTO · 1st March 2004, 13:05

My bad...It is indeed the XJR15

Dippy · 1st March 2004, 13:35

Hey guys speaking of SuVs do you think a Jaguar SUV would work?

Cheers

Aditya · 1st March 2004, 15:55

The beautiful XJ220 had brakes that were too weak for its pace. Grip was fine with those massive tyres, but the handling wasn't really good. The XJR15 was easily the worst handling supercar of all time. You didn't have to do much to spin it.
Regarding the Jag SUV, I don't think they should attempt it. It may sell because of the current boom in the SUV market, but, I wouldn't buy it - just as I won't buy an M Class or an X5 or for that matter a Cayenne. I might love Jaguar, Mercedes, BMW and Porsche, but when it comes to SUVs I'll go with traditional names. A Range Rover would do nicely for me.
Rather than making a Jag SUV, I'll be happier if Ford fits a supercharged Jaguar V8 engine in a Range Rover.
For me, Jag's range is limited to the XJ, XK and S Type.

21st February 2004, 13:28	#1
v12 Distinguished - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 6,757 Thanked: 7,461 Times View My Garage	Lamborghini has done it with the LM002. Porsche has done it with their Cayenne Turbo. Should Ferrari also join the bandwagon??? Should it create an SUV?? Imagine an SUV with 3.6 litre, 400 bhp, paddleshift, F1 sound etc. Amazing. Priced at par with the Cayenne Turbo, it'll sell like hot cakes. But NO. It shouldnt manufacture SUVs. A supercar manufacturer should manufacture ONLY supercars. A Ferrari SUV will spoil the image of Ferrari as a manufacturer as a supercars. Ferraris are not supposed to be sold like hot cakes. They shouldnt be common. They should be rare. Post your views guys. Would your attitude towards Ferrari change if it started manufacturing SUVs??? Mine surely would.
	() Thanks

21st February 2004, 15:12	#2
GTO Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 71,996 Thanked: 313,303 Times View My Garage	Luca di Montezemolo (Current President of Ferrari) once said that he would like to manufacture exactly one less Ferrari than there is a demand for...Porsche designed and manufactured the Cayenne to satisfy the growing SUV diet of USA - The largest car market in the world, by far. SUVs are high ticket items, and correspondingly high profit margins are the rule of the game here. Revvmaster will remember the very interesting discussion we had on the autocarindia forum about the for and against Porsches SUV decision. Though neither me and Revvmaster were all for the Porsche Cayenne, the company was bleeding and needed the extra funds which a high-priced and relatively broader appeal SUV would offer. Most Autocarindia forum users kinda understood the logic behind Porsches decision. Ideally, NO. Ferrari should not even think about a prancing horse'd SUV simply because there is currently no need for such an atrocious machine from the Italian manufacturer. Every Ferrari ever manufactured has had just one aim - Driving Pleasure...and SUV's are hardly the choice of enthusiasts! Correct me if I am wrong, but Ferrari makes only 4000 - 6000 cars every year in order to maintain a certain level of exclusivity and premium for its lucky owners. If today an SUV, what next? A four door Ferrari saloon...or worse yet...a Station-wagon? GTO
	() Thanks

21st February 2004, 15:55	#3
v12 Distinguished - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 6,757 Thanked: 7,461 Times View My Garage	hmmmm.............a Ferrari Station Wagon...... That reminds me that the Sultan of Brunei has one.
	() Thanks

21st February 2004, 16:00	#4
v12 Distinguished - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 6,757 Thanked: 7,461 Times View My Garage	and a saloon.................. he owns a Ferrari saloon too
	() Thanks

29th February 2004, 04:06	#5
_Crazi4Speed_ BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Shuffling between chicago and delhi Posts: 764 Thanked: 4 Times	Hey V12, you beat me to those 2..I was just going to give his example...I had read it some time back myself... But i personally am for the SUV..I think porsche did a great thing..but ofcourse on design we could debate... As for a supercar manufacture, y not..SUV is a car..a supercar is one that is super fast and has the finest performance..and who says you cant get that kind of performance and stats from an SUV, a carefully designed SUV can beat the best of the best super cars(imagine the challenge)..I might be wrong, but I remember BMW X5 Lemans edition run in mid 4s which is almost the same as a 360...so a little better engineering and more money into the building of an SUV can reveal a SSUV a super SUV.. So I think its a great idea..they should do the 1 less than required productuon on an SUV too, but people who like SUVs and are brand loyal would like to own SUVs of their fav brand which might be prosche, lambo or ferrari..and just imagine the design possibilities if these itallian designers get to work..i cant even imagine...I would love to own a sweet looking superfast SUV.. Anyhow this is my opinion... Also as for a ferrari 4 door, maserati is basically ferrari..so quatroportte..can be considered ferrari 4 door with maserati badge.. Cheers
	() Thanks

29th February 2004, 10:59	#6
Dippy Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai, India Posts: 7,615 Thanked: 2,935 Times	Interesting thoughts CFS Well one can say Porsche was successful with their SUV attempt. I really wonder if Ferrari went in for it what would it look like ? A raised 360? I really wonder what a Blood Red Ferrari would feel like to drive? Cheers
	() Thanks

29th February 2004, 15:08	#7
Aditya Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 19,135 Thanked: 82,720 Times View My Garage	I don't think Ferrari should make an SUV. They're just not that kind of manufacturer. For me Ferrari is another word for supercar. It would disappoint me. Jaguar disappointed me by making a diesel to boost sales. The X-Type which took Jaguar to the mass market just to compete with BMW and Mercedes Benz was another disappointment. I like it when a car manufacturer maintains a certain level of exclusivity. Anyway, I can't recall an instance of any of Ferrari's sister manufacturers making an SUV. Fiat, Lancia, Maserati, Alfa Romeo,.... any of you know any of these ever producing an SUV? Let me know if I've missing something.
	() Thanks

29th February 2004, 20:12	#8
Revvmaster Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 1,190 Thanked: 96 Times	Hey Addy The Maserati Kubang is the latest SUV to come from the Fiat stable. Currently being market tested and being tested for all other purposes. BTW, yea i agree, Ferrari and SUV don't go together. Fine, BMW made the LeMans edition and Mercedes the ML55AMG, but hey, these were just one-offs to show the capabilities of BMW and Mercedes engineering. Look at it this way, Porsche was in trouble. It was in trouble in 1989-92 since their Porsche 959 dream went bust (they went on to sell their 450 cars for nearly half the sale price, they lost 1,00,000$ on each car they sold!) and since the economies then went bust, having porsches was not the order of the day (remember XJ220? it pretty much got killed for the same reasons and jag decided never to build a supercar, ever again!). The problem with Porsche in the late nineties was the problem not of less, but want for more. Porsche needs to fund its racing activities, also it needed dough for the Carrera GT that you and I swoon over. So where do they get the money from? They probably can't sell 20% more boxsters in no time flat, and making a smaller sports car will give them volumes, but hey the margins would reduce and also who would they be competing with in a smaller Porsche. Toyota MR2, Mazda Miata???Brand image- pretty much outta the window and into the waste bin. So what could Porsche really have done? Well, build a vehicle that gives steady volumes, yet cheap to build and has good margins. Look around, and the word that keeps shouting outta ur corpus callosum has to be..... SUV. Look at it this way, Porsche is selling Carrera GT and its already sold out. Did Cayenne affect its sales..... hell no! But should Ferrari build it? I really don't see why they should be, since they don't have a cash crunch in F1 and their other racing activities are minimal, so "overheads" are low. They have enough financial backing from Fiat (even if itself is in trouble), Porsche doesnt have that kind of financial muscle. Other companies are just jumping onto the bandwagon of SUVs with just the intention of making more profits, Porsche atleast has half a better reason than that. Revvmaster
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 01:51	#9
GTO Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 71,996 Thanked: 313,303 Times View My Garage	In the United States, SUV's are high-volume and high-ticker items. The only reason Ford, GM and Chrysler still dont have the color red on their financial sheets is only because of the ever-growing appetite of the american consumer toward SUV's and pick-up trucks. Europeans, being more handling oriented in their preference toward cars, have not taken to SUVs the way the Yankees have. Also American freeways which are neverendingly straight suit the nature of this breed of automobiles, not the curvy and relatively narrower european roads. Butttttttttttttttt the best selling SUVs are in the 30000 - 50000 odd range. Not too many americans would pay 80000 + for an SUV, thus Porsche also launched a non-turbo version of the Cayenne which is a significant 20000 USD cheaper out the door. The cheapest ferrari is well over USD 100,000. An SUV from the Ferrari stable would cost nowhere below 150000+. Forget even decent volumes, Ferrari would have a serious problem moving even triple digit numbers out of its warehouses. Not to mention, the dilution to its brand equity (remember every Ferrari is a brilliant drivers car) would be potentially worth in millions! As revvmaster rightly mentioned, Porsche needed the dough from the Cayenne. Not only will these dollars please its investors, but it will lead to far better and more advanced sports cars across its range. Ferrari are in no such need, its Formula One operations are actually profitable despite having the biggest budget by far on the grid. No, Ferrari would do better in staying away from the SUV route...utlititarian value (S ports U tlity V ehicle) and Ferrari's dont go together - Only passion fits in! GTO P.S. - Hey Revv didnt the Jaguar XJ220 really fail in the exotic market because it garnered a reputation as the worst handling supercar ever? I have a video from jeremy that testifies this.
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 03:24	#10
Dippy Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai, India Posts: 7,615 Thanked: 2,935 Times	Yeah GTO Youre right bout the XJ220. I too have the same Clarkson video where he even said that car had brakes but they didnt work and it needed a parachuite to stop. But I think the handling issue was on the XJR15 and not the Xj220 if I remember. Cheers
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 03:33	#11
Revvmaster Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 1,190 Thanked: 96 Times	Hey GTO. You are probably right about what you said, the XJ having not so great handling. I find that hard to believe though, since if you've seen Tiff give the XJ a thorough work-out in TG, u'll not find such problems on the face of it. Accepted the brakes are horrible. BTW, I have a book on sports cars which mentions the true reasons for the failure of the XJ. Markets had crashed, the yuppy crowd then went pretty much bankrupt. Sports cars really werent on their mind. (Remember, Porsche had the max. no. of accidents during the mid and late 80s.... why?, cuz stockmarket punters and financial honchos were buying Porsches like they were aplenty, but cudn't handle the nervous nature of the car.)The XJ was priced right, but came at the wrong time. Infact McLaren deferred its project by sometime, so that they cud beat the recession (which they did). Also Bugatti and the EB110 seemed a much better proposition at the time. The XJ was a victim of unfortunate circumstances, where it was hardly at fault. Today XJs go for 30-40000 pounds, a supercar for E Class money. While 959s go nearly 2-3 times its original price. 2 victims of their times, one a great car which got hit by rule changes (959), the other cuz of an altogether new rulebook. What you and I see today in supercars is this learning curve. Others have learnt from it (ala Porsche, Ferrari, Mercedes etc). With more supercars expected, its gonna get even tougher, but i see another XJ in the making from one of these. Only time will tell which one.
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 03:53	#12
Revvmaster Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 1,190 Thanked: 96 Times	I think Dippy is right. Jeremy had a hard hard time with the XJR15 and not XJ220 in his supercars video.
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 13:05	#13
GTO Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 71,996 Thanked: 313,303 Times View My Garage	My bad...It is indeed the XJR15
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 13:35	#14
Dippy Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai, India Posts: 7,615 Thanked: 2,935 Times	Hey guys speaking of SuVs do you think a Jaguar SUV would work? Cheers
	() Thanks

1st March 2004, 15:55	#15
Aditya Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 19,135 Thanked: 82,720 Times View My Garage	The beautiful XJ220 had brakes that were too weak for its pace. Grip was fine with those massive tyres, but the handling wasn't really good. The XJR15 was easily the worst handling supercar of all time. You didn't have to do much to spin it. Regarding the Jag SUV, I don't think they should attempt it. It may sell because of the current boom in the SUV market, but, I wouldn't buy it - just as I won't buy an M Class or an X5 or for that matter a Cayenne. I might love Jaguar, Mercedes, BMW and Porsche, but when it comes to SUVs I'll go with traditional names. A Range Rover would do nicely for me. Rather than making a Jag SUV, I'll be happier if Ford fits a supercharged Jaguar V8 engine in a Range Rover. For me, Jag's range is limited to the XJ, XK and S Type.
	() Thanks