What's new
By:
Club Scuderia

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Please take a minute to read this thread about our recent server issues and forum platform Switch

Maserati MC-20

The carbon tub yes, but it'll take more than a playstation dash and gimmick doors...

I like it though :thumbsup:
 
Must be the worst web site I have ever tried to look at. Great if you are only worried about the look but I couldn't find much technical detail. I guess I am old school and want to know what I am buying. Are younger buyers happy to splash the cash without understanding anything about the car ??
 
Im not sure its F8 money if you start to add the usual extras which dealers expect of you, unless you want to wait until end of line!

Edit...Ive just seen the full UK options list...it soon adds up!
 
Last edited:
Modificato said:
<1500kg

630hp

Series Production Carbon Monocoque

Fully Digital Dash and Interior

Butterfly wing doors

Way ahead of Ferrari now...
Click to expand...

I like the looks and doors; but in all honesty you lost my interest completely at “digital dash”, not that I’m in a position to worry about it.
 
A348W said:
I like the looks and doors; but in all honesty you lost my interest completely at “digital dash”, not that I’m in a position to worry about it.
Click to expand...

+1. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Great engineering I'm sure, Mod, but I don't buy a car to marvel at the engineering in an objective way, I buy it because it's fun and engaging subjectively ie for me. By that measure I very much doubt Maserati are "way ahead of Ferrari now." Happy to be wrong, not driven this car, but I'd be quite surprised.
 
Nosevi said:
+1. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Great engineering I'm sure, Mod, but I don't buy a car to marvel at the engineering in an objective way, I buy it because it's fun and engaging subjectively ie for me. By that measure I very much doubt Maserati are "way ahead of Ferrari now." Happy to be wrong, not driven this car, but I'd be quite surprised.
Click to expand...


I Just saw the launch and the spec and the headlines I mentioned and thought - great a modern pure drivers car.

Light, powerful, no internal clutter and yet has all the tech I wish my 2008 cars now had.

Imagine going on an epic European trip and having all the stuff you need at your finger tips that no longer means having to have the other half with one of those mega atlas' or mobile phone constantly in her hands - that is surely a benefit.

When we did epic family holidays in our 456GT's in the 90's things like the luggage set helped but I cannot tell you how much easier it would have been with modern in-car electronics.

We set off the other day in our modern BMW and did 4,000miles to the Farm and Back taking a picturesque route with not a thing booked in advance. We did everything in the car via iDrive as we went.

No stress, no hassles and a delight to use.

Note: If you dont like having the screens most now are switchable to become minimal info only when on a sporting blast over a mountain pass or track / corsa mode is on.

This is equally better for that the part of the driving experience.

The tech is much more engaging and driver focussed than its early incarnations. I have lived with iDrive for example since its start and now I cant imagine my daily without it.

In my old Ferrari's I rely on bluetooth adaptors, Waze, and a wobbly smartphone holder in the redundant CD slot

In the comment way ahead - I meant re chassis, body, and interior tech.

I think Ferrari are in danger of going back to 'Great engine forget about the package its in' as per the pre-Montezemolo years.

Ferrari sports cars should be all carbon tubbed by now surely?
 
Last edited:
Whilst I like the idea of carbon fibre as its light/strong/exact shape required (for packaging other components) etc, I do wonder if its really practical on a road car. Its very susceptible to irreparable damage. All the things that make it attractive for the engineer geek, make it near impossible to repair.

I dont think the weight savings are as much as people think. I look at the chassis on my Elise and its alloy glued together it weighs 68 kg. Alfa 4c chassis is carbon and weighs 65kg. They are very similar in concept with metal sub frames at the rear for the suspension and all the oily bits. I dont have the subframe weights to hand, but the Alfa looks bigger and I am sure weighs at least 3kg more than the lotus subframe (Lotus chassis extends further back to the rear wheel centres - Alfa stops at the rear bulkhead). The Alfa also has an additional front subframe to take front suspension loads (lotus has suspension bolted onto alloy chassis, so no additional subframe)

This makes the Lotus rolling chassis a lighter weight prospect than the Alfa. These are both ROAD cars where you want to thing to last for years, which is more difficult with a carbon chassis.
 
Modificato said:
In the comment way ahead - I meant re chassis, body, and interior tech.
Click to expand...

Yep, I understand that, Mod, I'm just not convinced it'll make a material difference to the enjoyment. If you were trying to squeeze the last ounce of performance from a small displacement I could see the point but I just don't envisage I'd ever drive say a 458 or F12 and yearn for it to be faster, lighter, more nimble.


sssdu01 said:
Whilst I like the idea of carbon fibre as its light/strong/exact shape required (for packaging other components) etc, I do wonder if its really practical on a road car. Its very susceptible to irreparable damage. All the things that make it attractive for the engineer geek, make it near impossible to repair.

I dont think the weight savings are as much as people think. I look at the chassis on my Elise and its alloy glued together it weighs 68 kg. Alfa 4c chassis is carbon and weighs 65kg. They are very similar in concept with metal sub frames at the rear for the suspension and all the oily bits. I dont have the subframe weights to hand, but the Alfa looks bigger and I am sure weighs at least 3kg more than the lotus subframe (Lotus chassis extends further back to the rear wheel centres - Alfa stops at the rear bulkhead). The Alfa also has an additional front subframe to take front suspension loads (lotus has suspension bolted onto alloy chassis, so no additional subframe)

This makes the Lotus rolling chassis a lighter weight prospect than the Alfa. These are both ROAD cars where you want to thing to last for years, which is more difficult with a carbon chassis.
Click to expand...

I did wonder about what happens to a car like this in a moderate prang.
 
sssdu01 said:
Whilst I like the idea of carbon fibre as its light/strong/exact shape required (for packaging other components) etc, I do wonder if its really practical on a road car. Its very susceptible to irreparable damage. All the things that make it attractive for the engineer geek, make it near impossible to repair.

I dont think the weight savings are as much as people think. I look at the chassis on my Elise and its alloy glued together it weighs 68 kg. Alfa 4c chassis is carbon and weighs 65kg. They are very similar in concept with metal sub frames at the rear for the suspension and all the oily bits. I dont have the subframe weights to hand, but the Alfa looks bigger and I am sure weighs at least 3kg more than the lotus subframe (Lotus chassis extends further back to the rear wheel centres - Alfa stops at the rear bulkhead). The Alfa also has an additional front subframe to take front suspension loads (lotus has suspension bolted onto alloy chassis, so no additional subframe)

This makes the Lotus rolling chassis a lighter weight prospect than the Alfa. These are both ROAD cars where you want to thing to last for years, which is more difficult with a carbon chassis.
Click to expand...

All innovation curves are S-shaped and they always overlap. At first glance any new technology typically looks marginally inferior especially when compared to the best of the old but its where that tech is heading in the decades to come that matters.

Its true that extruded aluminium is a very compelling material for the engineer and in 1992/3/4 when it was developed the Elise looked the best way to follow the core Lotus philosophy. That first iteration soon had to be upgraded by 1999 for upcoming EU crash protection rules. This was only achieved by securing funding from GM which begat the VX220 as part of the deal. The series 3 chassis was shown in 2010 but it was heavier still to meet forthcoming regulations. The Elise has never been NCAP tested for good reason.

The current carbon tubs that we are seeing in road car form such as the Alfa 4C are the first 'industrialised for volume' tubs and nothing like the better optimised use of the material that is what is happening in other industries and ultra low volume production cars. If Lotus did a carbon platform it would likely be way lighter than their current and they wouldn't keep giving it sick notes to absent it from NCAP testing. So, yes it is marginal on paper but when you look at the future potential and factor in safety the Elise is a dead end and carbon tubs are the future. Regarding repair the tub plus Aluminium bolt-ons seems to be the current best solution.

The real question for me is two-fold.

1) Can Ferrari squeeze another decade out of the Alcoa platform and still retain its perceived marque position as the ultimate in performance and F1 tech for the road for another two decades?

I think NO

2) Will competitors gain an advantage, or sister companies cannibalise sales, by already having the march on the new material paradigm such that it damages the Ferrari brand

I think YES

There now also another factor to this situation that no one could have predicted....

Will the resurgent McLaren F1 team and continuing poor form of Ferrari F1 make this situation better for the Marque or perhaps even worse in the perceived standing of the brand for ultimate tech and performance?

That Maserati should have been a Rosso car IMO
 
Last edited:
I like them. Whether they'll ever be cheaper enough second-hand for me I don't know but I'd swap my 360 for one if they were.
 
Back
Top