Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Maserati MC-20

  1. #11
    A348W's Avatar
    A348W is offline Rear lights like a farm gate - The Ferrari 348 Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Wiltshire
    Name
    Adrian
    Posts
    932

    Default

    Interesting take on the "digital" thing!

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/n...ver-technology

  2. #12
    sssdu01 is offline No I'm Spartacus Committee Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Gloucestershire UK
    Name
    Simon Dutton
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    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.

  3. #13
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline Post whore with no life, no friends, and a problem fitting into normal social circles Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    11,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modificato View Post
    In the comment way ahead - I meant re chassis, body, and interior tech.
    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.


    Quote Originally Posted by sssdu01 View Post
    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.
    I did wonder about what happens to a car like this in a moderate prang.

  4. #14
    Modificato is offline Looks like a 308 to me? -The Ferrari 288 GTO Club Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    north west
    Name
    CPD
    Posts
    2,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sssdu01 View Post
    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.
    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 by Modificato; 18-09-2020 at 08:51 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. maserati SD3?
    By birdseye in forum Technical Q & A
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-02-2017, 07:02 PM
  2. Maserati
    By Cochst in forum Ferrari Talk
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 25-04-2016, 02:51 PM
  3. Maserati help
    By Fraccie in forum Other bikes, cars and toys
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-01-2008, 01:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •