Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Behind the Ferrari and Lamborghini rivalry (granturismoevents.com)
198 points by mhb on June 7, 2022 | hide | past | favorite | 157 comments


There is a version of the story here where Enzo is not wrong.

His #1 focus was building cars that won races. He was clear about that. And people bought his car because they won races. Lamborghini made amazing cars... that did not win many races.

There are not many accounts of Enzo being a likeable person, or a great engineer, or even a particularly good business man. But it wasn't a "mistake" how he treated Ferruccio's ideas.

So, maybe the moral of the story is listen to your customers. But it could also be: don't compromise and you'll still do fine, and they will go out and make what they want.


It depends on the culture perhaps. "not invented here syndrome" often practiced by many tech companies.

Granted, as an aside, my understanding is the 250 GTO line of models were meant as an afterthought to fund the racing side of things, but to my eye, they are the most beautiful Ferrari models. The supercar/racing inspired models often look ugly to me.


Small correction, the "250 GTO" was a specific racing model, while the "250 GT" was a series of models encompassing both roadgoing and racing cars. I'm assuming you are referring to the roadgoing 250 GT models, such as the 250 GT Pininfarina Coupe, 250 GT California Spyder etc.

The roadgoing 250 GT series was produced at the tail end of the "coachbuilt" era of automobiles, where the manufacturer sent the bare chassis and engine to a artisan shop specialized in the design and construction of the body. So you're correct that, from Ferrari's perspective, the design of these roadgoing models was secondary to the racing models. However, because it was not Ferrari's primary concern, it could be contracted out to coachbuilders such as Pininfarina. These firms were highly sophisticated designers and artisans and indeed produced some very beautiful work.


Your moniker proves to be very apt, your knowledge of this stuff is encyclopedic.


250 GTO is certainly beautiful; I’d put the 246 Dino right up against it for aesthetics among their road cars (meaning, setting aside the 335 S).


>246 Dino

One of the most beautiful cars of all time. Ironic that it was produced under the budget Dino marque; it is far prettier than anything contemporaneous that was badged as a Ferrari.


>246 Dino

And, today, fetching a boatload of money. They are very (very) high maintenance, and fragile, compared to many other Ferraris of that era.

In about 1985, I dated a woman who had one in her garage buried under a pile of clothing and fabric. I about fell over when I discovered it.

"Oh. THAT. I got it in the divorce."


> They are very (very) high maintenance, and fragile, compared to many other Ferraris of that era.

I’ve worked on them, and they’re certainly not more fragile than say a 365BB. But show me any Ferrari from that era and I’ll show you a basket case.

But the 246 is tiny inside and annoying to drive for somebody six feet tall like me. I’m also the only one, it seems, who doesn’t think they’re as pretty as everyone makes out. I think the latter 308GTB is the best looking of that line. Even of the Dinos, I like the Fiat Dino spider better.

But I realize and accept that the whole world thinks I’m wrong on this.


I don't think you're wrong. The 308 seems to be gaining in popularity and value recently after having suffered a spell of "that didn't age well" itis.

Perhaps "fragile" was the wrong word. Although I never owned one, I have had a few friends who have and they have all said something along the lines of, "the car is not a daily driver." They all owned at least two, and in one case, more than 10 vintage Ferraris.


A few years back when we were looking for a new house I noticed that almost nobody uses their garages to store cars - they are generally just full of random stuff. The one exception was an unoccupied house that had a Lamborghini Gallardo in the garage....

Eventually we decided on a house that doesn't have a garage.


Your anecdote is the best anti-marriage ad I ever saw. :)


Prenup


I saw a Dino in Amsterdam a short while ago, blue. I couldn't believe it was used as a regular car rather than just for shows and tours. It was gorgeous. And it sounded pretty smooth. Just the thought of driving such a car in traffic with the risk of an accident gives me cold sweat.


Seems like a wild oversight to not include this in an article about the rivalry


Despite the title, the article is not about the rivalry. The article is about the history of Lamborghini, up to and including the modern era. The rivalry is not really even discussed in the article, other than passing mention in the first few paragraphs.


Enzo Ferrari is such a unique character in automotive history. Not only did he piss off Ferruccio Lamborghini so much that he created a competing car company, he also enraged Henry Ford II so much that Ford decided to build the GT40 to beat Ferrari at the racetrack.

I just find it fascinating that this one man was such an arrogant jerk that built such a compelling brand that he inspired an entirely new company and all time great racing program just to get revenge against him.


Ford famously went 1,2,3 at the 1966 Le Mans. In 1967 they'd also take first place from Ferrari. Here's a great historical film on that race:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH0R4MDDgns

(Ford also took first in '68 and '69.)

The 2016 documentary The 24-Hour War is pretty good watching too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pd-TNOjHGo


Many of history's greatest minds were complete jerks. I think that Newton is the quintessential example.

But you've also got engineers, such as Edison, artists, such as Poe, inventors, such as Tesla (ha! take that Edison), and many many others.


Well there is a saying: You always create your own devils

I think it fits here.


May be Enzo, is our current generation Elon Musk, who pisses off many people too, many built a rivalry car company.


It's amazing how this story has fed into the myth making and brand for both companies. It's one of those "there are no losers here" anecdotes which can be used by both companies to attract customers (Lamborghini captured imaginations with their designs and Ferrari kept winning races). A marketer's dream scenario, so much so, it makes me question how much of this story is really true and how much this innocuous relationship between these two men really played at building their respective companies.

In any case, amazing that in 2022 there are still new articles being written about these events and still interest in hearing it. Story telling is essential in building a brand that captures public interest - those who aim to mass market their product, take notes.


Usually, such stories are planted just before someone is about to announce a new product.


It doesn't seem well enough written to be a plant. It reads like a middle school term paper or an AI assembled clickbait article.


How much of Steve Jobs vs. Bill Gates was real?


The part where both billionaires were laughing all the way to the bank.


As a writing side note since you talk about story telling. No need to place parentheses here. I enjoy reading your own comment and anything you have to say can be interesting too :)


Now I have no idea why I’m being downvoted here… Can someone tell me? I truly meant what I said without any form of sarcasm or malice. It was just a small comment to encourage him to share more even things he may consider small or not that interesting for others.


> The name “Countach”? It is pronounced coon-tasch and simply means "wow" in Italian.

In the dialect of the place, not in Italian (I'm Italian.) I learned the origin of the name a few years ago. I always thought it was an English word or something and always mispronounced it.


What I'd heard is that "countach" is the sort of expletive you'd say when you saw a beautiful woman. Although to be fair using regional slang makes some sense as the Countach dates to around the time that Italy was transitioning to Standard Italian.


According to Lamborghini themselves:

https://www.lamborghini.com/it-en/news/marcello-gandini-racc...

it was just a (most probably very local) common interjection/expletive by a mechanic (from Piedmont) that was chosen half way between a joke and because it sounded not-so-bad in English as well.

The literal meaning is "peste o contagio" (pox or contagion or disease) but it is actually used essentially in what would be "perbacco" o "accidenti" (which I believe would be in English "by jove!" or "damn!").


> Although to be fair using regional slang makes some sense as the Countach dates to around the time that Italy was transitioning to Standard Italian.

? Tuscan was the written standard for Italian since Petrarch and the Piedmontese conquest of Southern Italy was done by 1871. Admittedly colonization took a long time but it’s a very long time since anything but Tuscan has been used in official or prestige circumstances in Italian.


Sure but even sixty odd years later Mussolini was struggling to force people to drop their regional identities and adopt an Italian one. From what I can tell (as I'm neither that old nor Italian) even by the 50s or 60s it was still common to find folks who were only fluent in a regional language.

> official or prestige circumstances in Italian

Lamborghini differentiated itself from Ferrari in large part by being brash and in your face. Given what countach means I think it's pretty safe to say that they were not trying to come up with a prestigious name.


It's still the case in some regions where even young people don't have a good level of Italian as they speak dialect 90% of the time (or more). And I am not sure this will evolve as now people don't watch TV anymore (which is in Italian). There might local youtubers speaking dialect only.


As an Italian (and probably old enough) I can confirm, what made the "transition" to Italian was school but much more than that radio and television where an "official" italian is usually spoken.

In some regions (both in the north and in the south) many people are - still today - functionally bilingual, i.e. they still use largely dialect (and that is their "native" language) and switch automatically to Italian when dealing with (say) authority/government officers/foreigners or when they travel outside their region.

But I believe that at the moment the majority of people from these regions are in the "reverse" mode, i.e. they normally speak Italian but switch to the dialect in case of need or with older relatives/known friends.


I would not use the word "evolving" in this context, due to its "positive change" connotation.


This is why I didn't use "improving"


In the dialect of the Piedmont region, not the local one where Lamborghini was from (which is instead a variant of the Bolognese dialect).


Are you sure about this? I'm from Piedmont and I've never heard this word.


This is what the internet says [0], but it might be wrong. I'm from the same small town as Ferruccio himself and I can guarantee you it's not from our dialect.

0: https://www.unannoinpiemonte.com/?p=18104


No, it’s strictly a Utica expression.


I've always heard that "Countach" was translated as "holy cow" but i never fact checked.


> He would also build sports cars. And – they would be faster and better than Enzo Ferrari's.

This is what men do when they are insulted and told they can't do something.


Or they run for president.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHckZCxdRkA

Or they continue becoming even more Tucker Carlson than they already were. (side note, supposedly Stewart was super super hungry in this)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE


"And yet you still wear a bowtie," is probably the saltiest thing Stewart ever said outside of a Congressional Hearing. And Carlson got fired a week or two after that. Unfortunately he seems to have landed on his claws.

There is an alternative history in my head where Stewart moves into Graham's or McConnell's Congressional District and runs against them, on the success of his 9/11 lobbying.


> Unfortunately he seems to have landed on his claws.

Definitely got a chuckle from this, wonderfully stated. Not sure I'd heard that expression before.


Fail at what they set out to do?


If necessary, yes.


Or they take the other’s words in stride and decide their path based on what they already wanted to do anyway.


I bet behind a lot of successful men is "I'll show that mofo!!"


Also behind many unsuccessful people there is a "I'll show that mofo" but then they end up with nothing to show. Selection bias


That's not selection bias, it's the actual working definition of "success." Or at least one definition. Those who say "I'll show that mofo" but fail are not those we label "successful" in this context.

It's always more complicated than that, of course. Lamborghini built some legendary cars and established a respected global brand. But I'd be surprised if il Commendatore ever gave a hoot about them. And the company itself could teach Trump a thing or two about bankruptcy.


yeah, the "bias" aspect lies in attributing causative power to the "I'll show that mofo" attitude towards attaining success.


My argument is that in either case, spite as a motivation is a distraction from your true values.


https://www.quartamarcia.it/la-lite-tra-ferrari-e-lamborghin...

The story was quite embellished in time. Stanzani had a different, simpler recollection.

Besides, I'm Italian, born in the eighties. I may not have lived the seventies so I cannot comment about back then, but in my time there never was a perceived rivalry between the two brand.

They sit in completely separated market segments, with quite orthogonal mind shares.


Interestingly Ferrucio Lamborghini's son has commented on this blog post disputing its version of the story.


“Let me make cars. You stick to making tractors.” - Enzo Ferrari to Ferruccio Lamborghini. That's got to be an all time top 10 customer support fail. But, after that, it's how many owners for Lamborghini the car company, until AUDI AG? Maybe tractors are not so bad.

The wonder for me is the meanings of the names of the different models. "Countach" apparently sounds like "wow" in Italian. "Diablo", ok. Gallardo is after a fighting bull. Aventador is after another fighting bull. Urus, after aurochs, really big bull predecessors. Murcielago is bat, but maybe that's bull bats.


> “Let me make cars. You stick to making tractors.” - Enzo Ferrari to Ferruccio Lamborghini. That's got to be an all time top 10 customer support fail.

In these days of automated responses I'd be happy with such answer, direct and honest from the CEO, instead of a request for ID and a delay of weeks to let me know they are reviewing the case.


At least you know what you can expect. I can totally see myself building a competing product out of spite though.


And yet stuck with Jira we remain!


Here's a business plan: copy the features of RequestTracker in a different language; integrate a wiki with custom markdown-like syntax to dynamically pull data from the tickets; have a workflow to publish things from the internal side to a public side that makes it easy to audit for dynamic data flows. Design for self-federation, so that teams can have their own servers pub/sub queues, search across servers, and enact security boundaries.

You now have a product that will work for about 90% of existing JIRA users. Sell it in three versions: open-source no support, self-hosted with support-per-user, and hosted SaaS with support per team.


"The clutch is fine. You're shifting it wrong."


granted, I feel like sometimes, snobby customer service is a feature/"experience" and not a bug for certain classes of Veblen goods!


Ferrari is like this.

You have to be a "good customer" to be allowed to buy certain models. And, if you do something Modena doesn't like (e.g. put a wrap on a Ferrari), they will ban you from ever purchasing a new one from a dealer again.

Luxury watches can be similar, where people in various watch forums will proudly describe how they systematically sucked up to an authorized dealer, purchased this and that along with gifts to the salespeople, just to be privileged enough to pay for a specific, extremely high-margin, tchotchke. Not my thing, but more power to them.


NO SOUP FOR YOU!


Until you happen upon the recipes due to some random event !


Yes - I was just thinking this!


And as the current top post says, "there are no losers here". Chances are Ferrari didn't exactly suffer from being the most established one from "that magic place where all the supercars come from". Before Lamborghini, it was just some region in Italy that happened be the one where Ferraris were built.


El Diablo and Murcielago were also fighting bulls.


The bull names are intended. Since Audi took over, they name (almost) every car after a famous spanish bull.


The article feels like high-school level writing, it misses the part where the son of the corrupt Indonesian president owned the company (through a holding company in Bermuda) for a while.


Argueably tractors back the day were a lot closer to cars then they are now.


Iain Tyrell has just published a video where he is sent to authenticate the actual Ferrari 250 GT Ferruccio was pissed off with. Includes some clutch-swapping to see if any Lamborghini clutches might fit inside the Ferrari.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4n9EeiKhCA


> After some time, on to the stage comes the car that many, including myself, had on a poster in their rooms growing up. [...] – the Lamborghini Countach.

Apparently, I have never had an original thought, :) including (just now) hunting for the particular Lambo poster I had:

https://retromash.com/2017/03/15/the-hunt-for-this-amazing-l...


Nifty, that's the very one I had on my wall.


This may not be accurate, but from what I heard, it actually turned out that Lamborghini was a subject matter expert on that particular clutch, because it also happened to be used in some of his tractors. He tore down the failed Ferrari and found exactly what the actual third-party manufacturer of the clutch was. He was not exactly happy about it.


Race cars are not made for long service intervals. If you have to replace the clutch plates after each race, that's quite acceptable. Formula I cars used to need a new engine for each race, although things have improved a bit.


I'm surprised how few cars this is in total. It's kind of cool the brand has such a big impact with only low thousands of cars.


Ferrari and Lamborghini each sell about 10k cars a year. What's more impressive is Pagani and Koenigsegg each only made about 200 cars ever.


It took Bugatti 9 years to shift their 450 Veyron.

Though obviously these were different and I guess leaner times, the Chiron, much less of a loss leader (Veyrons supposedly cost VW $5 millions a piece, the retail price of the base model was $1 million) sold 200 units before the first one made it to a client, and the 500th (and last) unit was confirmed sold in January 2022, just under 6 years after the original announcement.


The engine in the later Bugattis is the same engine from the Veyron (modified but largely the same I understand). So the cost of development when down on follow up cars.


Koenigsegg will produce 300 of its latest hypercar, the (4 seater!) Gemera [1], which looks like having the most interesting powertrain ever.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_Gemera


Koenigsegg will produce 300 of its latest hypercar, the Gemera [1], which looks like having the most interesting powertrain.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_Gemera


Lamborghinis are ERC721s. Toyotos are ERC20s.


Grand Prix (1967), at the Ferrari factory:

"What means far more to me than anything else is: our good name! Our reputation represents desire for perfection of the highest quality. I gamble that reputation gladly, because I have absolute faith in every car that leaves this factory. But I will not risk it on a driver in whom I cannot have an equal faith. There are fewer than thirty men in the world qualified to drive Formula One; a mere half-dozen, perhaps, to win. At this moment, I am inclined to think you are not one of them."

Ferrari was the shiznit for me after I saw that movie.


35 years ago, people in my country were dreaming about Renault, Citroen, Peugeot, Volkswagen. Those were our car legends. They were as hard to obtain as Lamborghini and Ferrari in rich countries.


It's a story as old as time.

You can choose to work together, or not.


I found out about this rivalry through the YouTube video Lamborghini: Never Insult a Tractor Tycoon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5p4sAkjLSI. It was a pretty good little documentary.


For the person who has owned neither marque, it's only a question of feeling.

Ferrari has always been beautiful and performance driven.

Lamborghini has been design driven. Performance is there, but with more conditions.

If you want iconic, you'll have more choices with Lamboroghini. If you want elegant and mechanically elegant, you _usually_ want Ferrari.

Then there are specific models...

Ferrari 250, in its various forms is a Mona Lisa to the viewers who appreciate it. Then there was the Testarossa, and then the F40. After that, the designs were also great, but they weren't so special at the right time.

For Lambo, you have the Miura, Countach (probably the most recognizable supercar design of all time), and the Diablo.

For the car enthusiast, it's rarely a direct comparison. At times one has the mechanical advantage, and at other times is a design appeal.


Pretty much every comment on this thread comparing Ferraris to Lamborghinis is overgeneralized and outdated.

It really just depends on the era and the specific models you're comparing.

Also the founders' original philosophies have long been diluted and that's not necessarily a bad thing for customers.


Buy a Ferrari if you want to race, buy a Lamborghini if you want to shop on Rodeo drive.


You have that backwards, at least in terms of production road cars.

You know what you will never see? A Ferrari performance-tested against another car by a TV program or newspaper or magazine publisher. They prohibit journalists from doing head-to-head comparison testing against other brands because they didn't perform that well compared to, well, everything else.

Top Gear finally got so sick of their bullshit that they very famously went public, describing all the things Ferrari would do when they delivered a car for review. This including spending days testing the car around the Top Gear test track themselves, pouring over data, adjusting everything on the car specifically for their test track. Something no other car company did, and something they would never do for an owner of a street car. I believe they also put on special, non-stock tires, but I could be wrong.

They did it because Top Gear was the one outlet they couldn't say no to such a test. So they cheated. The one time Ferrari was forced to actually submit to a performance test, they cheated.

The result? Ferrari not only stopped providing Top Gear with cars, they forbade customers from loaning or renting a car to Top Gear for test or review. Anyone found to have provided a vehicle to Top Gear would lose the right to purchase a new Ferrari for life.

Ferrari also banned Chris Harris, another famous British motoring journalist, after he also revealed that Ferrari were equipping and tuning their press cars differently than customer cars.

Ferrari also refuses to test or publish lap times at the Nurburgring:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/8147/ferrari-reminds-us-it-doe...

Yes, 'ring times can be a bit silly, but like racing, they're a statement of what the manufacturer is capable of. Ferrari refuses to play games, and oh hey, what do you know: the fastest ferrari timed around the course is slower than a whole slew of Porsches: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_N%C3%BCrburgring_Nords...


Chris Harris drifting Ferraris in slow motion is some of the best car content on Youtube. Terrible to hear they banned him, but unsurprising. I also watched a segment where someone interviewed Jay Leno about why he doesn't own a Ferrari and he went on a rant about their snobbish behaviour, but it sounded like he was still upset after trying to buy one in the 80s/90s. Terrible customer service/arrogance, when you burn popular "car culture ambassadors" like these.

I fell in love with Lamborghinis when I was young (late Countach/early Diablo era) so I've always preferred their style, but now with their extended period of German ownership they are quite credible performance cars as well (Audi Le Mans/GT influence, perhaps?).


> the fastest ferrari timed around the course is slower than a whole slew of Porsches

I've driven quite a few Porsches and Ferraris, from 1970's models through modern ones and I'll almost always agree the Porsche is the better car. Usually faster, drives better, handles better, easier to work on, and easier to get parts for. But... it's usually the Ferrari that I want to take home. I've owned and enjoyed a few different Porsches, but my favorite car I've ever owned was a '95 Ferrari F355 Spider that would get its butt kicked by a Porsche 993 Turbo of the same era.


I've driven an F355 and owned a couple of 308s. The 981S made me lose interest in all of them. It has almost all of the positive qualities of both lines.


Expensive hobby where I live!


Only relatively speaking. My low-end two-seat Porsche has saved me three or four times its price in more expensive cars.

These days, automotive engineering is the art and science of using math to cope with regulation. Nobody does it like the Germans... legally or otherwise.


The Cayman is the best car I've ever driven from a handling perspective. But I ended up getting a 4 seater because of the kids.


Jay Leno famously has similar opinions of Ferarri as a vendor.


A Porsche is better in every aspect except it's not a Ferrari.


Since the f430 or maybe the 458 all Ferraris are reliable and use tons of parts shared with other car brands. Brakes, fuel systems, gearboxes (from 458) and more. Electronics are all robust and follow the same design philosophy as for example Porsche. Yes broken carbon ceramic disc or gearbox issues can cost you a lot. But it happens with any other brand as well.


Anyone found to have provided a vehicle to Top Gear would lose the right to purchase a new Ferrari for life.

How does it work in practice? Is that legal in every country they operate? What prevents someone paying a middle man to buy a Ferrari then sell it to them?


Nothing but being able to purchase a Ferrari directly is somewhat of an earned "privilege".

Money isn't enough if you want to purchase something like the new SF90 Stradale brand new, you essentially need to be offered the opportunity to buy one by Ferrari Corporate. Oh and you gain that by buying quite a number of used Ferraris and less desirable new Ferraris via your dealership until someone "notices" your "love of the brand".

If this sounds like gatekeepy bullshit, it is.


I have also heard they are unreliable as fuck from multiple people.


I also heard that warning about Alfa Romeos. I drove mine 124K miles over 11 years with normal maintenance (all easily DIY) and only one failure in that time (a Bosch distributor broke internally, so nothing Alfa-specific).

If a long-term owner told you that, by all means consider it; if a non-owner (including a mechanic) tells you second/third-hand horror stories, I’d be pretty inclined to ignore them.


I agree on non-owners, but an experienced independent mechanic who knows the marque is probably your best bet for reliability information. Non-owners usually don't know anything, and you'll always have lucky and unlucky owners, but the specialty mechanics see the cars day in and day out and know their issues.


But the specialty mechanic has an incentive to lie, if he thinks you're going to bring the car to him for service. ;)


I almost bought an alfa romeo once, but I was too young and didn't think I'd be able to be a garage mechanic at all. I vividly recall the guy had so many parts thrown in for free, he just got too old to lie underneath his car. It's a purchase I still regret to have passed on.


I've owned two Alfas (one of which I still have). The reputation for poor reliability is very well deserved in my experience, and we are very well known by the local mechanics. It varied a bit by model - but overall I think it's a fair assessment.

Like so many things these reputations form for good reasons - you may get lucky and have no particular problems with an individual example but that doesn't mean the reputation isn't deserved.


It depends greatly on the model AND on the country it was made for (the ones made for export were much better than "italian local market" ones).

As (by now historical) anecdata I owned an Alfetta (2000, gasoline, "America") for several years (used 50% with my father) we made 250,000 km with the original engine, then we put an used (from a wreckage) one with alredy 66,000 km and drove it for another 100,000 km or so when we had an issue with the gearbox/transmission and the car was overall too old to be worth the repair, but the body was in very good condition (car was around 15 years old).

Later I drove for a few years a 75 (bought used with already 90,000 km, "italian") and while I had no particular issues (engine and mechanics in general) up to the 150,000/200,000 km, the body had lots of issues with rust/corrosion after 6-7 years.

I would not call any of them "unreliable", they needed some little maintenance, but I would say no more than other make/models of those years (those were the '80's and early '90's).

Later Alfa Romeo became essentially "FIAT with another name" and reliability was essentially the same as the FIATs (rather poor, but not as bad as they are sometimes depicted).


There was an interview with Gordon Murray, where he was comparison testing supercars of the era while designing the McLaren F1...his comment on the Ferarri F40 (I think) was "well, we realized we couldn't build one in our shop if we tried, because we didn't have anyone that would weld that badly..."


Modern Ferraris are actually pretty reliable as supercars go. A few years ago Ferrari started included free maintenance for any new Ferrari for 7 years, so most owners are only really paying for tires and gas.

Not to say the cars are perfect, but most owners end up with relatively hassle-free ownership experiences these days.


Do you know which Top Gear episode did this?


Modern Ferraris are amazing driver's cars. To this day, the single best driving experience I've ever had was in a 458 Speciale. There are better engineered cars, there are faster cars, there are more comfortable cars, but this to me is the embodiment of what a car can do. It is just an amazing feeling to drive it. It's like using a precision instrument that somehow immediately becomes an extension of your body. It's really uncanny.

None of the Lamborghini's I was fortunate enough to drive came close to this.


"It's not the best engineered, it's not the fastest, it's not he most comfortable, but..."

Perfectly summed up Ferraris: gorgeous, nice-sounding marketing fluff.


There’s something visceral about being in one. It’s like a living animal that just wants to go-go-go.

Who cares if it’s slower around a track, unless you’re actually going around a track for some reason.


I'm not personally a ferrari fan, but I can understand the appeal. you can buy cars for $50k that are already much too fast to fully enjoy on public roads, and realistically, $250k+ cars are going to spend most of their lives in garages. I suppose they might as well look good while they're doing it?


Character forgives nearly any flaw in a car. Sometimes it isn't about going fast, it's about feeling involved and necessary to the process of driving.


Nah, it’s a real thing. You know how some NBA player can be top 10 (but not #1) in scoring, assists, rebounds, and steals? Good chance he’ll win the MVP.


It's not marketing. Design matters.

Germans have many qualities but design is just not one of them. They just can't do it and especially Porsche they are still running with the elongated Beetle design from the 1940s. Over at Porsche they are making the same car over and over again ever since the 1940s Beetle.

Once you remove the Porsche brand what do the Germans have left which can compete with Ferrari? Audi R8?

Have you seen the new Daytona FP3? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA66mWhznVs

Porsche doesn't even dream about making something like that.

In a sense it's true that the supercar battle is Ferrari vs. Lamborghini. They are the only game in town because design matters. The former is timeless and elegant and the latter aggressive and bold...but they are both aestetically pleasing and merit being in an art museum.


Porsche doesn't dream of making something like the FP3 because their 'elongated beetle design' is still curb stomping almost every other competitor into the ground. McLaren is essentially their only real competition, if we aren't counting multimillion dollar vehicles like a Rimac or Bugatti. Porsche still holds the Nurburgring lap time title with their GT2 RS; and their GT3 and GT3 RS (multiple generations) as well as the ol' 918 Spyder are still among the top times posted. As far as I'm aware there's not a single ferrari that's cracked 7:00 on the lap.

FWIW, I think the GT3 RS is probably the pinnacle of functional design (among commonly-known models). It's aggressively winged, but the original design is literally decades old. Timeless and elegant. I'd take the Porsche 10000 times out of 10 over a Ferrari.

Edit: You are also aware that the V10 in the Audi R8 is the same engine that powers Lamborghini's, right? Like almost all engines (e.g. The small block LS, the ford 5.0, the subaru 2L boxer), it's an older design that's been updated as needed.


> Porsche still holds the Nurburgring lap time title with their GT2 RS; and their GT3 and GT3 RS (multiple generations)

When you look at car magazine lap times the Porsche is like 1 second faster than an equivalent Ferrari.

Porsche Gt2RS in 6.58,28 : https://youtu.be/sl0HtR6MaXs

Ferrari 488 Pista in 7.00,03: https://youtu.be/nblOLdCUzA0

Over a 10 miles long track . They are essentially the same lap time, and why it wouldn't be? This ain't string theory. 2 cars with approximately the same power:weight ratio are going to perform the same.

This is normal, what is not normal is that once you have done your lap you have to hop out and actually look at the Porsche elongated Beetle design and wonder why Porsche hasn't found any new design language ever since 1940...whereas when you pop out of the Ferrari 488 and look at it a non-zero part of your brain wants to make out with it. Same goes for a Lamborghini, regadless of the engine being the same of an R8 and also the power:weight ratio for that matter.

Design matters. GM understood that and they blew it out of the park with the new Corvette C8, they understood they needed something new as opposed to making the same car over and over again


The lap was 6:43. Not 6:58. Might wanna do some research there.

Also, the new C8 looks like crap with those massive side pods and enormous trunk/rear. It's been panned widely for that. Front looks okay, though.

Your argument is frankly stupid because the 911 in higher trims is consistently an extremely sought after vehicle, year after year. It's good looking, and it's not broken, and they won't 'fix' it. There's nothing to fix. Stop with your inane attempt to pass off 'neat', or debatably good looking bodywork, as what makes a supercar a supercar. It betrays your lack of knowledge.


> The lap was 6:43. Not 6:58

I don't trust Porsche, like I don't trust Ferrari or Lamborghini or Corvette. Carmakers cannot be trusted.

They can use custom specs and/or slick tires and you'd not be the wiser.

On the other hand I trust a publication such as Sport-Auto.de which uses a regular car, Michelin tires and the same driver for each and every tests. The only variable is the car and the Nordshleife as well as wind/track temperature. Plus they record the attempt as you can see.

When Sport-Auto.de driver made the lap times it was 6.58.22 vs. 7.00.03

Again. Not string theory. The Pista and the Gt2RS have basically the same weight:power ratio

If Ferrari sent their team to Germany doing all sorts of magic to optimize Nordshleife laptimes they'd come up with a 6:44 too.

If anything it's Porsche using marketing gimmicks to sell more cars, not Ferrari. Lamborghini is guilty of this too. Every manufacturer which sends its team and driver to Nordshleife, Hockenheim, Silverstone etc. is using it as a marketing gimmick.

Such cars are expensive BUT not that expensive that publications won't get their hands on them, just let the publications do the lap timing.

> Lack of knowledge

Clarkson said it best: "Porsches are for guys who only have sex in the missionary position, if they manage to get any pus*y at all"


A Porsche 911 looks far better to me than any of the cars you've listed. It's timeless.

Edit: To be honest the only ferrari design I like is the F40.


I think there can be one argument that apply to many German brands: they perfect and produce their “Model 100” little too much and too many for a brand to diverge later. A driving 944 sells for sometimes as low as $5k, literal wreck of a 911 goes twice that.


I’ve driven multiple Ferraris and Lamborghini on various tracks for many hours. I agree that Ferraris are better on the track in general: historically they’ve been lighter and RWD vs AWD. You’re still more likely to see them during track days than Lambos and Ferrari as a company does more racing. The track-oriented models like 458 Speciale (I haven’t driven it) are usually even more visceral because of a louder exhaust note, harder suspension, being lighter and lower, racing seats, etc.


Ferrari got rid of the gearshift :-(


I like driving manual as much as the next person (and have been for 25 years), but I full well acknowledge that I'd be way out of my depth driving any modern Ferrari.

And let's be honest: if you're worried about lap times, the flappy paddle gearbox is faster. It will never replace the joy of rowing your own gears or nailing a downshift, but it's almost certainly a win in terms of reliability under real world drivers and pace under all drivers.


Agreed 100%. I learned to drive manual, but I'd never go back to it :)

There's not a chance in hell I could ever learn to switch as fast as a flappy paddle in a modern supercar.


The flappy paddle is cheating and boring.

You gotta master the heal-toe brake double-clutch downshift going into a turn, or you're not a real driver.


I'm not saying it's not, but I stand by my claim (completely unsupported by evidence, I'll admit) that somewhere between 4 and 6 nines of drivers are completely outclassed and lack the experience to drive a 500hp+ car competently, nevermind get the most out of it on a track, with a manual.

I owned an '86 Subaru BRAT with an EJ22 swap and a cranky transmission (heel-toe and double clutching required down into 1 and 2), and truly nailing a smooth 3-2 downshift with the transmission shifting sweetly into 2 was an occasion to be celebrated. I am 100% confident that I'd nail it less than 1/10th as often in any modern supercar with a manual.

I've also driven an E36 M3 (US spec) and a 458. I know I lack the training and experience to stay ahead of either of them on the limit. I suspect most other people do too.


My car is much more powerful than my expertise. I have a lot of fun with it, but I'm careful to stay within my skill level. The machinist who built my engine said he wouldn't have done it if I was under 40.

I enjoy practicing double-clutching heel-toeing downshifting. Paddle shifters, phooey.


Every F1 pilot on the planet just might disagree that they aren’t real drivers.

Technology has moved on.


> Technology has moved on.

A number of technologies have been banned from F1 because they were too good. (Other sports, too, like aluminum bats in major league baseball.)

When an AI bot is driving the car, are you still going to watch F1?


> Technology has moved on.

Well, how far do you want to take that argument? One could argue the last time high performance piston engine engineering actually mattered was in the aero engines of the 1940'ies. Then you had the might of nation states pouring resources (directly, or indirectly through buying lots of them) into making the absolutely highest performing (in terms of power/weight) engines. With some consideration to reliability, of course, and relatively little consideration to cost. Producing masterpieces like the mighty R-2800.

After that the serious development money went into turbines. Sure, piston engine development didn't stop, but the development going into "performance at any cost" was a pittance compared to other priorities.


Ferruccio Lamborghini was primarily interested in building comfortable, quick and stylish GT cars, not high performance sports cars or racing cars. In contrast, Enzo Ferrari was interested in producing road cars to fund the racing division of the company.

From the present-day, it's easy to see why Lamborghini and Ferrari are "paired." Both are merchandising and branding behemoths, both produce thoroughly modern, refined sports cars that are often cross-shopped against each other. However, in the 1960s and 1970s these companies were definitely not two sides of the same coin, being run by idiosyncratic personalities with differing priorities. While the Miura and Countach are best remembered today, Lamborghini struggled tremendously to break in to the luxury GT market with the 350 GT, 400 GT, Islero, Jarama and Espada. They also tried and failed to compete with the Porsche 911 using the Urraco. Economic and manufacturing issues prevented Lamborghini from achieving lasting profitability in these markets. Thus, as described in the article, Lamborghini struggled through the 70s and 80s. In contrast, Ferrari was continually buoyed by positive publicity from racing and weathered the oil crisis using funding provided by Fiat.

One part of the story that is glossed over by the article is the engineering team behind the early Lamborghini cars. The legendary popularity of the Miura and Countach and their crucial role in the Lamborghini story overshadow the fact that Ferruccio was not initially supportive of these cars, or of the idea of building racing-inspired high performance sports cars at all. In particular, the Miura was an "after-hours" project of three talented engineers: Gian Paolo Dallara, Paolo Stanzani and Bob Wallace. These three all had keen interest in racing cars and developed the Miura chassis without official support. After the completed chassis was shown at the 1966 Geneva Auto Show, favorable public response led Ferruccio to approve a production version. The success of the Miura allowed the small Lamborghini engineering team and body designer Gandini to have creative freedom in designing the Countach. However, if the company stayed true to Ferruccio's original goals and these engineers were not allowed to "play", these remarkable models would not exist at all.

The article's states that ATS designed and built early Lamborghinis. This is historically inaccurate. The only ATS member that had a significant relationship with Lamborghini was Giotto Bizzarrini, who designed the V12 engine used in the 350 GT and subsequently refined and updated for use in many other Lamborghini models. Bizzarrini's association with Lamborghini was very brief, most likely only consisting of providing the engine design as a deliverable. The four person team of Bizzarrini, Dallara, Stanzani, and Wallace were responsible for the engineering of the early Lamborghini cars, not ATS.

There's also an interesting story here behind the article's brief mention of the 1961 walkout/"palace revolt" where some of the leading technical talent left Ferrari and formed ATS. While this was a blow in the short term, Ferrari very quickly filled the void with a young engineer named Mauro Forghieri who became one of the most successful technical directors in the company's history. Enzo's willingness to bring in new, young talent when existing employees (and drivers!) proved unsatisfactory is a major theme in the company's history. Arguably, this tendency contributed to the company and team's ability to stay solvent and successful for so long under Enzo's management.


  > Ferruccio Lamborghini was primarily interested in building comfortable, quick and stylish GT cars
I agree with you about "quick and stylish GT cars", but "comfortable" is not a word that I'd associate with the only Lamborghini I know. The Countach was very uncomfortable, both to sit in and also to ingress and egress. The pedals are not in line with the seat, the sill is as wide as a moat, and there is no visibility behind the door, even the mirrors are near-useless.


Yeah, Countaches are definitely not comfortable cars. As I mention later in the comment, the original intentions of Mr. Lamborghini were somewhat at odds with what Lamborghini the company became famous for after the success of the Miura and the Countach. The engineers that Lamborghini hired to make his luxe GT cars were more interested in building racing cars. Mr. Lamborghini gave them room to experiment, and they built a uncompromising, racing-inspired sports car in the Miura. This led on the the even more successful Countach. Good thing too, as the Lamborghini GT models (350 GT, 400 GT, Islero, Jarama, Espada) were never really luxurious or well constructed enough to compete with the likes of Mercedes and Jaguar. So Mr. Lamborghini's willingness to compromise and follow his engineers' vision of making radical, uncomfortable sports cars probably saved the company. They managed to limp along with the Countach design almost to the 90s. Meanwhile, the GT models that Mr. Lamborghini loved were out of production by the end of the 70s and are all fairly obscure today.


I see, thanks. And by the way, I never understood the Urraco. I've never actually ever seen one, but from what I've read I had never understood why the car existed until you mentioned that it was poised against the 911. Thank you.


You seem pretty knowledgeable about this stuff. Any book or other material recommendations detailing the history of both brands? The rivalry is legendary, but seeing results across decades trying to outdo each other and the market is pretty interesting I’m sure.


I'm not aware of any book specifically addressing the rivalry or both brands at once. My opinion is that this rivalry mostly exists in the press and in the public imagination and therefore would make poor fodder for a book. In contrast, Ferrari's dealings with Ford both on and off the racetrack are much more interesting, and have generated a lot of writing as well as the recent movie.

My #1 book recommendation would be Luca Dal Monte's excellent recent biography on Enzo Ferrari. In a field dominated by shallow coffee table books and breathless romanticism, it's a comprehensive, scholarly history that remains very readable. Not much material on Lamborghini, though. Unfortunately like many auto books it is now out of print and prices are in "collector" territory. Still worth picking up if you can.


Not exactly related to the article, but is Enzo Ferrari's links with Mussolini and his party being somewhat airbrushed away in popular imagination? Enzo Ferrari's wikipedia page for example barely mentions that.


> After some time, on to the stage comes the car that many, including myself, had on a poster in their rooms growing up.

One of my favorite posters growing up was a white Countach, about five feet long by maybe two feet high. I had a much smaller print of a Ferrari F40. The appeal for a kid like me, of course, being that each had some claim to the fastest production car at some point.

It's kind of amazing to me that over sixteen years only about 2,000 were made. By comparison, there were about 9,000 DeLoreans in three years.


Perhaps we should document the associations between well known figures in our field/industry/business and these cars?

I'll start:

Iann Barron (Elliot, CTL, Inmos) had a white Countach as his daily driver. It was famously unreliable: supposedly the oil pan separated from the engine once while moving, and famously fast on the M4.


Outrageous ego is sort of a pre-requisit if you want to outlive a established dogma/organization you are going up against, which will punnish non-conformity on every step - either that or you are doing a sort of "secret agent" subversion with a cell like structure on the inside.


Imagine if it was the other way around and a disappointed Enzo Ferrari started to make tractors. :D


You're one of today's lucky 10,000!

https://www.ferraritractor.com/


Same family name, same region, but apparently that company had already been making tractors for a few years when Lamborghini's proposals were dismissed.


Perhaps this should now read "Fiat and Volkswagen rivalry" :-P


What a great story for a movie! Alright you armchair casting directors, who would play Ferruccio and who would play Enzo?


I'll start a spite ~store~ car.


Hmm, I think I’d buy Lamborghinis for the same reason I buy AMD over Intel.


Which is?


They both sound terrible and shouldn't be allowed off a racetrack! :P


The only problem with a Lambo is it's not a Ferrari.


You're failing to see their practicality, which they both lack in spades.[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIahBbDxfG0


Don't care. Ferrari or nothing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: