Ferrari's Supercar Revolution 

Any cool trivia?

@@caledonianrailway1233 Probably the weirdest one is the bag or bladder fuel tank of the EU-spec cars vs. the regular aluminium tank for the US-cars; then there's the plexiglass (or sth. similar) windows; or the fact that it was NOT the fastest car in the world until the launch of the Diablo since the RUF CTR Yellowbird was much faster than both and Porsche couldn't be bothered to officially test top speeds for the 959 Sport and other 959 optional power upgrades.

Still my dream car since I learned about it when I was small

I saw one filling up at a gas station in Hemet, CA USA in about 1989 or 1990.

+1

Lol never expected to see you here. - Zipper

@@joelrodriguez9611 I am omnipresent 🗿

Same here

that's not an unpopular opinion at all

Me too!

I don't think automobillistic ever covers smaller series but there was a interesting development where people started running more front raked setups, rear suspension, geometry, springs lower/softer more like a FR, and i know that won and podiumed countless titles. I believe the MR-S is the main one that still runs rear raked like most MR. It started so far as i know with a guy named Steve who at time went by name XHEAD online, previous x1/9 guy in national series autocross. More people tried it and worked really well, mkii made 1993 or later can even achieve similar setup with lowered rear and increased tire diameter. They drive a bit like fast-drift car, or maybe a drag car? but you don't really drift them so much since that would burn out the rear tires extremely quickly, but regardless the changes in vehicle setup helped fuel a lot of MR2 entries in various classes at highest levels stateside. Outside that first gen had a larger following internationally in rally cross, and some gymkhana style events, mr-s is the main one with interesting time attack history.

YEAH

Have u seen Jason Cammisa's video on it? It's awesome

Not bad top 3

Mclaren f1 is one of my favourites as well

Why limited them to 3? You wouldn’t be able to own one anyway 😜. My list was a long one😂

@@oceanthirteen1628 I only listed TOP 3, forgot to mention. I have many other favourites.

@@oceanthirteen1628 who cares?

The 911 GT1 was still the better race car then the f40. It was IMSA champion for a couple of years and it won le mans despite the F1 GTR and Clk GT1 being way better.......

Porsche GT1 was way later, same time as F50.

@@MiguelGarcia-vj7oo I just hate 911s for filling up half the grid of any 90s sportscar race with bug eyed roadblocks

​@@samacw if you were a motorsport enthusiast you should know by now that the 911 has covered half the field since it's creation in 1964. From 60,70s Trans Am, 70s, 80s IMSA, group 5 sports endurance, GT2, BPR series, ALMS, and the DRM the 911 dominated or at the very least was very race successful. From beating muscle cars with double the HP in 70s IMSA to beating prototypes in Daytona, Le Mans the very last targa Florio. The 911 dominated. And because of that no other car has been handicapped, banned and outlawed more In motorsports then the 911. Like it or not it's been the trend since it's first race in the Trans Am series or monte carlo. BTW the 911 GT1 is not a 911. It's a parts bin prototype that was homologated. Underpinnings from the 962 group C car. Engine from the 911 or from canceled Indy project I think, etc, etc.......

It would have been Porsche 959 or more accurately the circuit version of the car the Porsche 961 would have been F40's competition at if we had a quote on quote "GT 1 Series in 1988" ironically that would have been a GT series run to Group B regulations yes that Group B. I imagine the series would of consistted of Porsche 961s, likely a RWD Version of the Ford RS200, the Jaguar XJ220 as the car was originally designed with the still born Group B GT class in mind and the Lamborgini Countact 5000 quattrovalvole another car that was conceived for the Stillborn class. Finally at that point I imagine that privateers of the era would be using the older Ferrari 288 GTOs, Porsche 911 Turbos possibly also the Lotus Esprit and some madlads may still be using a massively moddfied version of Lancia 037 I mean some nutter tried to use one in the Japanese GT Championship in 1994!!! 😂😂😂

The F50 is far from being kind to the driver. The engine is mounted directly to the tub and as a result, your whole body will vibrate every time you step on the throttle

@@kilotiger7780 eyh it's still a Ferrari !

How do you mean? Even with it's age, the F40 out qualified the McLaren at Le Mans and still won a round of the BPR series.

yea, but with an escalade-v you gotta brake like a km before a turn))

facts

Excellent

I kind of wish they threw the 4.0 TT v8 instead of the v6

What about Testarossa OUTRUN GT2?

Agree. So did 250 GTO from Outrun 2.

Skill issue detected

​@@Ecosupremo-Ecosupremow

While the 288 GTO was designed around the Group B rules, and was used as a test bed for some of the F40's development process, the F40 itself was not built to Group B specification. Could it have been a consideration during pre 1986 development? Maybe, but we only have Ferrari's word on it, and they say it wasn't designed for racing. Edit: yes they homologated it in 1989, after the production of the LM - as the video discusses

The f40 was never a group b car

​@@automobilistic it seems I stand corrected then, learn something new every day

@@TinyBearTim the Group B homologation certificate says otherwise, although never raced due to being late it technically still is a Group B car

@@automobilisticI have a feeling Ferrari won’t admit that the f40 came about as a group s prototype. Ferrari wanted the badge on winning race cars and having Lancia outshine them + with the Lancia ECV prototype being made it only makes since. Ferrari is a big fan of having same ownership different team company’s racing together. Ferrari had a rivalry with Audi aswell and they were working on the sport Quattro RS 002. The timelines add up since toyota was creating the 222B aswell. Is it plausible a new supercar racing series where it could easily get dethroned was coming out and Ferrari said no? No way lol. The f40 had to be the planned group S car.

Respectfully, I don't think that models like the Mondial, the 400 or the 412 were that sporty and race cars for the road. Maybe the top models were, but the philosophy rather was to sell road cars to finance the racing program. There was no attempt to beat the 959. This would have been with the 288 GTO Evoluzione with the Group B version being developed, but since that category died, there was no use for it really. So the F40 was built on that base. If the F40 truly was built to compete with the 959, it would have driven in very similar categories and the cars would have had similar concepts. However, the cars are so completely different to each other, bar the engine and power stats, that it's difficult to compare them. The 959 is not credited with the better top speed. Actually, the F40 has the better top speed. The F40 never was as fast as the 959 from 0-100 kph, and honestly it's not surprising considering the F40 is rear-wheel drive only with the Porsche being all-wheel driven. The first two gears of the F50 were not properly suited to bring the traction to the ground. However, the 100-200 kph stat is very impressive with 6.4 seconds, and from 0-200 kph, the F40 was with 11.0s much faster than the 959 which needed 13.3s for this. While the F40 did not reach 201 mph, or 324 kph, like advertised, it did reach 199 mph as auto motor & sport reported. With this, it also beats the 959 top speed of 197 mph slightly. It does not beat the top speed of the 959S though, the souped up sportier version of the 959, which I honestly would expect from a car with more power and a better cw value. As you also mentioned, the racing program started very late and was rather an afterthought. So it's not surprising that an old car without much backing of the manufacturer has worse results than the 959/961 which had factory backed racing programs and was used as soon as it was developed. Considering the low effort that went into the development of the race cars (which were based on the road cars instead of being purposely built and designed as race cars mainly), it's still a respectable effort, with getting a win in the quite competitive BPR championship as a 10 year old car. One has to imagine of what the F40 would have been able to achieve if it was designed as a race car first and foremost and if Ferrari would have put more effort into racing this car. And about the F1 outmatching the F40... yeah, the F1 brutally outmatched every car at that time and it remained the benchmark for over 10 years until the Bugatti Veyron arrived (well, beating it in top speed at least). I think automobilistic described it perfectly with how he explained the story.

​@@ConfiUser3 I totally agree, in fact I wrote there were already poor Ferrari road cars around when the project F40 started. And that was the point, as Materazzi explain in a video (by Davide Cironi), it started for that exact reasons: Ferraris were loosing appeal as performance cars, there was a lot better around, and Porsche just made the best street cars ever, the more advanced, fast, innovative. F40 had to beat the 959, not on the tracks or rally (group B was already dead), that's the point. It only had to be fastest on the charts. But never did it on a proper speed test, as you can control on the list of official speed records. 959 is on the list, credited as the fastest car of the time, F40 not because never did properly, so has no official record, only private tests with no certification. And was a big failure, because 959 was handicapped by 4wd, so it should have been easy for F40 to beat in top speed. The racing program started very late because there was little to no interest from the company, Enzo was dead and the car already had a great response from the market, and that was the only real goal for the car. And that became the modern trend for this kind of top supercars, they're built to be full of hps and sold at higher price possible. Since then only McLaren F1 has had a proper race program and won big on tracks, so by now is the last supercar to have achieved a race pedigree, and that's why is rightly considered the best car ever. Veyron and Chiron are tumors on 4 wheels, pure brute force and lots of electronics to prevent the driver from being killed by the ridiculous amount of power. It is the aesthetics of modern bodybuilding: exasperated exhibitionism of monstrosity in contempt of the sense of proportion and elegance. Steroids on wheels. It's sick and sad.

Most of its wins were in under-contested regional championships unfortunately. Its FIA GT and JGTC wins, though small in number, were far more impressive

@@automobilistic ok

Gordon actually liked the f40 best out of all the super cars he just couldn't believe the terrible build quality for something so expensive and he doesn't like turbos.

1) the other racing variants fall under the same "F40 LM" internal codes to my knowledge, and while various teams badged them differently, for the sake of a 10 minute video the "GTE" cars are much the same. Apologies for the incorrect pronunciation, that is my bad. 2) The F40 was not developed as a Group B car. The 288 GTO was and that car aided development of the F40, but the F40 itself was not built to Group B specification. 3) The video does mention more than in passing the F40s regional GT career.

400k for the most beautiful piece of artwork to sit on four wheels

Let me rephrase that 400000 dollar for a sweatbox machine with no forgiveness but ultimate driving pleasure

Source? Every source I have seen has quoted road car kerb weight at between 1250 and 1350kg depending on the market

Earlier today Davide Cironi posted an interview with Ferrari test driver Dario Benuzzi who worked extensively on the F40 and he said that it weighs 1300 kg

I get it. I hear anyone born after 500 AD trying to talk about Ancient Rome and my brain simply rejects the information!

That's a stretch to say all of them. Ive seen 6 on a dyno and the numbers were all over the place.

@@Understeerking All of them are 500+bhp.

@@v4skunk739 485 was the max out of the 6, that doesn't = 500 lol.

Spoken like a true broke person, just like Tata, Mahindra, Lada and Dacia were made for you, sit down, appreciate technology and Motorsport, without Ferrari, Lamborghini, McLaren and the likes your cheap road cars would still be the same spec as they were in the 1960's.

@@bzilla1090 totally wrong, ferrari is never about innovation. Chassis tuning? Ask colin chapman. Engineering breakthrough? Ask germany. Safety tech? Ask those crazy Sweden of saab. Even enzo ferrari despises aerodynamic lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

​@@bzilla1090And FORD.

Yes. Overrated. But them old Ferraris are amazing.