DCAWD.com

from Jalopnik: Ferrari FF: Four Wheel Drive, Four Seats, One Fantastic Rear End



This is it. This is Ferrari's first four-wheel-drive model, called — the FF (Ferrari Four). The new Prancing Stallion with the super-sized rear end will replace Ferrari's 612 Scaglietti flagship. See, told ya it'd be a shooting brake.

Powering all four wheels is a naturally-aspirated 6.3-liter V12 direct injection engine, with 651bhp (at 8000 rpm) and 504 lb-ft of torque. That's enough to motivate the 3,946 lb. FF from 0-to-62 MPH in 3.7 seconds, with a top speed of 208 MPH.



omehow we think it probably won't hit that speed with four in the seats and a boot full of luggage.

The FF features the company's first ever four-wheel drive system. Ferrari claims its 4RM (four-wheel drive) weighs 50% less than a conventional four-wheel drive system, maintaining a rear-biased weight distribution (53 per cent over the rear axle).

Completely integrated with the car's electronic dynamic control systems, the four-wheel drive technology delivers performance on all terrains and in all conditions via continuous predictive torque distribution to all four wheels.



The FF is also equipped with the latest magnetorheological damping system (SCM3), as well as the most recent development in carbon-ceramic brakes from Brembo. More to come shortly.

video & more in the original post

chicken n waffles wrote:

Well put.

I actually like the silhouette and the back end.
The front facia is a bit too extreme almost cartoonish.

the front is meh but the side and rear is to me.
but then again I like Z3 coupes and P1800 waggons .

waste of a v12

Side profile is what makes me want to kill it with fire.

It looks to me like everything aft of the B-pillar is a bad photochop... except this is real?!?

All the lines on the front portion are sleek and elongated. Everything behind is squat and fat.

I can't fathom Ferrari screwing up those lines that badly. Its not that the front or the rear of the car would look bad on another car, but stapled together it looks awful.

$.02

If rear fender arch would match the front fender arch, the rear window rake match the front window rake:



Or:

With the exception of the front grill, I like it a lot. Reminds me of the Z3/4 as Gabe said.

Very cool video and looks to be an amazing machine.

I think it's funny to hear a former GT-R owner complaining about aesthetics.

Mr Kleen wrote:I think it's funny to hear a former GT-R owner complaining about aesthetics... to a crowd that likes the looks of Subaru's and Mitsubishis if they come with the right wheels

Fixed it for ya.

I don't think the idea is fail, but the execution makes me wonder if 2 people didn't design both halves of the car without talking to one-another.

It's not like this is a voluptuous girl, or an athletic chick. I could find asthetic appeal in a 36-26-36, or a 32-22-32.

But a 32A-32-42 isn't exactly my taste is all... Just sayin...

"32A-32-42"
^bad^^..^good^

I for one love the big booty...

But square-chested girls... meh...

-scheherazade

they stretched a z-coupe past funky and into weird.

that being said, i like parts of it.

and if offered one i sure wouldn't kick it out of the driveway. i've never driven an awd v12. you guys?

complacent wrote:they stretched a z-coupe past funky and into weird.

that being said, i like parts of it.

and if offered one i sure wouldn't kick it out of the driveway. i've never driven an awd v12. you guys?

V12 AWD? No. 500hp AWD? Si.

GaToR wrote:

complacent wrote:they stretched a z-coupe past funky and into weird.

that being said, i like parts of it.

and if offered one i sure wouldn't kick it out of the driveway. i've never driven an awd v12. you guys?

V12 AWD? No. 500hp AWD? Si.

then i guess my original question still stands, eh? i'm sure it offers a different driving experience than godzilla.

I find it interesting.
Even if the looks are off, I bet it will be a hoot.

This, and the turbo S, are two cars I'd love to test drive.

And actually, the R8 and F430 would be pretty sweet too (since the vanilla F430 still offered a stick).

-scheherazade

complacent wrote:
then i guess my original question still stands, eh? i'm sure it offers a different driving experience than godzilla.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be pedantic. Naturally it would be different, and many will say better, and that is theirs to decide.

I just can't even look into the crystal ball or rub the magic lamp and see myself in a Ferrari for anything other than it's looks.


IRT the Turbo S, I think it would feel more like Godzilla than a Challenger would feel like a Camaro. Neutral, stable, reactive. Form following function, I think will eventually bring the supercar families closer together, rather than further apart.


This is just an opinion, and one that would likely see me burned as a witch on a Porsche/Ferrari forum, but I think a 2011 Turbo is going to feel more like a GTR than a 2002 911 Turbo. And I think this car will feel more like a Panamera than a 575M.

Peace.

GaToR wrote:

complacent wrote:
then i guess my original question still stands, eh? i'm sure it offers a different driving experience than godzilla.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be pedantic. Naturally it would be different, and many will say better, and that is theirs to decide.

I just can't even look into the crystal ball or rub the magic lamp and see myself in a Ferrari for anything other than it's looks.


IRT the Turbo S, I think it would feel more like Godzilla than a Challenger would feel like a Camaro. Neutral, stable, reactive. Form following function, I think will eventually bring the supercar families closer together, rather than further apart.


This is just an opinion, and one that would likely see me burned as a witch on a Porsche/Ferrari forum, but I think a 2011 Turbo is going to feel more like a GTR than a 2002 911 Turbo. And I think this car will feel more like a Panamera than a 575M.

Peace.

fair enough. with that explanation (and comparison), i'd be willing to wager you're correct.