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...
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?).
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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).
Not to say the cars are perfect, but most owners end up with relatively hassle-free ownership experiences these days.
None of the Lamborghini's I was fortunate enough to drive came close to this.
Perfectly summed up Ferraris: gorgeous, nice-sounding marketing fluff.
Who cares if it’s slower around a track, unless you’re actually going around a track for some reason.
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.
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.
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
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.
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"
Edit: To be honest the only ferrari design I like is the F40.
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.
There's not a chance in hell I could ever learn to switch as fast as a flappy paddle in a modern supercar.
You gotta master the heal-toe brake double-clutch downshift going into a turn, or you're not a real driver.
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.
I enjoy practicing double-clutching heel-toeing downshifting. Paddle shifters, phooey.
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?
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.