View Full Version : Time to make the petrol-heads here cream....
Impact Blue
11-10-2007, 07:42 PM
Pics of multiple exotics in one common place. Enjoy!!
http://forums.finalgear.com/showthread.php?t=22948
spike109u
11-11-2007, 09:31 AM
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/9739/f4026zx3.jpg
:eek2: :eek2: :eek2: Can I have one? Just one?
ikeyballz
11-11-2007, 11:32 AM
oh good lord wtf. why are they all red too?! >_<
idiosyncratic
11-11-2007, 02:03 PM
because true sports cars are red :eek9:
.
or so i've heard :confused: :gapteeth:
.
perhaps it was one of the requirements for this particular gathering...
all exotics welcome! must be red!!! :hihi:
xurusaibobx
11-11-2007, 07:26 PM
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a340/punkrockkid247/DSCN0659.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a340/punkrockkid247/DSCN0656.jpg
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/9739/f4026zx3.jpg
The wheels on the that first one are UUUUUGLY!!!!!!!
The wheels on the that first one are UUUUUGLY!!!!!!!They're stock Ferrari wheels from the 80s. I was thinking of getting the same ones for my Ferrari. :(
blech!! Obviously I don't know my Ferraris very well or I would have known that, but still, stock or not, they are still ugly...but that's just me. :weirdo: Of course, as my hubby will tell you and I admit to, I've been known to see a pic of something and not like it and then see it in real life and like it--complete 180 of what I said of the picture. So who knows??? Maybe if I saw it up close and personal, I would think differently, but for me, those just don't do the car justice from the picture.
Act162this
11-12-2007, 08:28 AM
oh good lord wtf. why are they all red too?! >_<
IIRC, the coat of red paint is so thin on the F40s that you can see through it to the cf bodywork beneath it...
mmmm.... carbon fibre...
Yoherz
11-12-2007, 09:27 AM
IIRC, the coat of red paint is so thin on the F40s that you can see through it to the cf bodywork beneath it...
mmmm.... carbon fibre...
:really:
Wow. Didn't think there was actually a viable explanation for cars having red paint.
Most road-going Ferraris are red because Ferrari's race cars have all been red. It's a matter of tradition. Ferrari is all about racing heritage and tradition. Honda, as an example, is a car manufacturer that participates in Formula 1 so they can sell more road cars. Ferrari is a Formula 1 team that sells road cars to fund their racing efforts.
Most car companies that have factory-backed race teams participate in auto racing to improve their image and for the trickle-down technology. Ferrari is a little different. Enzo Ferrari never wanted to sell road cars. All he ever wanted to do was build race cars and race them. He only started selling his race cars to the public because so many people offered him a lot of money for them. He used the money to improve his race cars.
That's how it all started, anyway. Of course, Ferrari's F1 team and road car divisions have since evolved into their own independant entities, but they still use the same facilities and fall under the same management umbrella.
There isn't a technical reason why most Ferrari's are red; it's just a matter of tradition. Red Ferraris have a different primer under their paint than other color Ferraris, and the red primer is supposedly a little lighter. So the popular lore is that red Ferraris are faster. :D
Impact Blue
11-12-2007, 01:30 PM
Most road-going Ferraris are red because Ferrari's race cars have all been red. It's a matter of tradition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_auto_racing_colors
ikeyballz
11-12-2007, 01:32 PM
LOL. i remember the story abt mercedes and how their car was too heavy to run in a certain class for a race so they stripped the paint...to make it within weight!
Yoherz
11-12-2007, 06:00 PM
Wow. Couldn't have been much more than about 20 pounds of paint though, eh?
Act162this
11-12-2007, 08:02 PM
that's a good question - i have no idea how much the paint on an F40 weighs, but 20 lbs is still 20 lbs... if you can lose it, then you're still lighter.
back when cf fairings first came out, we used to run them unpainted b/c we were trying to save every ounce we could. we figured paint adds weight, so who needs it? as long as we kept the fairings waxed (figured it would both protect them and make them hydrophobic) we figured we were okay.
that's a good question - i have no idea how much the paint on an F40 weighs, but 20 lbs is still 20 lbs... if you can lose it, then you're still lighter.F40s are ridiculously light. About the weight of a Miata, if I'm not mistaken.
Hey, I'm learning a lot from this thread! I never knew any of that about Ferrari...the paint stuff and all. Learn more! Learn more!! Learn more!!! :read:
Impact Blue
11-12-2007, 10:58 PM
Hey, I'm learning a lot from this thread! I never knew any of that about Ferrari...the paint stuff and all. Learn more! Learn more!! Learn more!!! :read:
You were adopted. :hilarious:
Act162this
11-13-2007, 10:26 AM
F40s are ridiculously light. About the weight of a Miata, if I'm not mistaken.
not sure about that, but really light. no radio, no carpeting, almost no upholstery on the racing buckets, early F40 windows didn't even roll down! instead of door handles, they had little pull strings that you tugged on to open the doors. that's taking it to the extreme, but it worked...
i think those rims are speedline ultralight alloy rims too. not sure how many other models of Ferraris got those rims.
Yoherz
11-13-2007, 10:36 AM
that's a good question - i have no idea how much the paint on an F40 weighs, but 20 lbs is still 20 lbs... if you can lose it, then you're still lighter.
back when cf fairings first came out, we used to run them unpainted b/c we were trying to save every ounce we could. we figured paint adds weight, so who needs it? as long as we kept the fairings waxed (figured it would both protect them and make them hydrophobic) we figured we were okay.
I didn't think of hydrophobic, but I guess no paint also saves you a good bit of money rather than buffing, painting, and then waxing.
Zhanshi
11-13-2007, 10:38 AM
I remember an episode of TopGear, though I can't remember if it was either a Ferrari or Lambo, but the windows could only go down about 3/4 of the way.
not sure about that, but really light. no radio, no carpeting, almost no upholstery on the racing buckets, early F40 windows didn't even roll down! instead of door handles, they had little pull strings that you tugged on to open the doors. that's taking it to the extreme, but it worked...
i think those rims are speedline ultralight alloy rims too. not sure how many other models of Ferraris got those rims.
Ok, it was bugging me, so I had to look it up:
Ferrari F40: 2425 lbs
1st gen Mazda Miata: 2070 lbs
3rd gen Mazda Miata: 2414 lbs
Ok, so it's not quite as light as a Miata.
I'm pretty sure those are Speedlines. The only other car I know of that had similar rims is the 288GTO, the F40's predecessor. My 308 has these funky 390mm metric rims, and tires for them are stupid expensive. I want to replace them with standard 17" wheels, and I've been kinda leaning toward those Speedlines. I don't think they're all that great-looking either, but they're accurate to the period and the marque. They are kind of ugly, though. I'm still a little torn.
Act162this
11-13-2007, 11:19 AM
I remember an episode of TopGear, though I can't remember if it was either a Ferrari or Lambo, but the windows could only go down about 3/4 of the way.
i think that was the one where they tested the countach - with the little "mail slot" windows, so you had to reverse into parking spaces by opening up the door and hanging your rear end over the side of the car (rear window is also useless).
Act162this
11-13-2007, 11:23 AM
I didn't think of hydrophobic, but I guess no paint also saves you a good bit of money rather than buffing, painting, and then waxing.
i forgot how much paint actually weighs, but someone back in the day actually did weigh their fiberglass fairings before and after paint (Gel coat vs. single-color paint job) and it was more than we thought.
i just guesstimated based on the weight of water, which i heard was about 8 lbs/gallon, and figured if we could even save 8 lbs, that'd be good.
we also figured if we could keep the fairings waxed and hydrophobic, they wouldn't soak up moisture and gain weight (we didn't paint them). besides, i kinda liked the way the cf weave looked.
Do you honestly like the look of carbon fiber weave, or do you just like it because you know carbon fiber is an amazing material? I've always thought CF was ugly, so I wonder if people honestly like the way it looks or if they just like the fact that it's CF.
kombi731
11-13-2007, 07:20 PM
those ppl could just paint fiberglass black and clear coat it
Ghetto mods FTW
ikeyballz
11-13-2007, 08:53 PM
Do you honestly like the look of carbon fiber weave, or do you just like it because you know carbon fiber is an amazing material? I've always thought CF was ugly, so I wonder if people honestly like the way it looks or if they just like the fact that it's CF.
i agree with the ugly.
i think it looks like someone made a car out of a black rug..
its sexy when cf is painted tho, so its sleeper-like.
i also really dislike the look of the resin getting all oxidized..as you see on lots of ricercars. x_x
can someone say ugly!:awcrap:
Act162this
11-13-2007, 09:10 PM
Do you honestly like the look of carbon fiber weave, or do you just like it because you know carbon fiber is an amazing material? I've always thought CF was ugly, so I wonder if people honestly like the way it looks or if they just like the fact that it's CF.
actually, i like both the look and that it is an amazing material. keep in mind that this was way before the ricer c/f craze began, when c/f fairings first became commercially available for bikes (CBR900R) - like back in the early 1990s.
they weren't even shiny and polished-looking like the hoods for cars nowdays. they were really rough materials, and you sorta had to trim to fit the onto your bike, make your own mounting holes, etc... but they were light, and not many people had them. we deliberately didn't paint them to save weight, more so than to show off the c/f weave.
i kinda like the rat rod look, so this could also partly explain why i like the look of c/f. it's functional. kinda like my old chevelle - no carpet, plexi windows, sheetmetal interior, mismatched primer paint, etc... didn't spend a dime on making it pretty, just lighter and faster. if i had c/f back then, it would have matched the rat rod look perfectly, i think.
i can see the point of your question, though. probably many people say they like the c/f look because it's ricer trendy... but for me, function always before form.
vBulletin v3.5.3, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.