it's not ferrari's fault, but at the same time i don't think that's morally right / fair either.

it's just like saying knock off companies aren't at fault, but doesn't make them right

 

Wait, what? How is it even possible to suggest that this isn't Ferrari's fault? Because C+D and other car mags bend over backwards to let Ferrari cheat, that makes it OK? When the EPA doesn't independently review mpg ratings so manufacturers cheat the figures, that makes it OK? No, that's ridiculous. It's terrible logic and it is an argument that should be aggressively derided by everyone, and particularly by anyone who considers himself a car enthusiast.

There is no other way to put it except that Ferrari's cheating is stupid, embarrassing, pathetic, and complete and utter BS. It's the stupid, embarrassing, pathetic BS that we should only expect from newcomers with lousy products (like Hyundai making up mpg numbers, as I alluded to above) because they have to do that in order to compete and make sales. We certainly do not expect that from a legendary manufacturer like Ferrari that has decades of sport racing pedigree and decades of producing fantastic cars. That's what's so pathetic and embarrassing about this. The 458 doesn't need Ferrari lying about it being 5 seconds faster than it is around some stupid race track for the 458 to be a great car, and all this cheating does is destroy the legacy and the heritage.

This is the kind of stuff that makes certain I'll never ever consider buying a Ferrari. And this is coming from someone who idolized Ferrari vehicles growing up, and unsurprisingly it's a Ferrari that is the first supercar I ever considered - long before I bought the LFA. I've posted on this forum before that even with all the LFA gear that Lexus sent me (and continues to send me), I still have more Ferrari-related memorabilia. That should say a lot. Well, Ferrari's BS is making all my Ferrari stuff BS. Maybe it's time to put it on eBay. Or perhaps more appropriately, in the garbage.

 

What "rules"? Did the C&D explicitly allow on-site engineers to tune the car just for that specific track and comparison? Did C&D specifically allow Ferrari to run shaved tires? If so, then it's completely C&D's fault. If not, then it's totally Ferrari's fault. In either case, I'd love to see proof of C&D explicitly doing this. We have proof that Ferrari acted the way they did, but so far we have no proof that C&D explicitly allowed Ferrari to do what they did. Or did C&D have a set of unwritten rules for the comparo, and when Ferrari broke them, C&D turned away and let them get away with it? These are all important questions.

None of the other brands in the comparison engaged in such cheating. Ferrari has also been doing such misleading trickery for a LONG time, so people have every right to jump all over Ferrari. Ferrari's time of doing such cheating moves without anyone noticing is over.

No, there is much more difference than just alignment.

How is this not Ferrari's fault?
They had a choice of whether to cheat or not to cheat, and they chose to "cheat". Ferrari prohibits a factory stock car from a showroom from being tested, so that right there shows Ferrari has a policy to cheat, since Ferrari engineers always seem to be present at every test.

Knock off companies aren't at fault for what? For producing knock offs? Of course they are at fault.

Quoted for truth .

Also, we really don't know just how long Ferrari has been engaging in such pathetic practices. Ferrari's reputation and history may owe more to their cheating ways than we realize.

Like you, when I was young I too grew up idolizing Ferrari vehicles. Now, I mostly just laugh at Ferrari.

 

^ I'm sure C+D knows about Ferrari's cheating. The reason why mags like C+D allow Ferrari to cheat is that if the mags don't, Ferrari won't give them cars to review. I guess that articles on Ferrari vehicles are such an important feature to the subscribers that magazines selling out to cover Ferrari is more important than their journalistic integrity.

I was certainly not saying that C+D is not complicit; they certainly are. However, suggesting that Ferrari is not at all at fault is simply absurd.

 

if there is a rule of saying nothing more than factory car and ferrari did this, then yes it's their "fault". but there is no such rule, they get into the gray area of doing something unfair and unethical imho. did CD say no factory engineer on scene? no. that's all i am saying.

there will be about half of clublexus who will argue with you knock off is no fault. why? coz' there are really no rules so to speak on a lot of the copies, because the original designs are not trademark.

they are the exact same issue. i consider them bad, not right, and unfair. but if you and i are going to have different definition of fault, then so be it

 

Agreed .

 

3600 lbs also seems heavy for an LFA (usually 3260 +/- 30 or so). What did Roy have in the boot???

 

Maybe he had a full size spare and came along for the ride?

 

 

LFA is supposed to be around 3200 lbs

 

"Supposed" is the keyword.

I believe Lexus quoted dry weight when they said 3280 lbs.

Unfortunately, with all the fluids it has been tipping the test scales at 3460 - 3600 lbs depending on the configurations selected for the car.

The 458 Italia also weighs in the 3400 lbs region, but for this test Ferrari put a lot of lightweight carbon fiber options such as, seats etc.

 

Lexus didn't quote a dry weight for the LFA. C&D measured the car with full tank/fluids and the driver to my knowledge.

 

Commentary and video of Lexus LFA lap:

p.s. Indeed, as they admitted, he went through sector 2 very slowly and was almost cruising through it.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...5-class-page-7

 

So basically instead of the saying "run what you brung" it should be "run what you bring only if you win with a team of engineers who will ensure victory". I mean at that point its not a comparison, its a gotdamn racing event with a pit crew.

It would be great to see them run an owners Ferrari. Its great to see just how well the 458 can perform but THAT IS NOT A CAR YOU CAN BUY. They spec'd it just for that event so of course it will do better.

 

True. The more I think about it, the more angered and disgusted I feel.

Ferrari is a control freak and insecure, which is why it tries to control the outcome by determining what the outcome should be and then do all kinds of necessary changes in order to achieve that outcome.

The fact that Ferrari reserves the right from suing any publication that tries to get a customer car for testing is downright disgusting and appalling.

It simply turns the whole idea of competing with what Ferrari offers to customers that they can drive every day and take to any track on its head. It is more like a customer asking for his car to be tuned for a specific track every time he goes to a new track and we all know that never happens.