One of my best friends is an automotive journalist, while he doesn't get Ferraris, he has had many expensive exotics as testers for the week (ie: R8 V10, 911 Turbo S, XKR).
From some stories he tells me alot of auto makers go a long way to ensure you write nice things about their cars, none to the level of what that guy is saying Ferrari does tho. Shame on Ferrari I guess, but this is no worse IMO than any of those 'Ring laps times from cars where the "showroom floor" condition of the car has been brought into question.
sndsgood wrote:its too be expected the car manufacturers want the best outcome possible.
Agreed
And having beaten a new 430 well enough, I can tell this guy is nothing but a crybaby. After living in Italy for a half a year and had plenty of test drives and reviews, I am looking forward to owning an early 2000s 360 within the next year.
Very interesting, and very sad at the same time. I just don't get why Ferrari worries themselves with things like this.
Paying someone to install parts and bragging about it being fast, is like watching someone bang your wife and being proud to raise their kids.
This is really not new what so ever. Some manufacturers tends to pair models that are not in the same power rating, some with not the same transmission, some with different drive lay out or avoid options that can enhance what ever field it will be tested on. All for so their model will truly stand out from the competition. I tell you this because I see it very-very often.
Ferrari bringing out their crew to optimize the car, is really not as bad as I mentioned. Ferrari has a reputation to live up to and if it is going to get exposure, they want the media to get maximum Ferrari experience. That in my book is a plus, as the company shows their passion and also want to maintain money flowing in too (lol). Personally, when I got to drive the California, Ferrari never did that, but we did had two reps there with dealer owners, but I'm in another field to begin with. lol
I don't read blog sites because of this... crying for attention and in return get more clicks from the public to get a higher advertisement rate. Call me old fashion, if you will, but if I want to read a review, I'll go to a legit source that have been doing for decades and has a magazine, and not done by ignorant kid from a basement. Again that's IMO, and quite frankly I don't care if you got a rebuttal on my opinion.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
This is stupid. Why would you test the altered car and then say these are the numbers? They are implying that the car will do something right off the lot that it simply won't. People want driver skill to be the only thing stopping them from matching stock times. Unless they start including a test team with every car purchase, they should axe the false advertisement.
I see nothing wrong with this. Isn't the idea to show what the vehicle is capable of off the showroom floor? For vehicles equipped with active aero or active suspension, should the test driver not be allowed to select the appropriate performance mode before testing just because it was set for city cruising when they got it? If they are tuning PCM parameters or changing parts (e.g. tires, rotors, suspension, etc.) then I can see an issue, as these are not available to the driver off the showroom floor.
I have no signiture
No such thing as a legit source.
Even if there is no advertising dollars involved, bias always ruins truth.
Whalesac wrote:If they are tuning PCM parameters or changing parts (e.g. tires, rotors, suspension, etc.) then I can see an issue, as these are not available to the driver off the showroom floor.
Did you read the article...? That's exactly what they were doing...
Paying someone to install parts and bragging about it being fast, is like watching someone bang your wife and being proud to raise their kids.
Transporter7220 wrote:Whalesac wrote:If they are tuning PCM parameters or changing parts (e.g. tires, rotors, suspension, etc.) then I can see an issue, as these are not available to the driver off the showroom floor.
Did you read the article...? That's exactly what they were doing...
my bad...That is pretty messed up.
I have no signiture
ON second thought.
It's my understanding that this kind of preperation is available from the factory.
For the right price.
It's the real reason a Ferrari is special.
And you can't blame manufacturers for giving the cars the once, twice and 8 times over routine.
You don't want this to happen while it's in the wrong hands
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw6-E72Q1zs
When I take my car to the track, I give it a significant once over.
Just in case.
Don't underestimate the reach of paid comentary.
Anyone hear about the Toyota Gift certificate/soccer mom scandal?
Having sold cars at a GM dealer, I'll have to admit that I convinced more than a few people that the J-body was a fantasitc car for the money.
For the money.
This is crooked, plain and simple. They are getting auto journalists to review a car that they have to say is in stock trim (when it is not). So when me and you go and buy the car we will think we are going to get the same performance as the new car, when in reality we won't.
It's basically, for a lack of a better word, "false advertising", but they are getting someone else to do it for them.
Come on. This has been happening since the 60's. Back then it was car's showing up in Hurst Trailers for the test drives after they'd been worked by Hurst or any number of performance companies back in the day. Car companies did that because they know that Journalists for car mags are Journalists first and drivers 2nd. They dont want their hot new baby to show up with a @!#$ty 1/4 mile time in the magazine just because Joe the journalist cant drive to save his life.
1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by:
Kronos Performance
WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Leafy wrote:Come on. This has been happening since the 60's. Back then it was car's showing up in Hurst Trailers for the test drives after they'd been worked by Hurst or any number of performance companies back in the day. Car companies did that because they know that Journalists for car mags are Journalists first and drivers 2nd. They dont want their hot new baby to show up with a @!#$ty 1/4 mile time in the magazine just because Joe the journalist cant drive to save his life.
Murders have been going on since the 60's too... are they alright?
kevo1586 . wrote:Leafy wrote:Come on. This has been happening since the 60's. Back then it was car's showing up in Hurst Trailers for the test drives after they'd been worked by Hurst or any number of performance companies back in the day. Car companies did that because they know that Journalists for car mags are Journalists first and drivers 2nd. They dont want their hot new baby to show up with a @!#$ty 1/4 mile time in the magazine just because Joe the journalist cant drive to save his life.
Murders have been going on since the 60's too... are they alright?
if they're only murdering other criminals then yes. I guess thats the closest analogy I can make between the car companies and murderers.
1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by:
Kronos Performance
WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
what if the criminal stole a bag of cheetos from a 7 eleven?
Transporter7220 wrote:Whalesac wrote:If they are tuning PCM parameters or changing parts (e.g. tires, rotors, suspension, etc.) then I can see an issue, as these are not available to the driver off the showroom floor.
Did you read the article...? That's exactly what they were doing...
did it say that? i just read where it says they were tuning the cars to the specific track.
anyone ever watched a car commercials. who has seen the commercials where the windows are tinted super dark definatly not legal. but they do it for the commercial to make the car look better. this really isnt any diffrent. sounds like ferrari is a pain and the ass to do articles and tests on but then again the jouranalists jump thru the hoops neccisary to get the car so they are just as much to blame. they could always just say screw you ferrari and stop testing them all together. after a year or two of not getting any press im sure they would change there tune (little play on words there ha)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
What is the difference between Ferrari making sure their car is in peak performance and Wendys making their burgers look perfect on TV commercials when you get them they're half smashed and apart?
Or the fact that BWW has 9s and 10s all over in their commercials yet when I go in there best I see is maybe pushing a 7.
I'm not surprised by it, I don't necessarily agree with it. But it is not like Ferrari is the only one doing this all companies do this to one extent or another. If you are going to bithc about one you might as well bithc about all of them.
LowFire wrote:I am looking forward to owning an early 2000s 360 within the next year.
If you reach a point in your life where you purchase a ferrari...i think you should instantly be banned from this board. A ferrari owner posting on a J-body board would be like owning a multi-million dollar house and suggesting home improvement ideas to trailer park residents.
