Ferrari 458 Italia 2009-2015

[Ferrer]

This car can only hide itself in shame next to an original Dino.

There I said it.

[clutch-monkey]

i wish they'd done the headlights better. i love the side profile and rear end, it's a lot more seamless than the 430

[wwgkd]

i wish they'd done the headlights better. i love the side profile and rear end, it's a lot more seamless than the 430

Once again you're like a little australian version of me.

[BarneyBoy]

Nice looking car IMO.

Not enough tail lights, however...

[McLareN]

In black:

[clutch-monkey]

looks good in black..seems sleeker

[Kitdy]

looks good in black..seems sleeker

No, black hides the ugly.

[clutch-monkey]

well, you don't notice the stupid headlights so much, yeah.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I don't mind the headlights, actually.

This is possibly the best looking ferrari since the 456. Embrace Modernity and stop harping on about the past. At least they've stopped getting uglier.

[Ferrer]

At least they've stopped getting uglier.

That's the problem.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

How so?

The 458 is gorgeous in terms of proportion, detailing (hell, I like the headlights and they at least serve some purpose...however weird) and by all accounts is a stunning return to form for Ferrari. The interior is in itself a beautiful reflection of craftsmanship and technology working together.

I fail to see how Ferrari moving forward from ugly cars towards those which inspire and are damn pretty is a problem.

I think you're living in the past.

[Ferrer]

I don't live in the past, or maybe yes, but what I definitely live in is an Alfa Romeo 8C. If that thing of beauty can exist there's no excuse for ugly Ferraris, because of the regulations or safety requirements or anything really.

The problem with this car is that it was designed by a computer. And computers shouldn't be designing italian cars, because they simply can't understand them. An italian car should be designed by people, because only people can understand what makes an italian car special.

In a way though, this is pure modern Ferrari. It puts performance above everything else. All the details cars are designed, or rather dare I say engineered to be efficient in their purpose, being reducing drag, creating donwforce or both or whatever they are meant to do.

I personally prefer the olden days, or a Maserati. In those what you do is have all the right ingredients. You had a capable chasis and massively powerful engine. And those where in charge of propelling a beautiful body crafted at the various Carrozzerias to insane speeds. Now it's almost as if it's the other way roung.

So yes the present is more efficient and better, but the past was definitely more beautiful.

[RacingManiac]

I think Enzo will disagree with you, but he disagrees with road car to begin with. For him being a "racer" first, faster always equals to better. Back in the day of pre-CFD and windtunnel, aero=what looks good. Now you actually have a very developed science behind it, and thats how you make "faster".....

[Wouter Melissen]

I think Enzo will disagree with you, but he disagrees with road car to begin with. For him being a "racer" first, faster always equals to better. Back in the day of pre-CFD and windtunnel, aero=what looks good. Now you actually have a very developed science behind it, and thats how you make "faster".....

Enzo Ferrari once said: "The most beautiful car, is the winning car."

[LeonOfTheDead]

To be honest, this car has been penned by an Italian, who also left Ferrari btw.
I honestly think the 8C, albeit extremely good looking, is quite selfish. Yes, it's awesome to look at it especially when you see 3 of them parked side by side while a white 8C spider is testing down the road, BUT I often think about the fact that many parts and details weren't designed properly just because they knew people would have bought it nonetheless.
What's that weird tank stealing all the room?!
What's with that huge weight despite the massive use of carbon fiber?

Actually I don't care about the weight or the tank, as I just drove an Alfa 159 SW, with the 1.9 150 bhp diesel engine and if that thing is really the badly designed car all journalists are talking about, drag me to hell right now. Not only it was a joy to drive and slide at every roundabout, not only it was SO different from the Croma we have and which shares so many components with it, but it was also a nice place to be in, excellent position, feelings coming from the dashboards, a low-low-low diving position worth of a DTM car...

We should just stop being blinded by car reviews, data sheets, power, speed, acceleration weight and what to expect from a a car because of those which came before.

Styling. I'm not going to say that's subjective, but it's a thing of its time. What was good looking in the nineties isn't that anymore right now in many cases (back grilles, anyone?), let alone more and more years ago. Other things are still extremely good looking, but their modern counterparts look so different you wouldn't say there is some sort of a trait d'union between them.
While the F430 seemed just tacky and son of its buyers, this seems to be son of its factory, sort of as the Enzo was, just this actually looks better.
Even trying to insanely compare cars from 40 years ago with present one, as if the very idea of the car could still be the same, I'd suggest that while back in those days drawing a beautiful car was just about doing exactly that, now it's about many different things. Not only safety, aerodynamics, or packaging, but also production, a wider group of buyers, new influences from different sectors dropping an effect in other fields, the very idea of the brand now exist since 60 years rather than "just" 10, so everyone thinks you should pay an homage to the old days while still re-inventing yourself.

Ferrari understood one important thing, the fans base. If you drag into the spiral a kid when he is 8 years old, there is a large chance that when he will be 30 and horribly rich due to his internet activity he will buy one of your cars. Designing a car doesn't mean you have to pay attention to what a 10 years old kid thinks, but when designing a 250 GT Lusso I doubt they were thinking about those who were going to buy it in first place, and not only that, they were also in the position to be almost the only one to offer that.
So it was something more about creating an artistic (and potentially even more selfish) object.
Incidentally, Ferrari as all the other companies was in financial problems, while now it's the only brand who can live on its own (almost) and have a top notch race department, without selling the Cayenne and trying to buy the whole world.

Considering the berlinettas from Ferrari, modern ones say from the eighties, I don't think many of them could be considered beautiful. I honestly don't even like that much the original Dino.
Talking about a Maserati or an 8C (ironically the same) on the other hand is easier, as the car itself is different, much different.

There is a good chance that not all cars can be judged with the same weight, and that this weight should be changed almost every 10 years.
Eventually, cars like these, like Ferraris and the likes, shouldn't even be judged only on their look as right now in these modern days, the look itself is now a part of the technical side of a car, especially at this level, so you can't separate the two things so easily. 40 years ago, having a good looking car wasn't connected to what was under the bonnet. Now it has to be, or someone would wonder on why your supposed sportscar isn't faster than an AMG sedan.

EDIT: fixed parts