You’re misunderstanding the term. Design language is subtle aesthetic cues, usually not functional, that remind you of other things they’ve made in the past. To suggest that the batteries dictate stuff like the shape of headlights doesn’t make sense.
You’re right, shape is also part of design language too, but I don’t think being an EV prevented this from looking like a Ferrari. Body styling cues could make the connection, like the way a Cayenne is a SUV but still looks like what you think of as a Porche. It just seems like Ferrari didn’t want to here, for one reason or another.
The thing is, others did manage to, and those are new companies without the massive budget Ferrari has. But with all those possibilities they chose to create a fast blue dumpster.
Okay, the car I posted isn’t exactly the same price tag, but it outperforms the Ferrari on more than just design.
Those batteries are a massive advantage for the design, they are put at the bottom like all other electric cars, and help keep the weigh center very low.
Engines and cooling also allow for much greater flexibility in design. But for some reason they decided to not use that greater design freedom to make an actual cool design, but more like if Tesla model 3 had a sports version with some body tuning.
The 700k price tag is not a problem for me, 500k or 700k doesn’t make any difference to me, I can’t afford either.
My price range is more like 60k, and then I buy it used for half of that. 🤣 🤣 🤣
Still I like new groundbreaking designs, which we have seen sometimes from Ferrari, but this is not one of them IMO.
This looks more like a way cheaper car, that could actually be in my price range.
Maybe it looks better in real life, but my experience is the opposite.
batteries and inverters definitely take up more volume than an ice drivetrain. the advantage is that they can be put in more places than the mechanical linkages.
I’m pretty sure an ICE takes up more space, there’s a lot more components to it. There’s some very slim EV super cars. And yeah, way more flexibility with an EV system.
i’ve got a phev and lemme tell ya, those batteries are like three times the size (and weight) of the rest of the drivetrain combined, including fuel tank.
the bmw i3 rex is a pretty extreme example because it has a motorcycle engine, but they managed to cram the engine, inverter, gearbox and fuel tank into the space under the floor of the trunk, between the rear wheels, while the battery pack consists basically the bottom decimeter of the entire car. and that 9 liter tank doubles its range.
meanwhile the original chevy volt, a fwd car with an 1.6l i4, opted to keep the transmission tunnel and space where a rear axle would go to stuff them with batteries. really compromises the internal space, sacrifices a middle rear seat, and gives a whopping… 45km of electric range.
My point is simply that electric vs combustion power distribution and volume / mass differences make it, I assume, difficult to maintain the same design language.
Not at all, there’s loads of fully electric super cars that look just how you would expect, sleeker even. This was a deliberate design decision from Ferrari.
Difficult to use the same design language with massive batteries. I actually think it looks okay. For me the issue is the 700k price tag.
You’re misunderstanding the term. Design language is subtle aesthetic cues, usually not functional, that remind you of other things they’ve made in the past. To suggest that the batteries dictate stuff like the shape of headlights doesn’t make sense.
Fair. I meant proportions/silhouette, not details like lights. I just mistakenly thought those were also part of design.
You’re right, shape is also part of design language too, but I don’t think being an EV prevented this from looking like a Ferrari. Body styling cues could make the connection, like the way a Cayenne is a SUV but still looks like what you think of as a Porche. It just seems like Ferrari didn’t want to here, for one reason or another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOcp3-Ik3G4
The thing is, others did manage to, and those are new companies without the massive budget Ferrari has. But with all those possibilities they chose to create a fast blue dumpster.
Okay, the car I posted isn’t exactly the same price tag, but it outperforms the Ferrari on more than just design.
Those batteries are a massive advantage for the design, they are put at the bottom like all other electric cars, and help keep the weigh center very low.
Engines and cooling also allow for much greater flexibility in design. But for some reason they decided to not use that greater design freedom to make an actual cool design, but more like if Tesla model 3 had a sports version with some body tuning.
The 700k price tag is not a problem for me, 500k or 700k doesn’t make any difference to me, I can’t afford either.
My price range is more like 60k, and then I buy it used for half of that. 🤣 🤣 🤣
Still I like new groundbreaking designs, which we have seen sometimes from Ferrari, but this is not one of them IMO.
This looks more like a way cheaper car, that could actually be in my price range.
Maybe it looks better in real life, but my experience is the opposite.
Batteries that take up less space than a massive engine and gearbox?
batteries and inverters definitely take up more volume than an ice drivetrain. the advantage is that they can be put in more places than the mechanical linkages.
I’m pretty sure an ICE takes up more space, there’s a lot more components to it. There’s some very slim EV super cars. And yeah, way more flexibility with an EV system.
i’ve got a phev and lemme tell ya, those batteries are like three times the size (and weight) of the rest of the drivetrain combined, including fuel tank.
the bmw i3 rex is a pretty extreme example because it has a motorcycle engine, but they managed to cram the engine, inverter, gearbox and fuel tank into the space under the floor of the trunk, between the rear wheels, while the battery pack consists basically the bottom decimeter of the entire car. and that 9 liter tank doubles its range.
meanwhile the original chevy volt, a fwd car with an 1.6l i4, opted to keep the transmission tunnel and space where a rear axle would go to stuff them with batteries. really compromises the internal space, sacrifices a middle rear seat, and gives a whopping… 45km of electric range.
My point is simply that electric vs combustion power distribution and volume / mass differences make it, I assume, difficult to maintain the same design language.
Not at all, there’s loads of fully electric super cars that look just how you would expect, sleeker even. This was a deliberate design decision from Ferrari.
I seem to be unclear I guess. But to me there is a difference between, “can’t use the same design language” and “can’t look sleek”.