DEC 12

One of the most famous car brands in the world has committed to reducing its fuel consumption by 40% over the next five years. This would be very exciting, except that we're talking about Ferrari - a company which manufactures just 6,000 cars a year. A Ferrari is most assuredly a non-essential purchase... the carbon being saved by driving a 2012 Millechile over a 2007 Scaglietti will be negligible, especially considering the usage a typical Ferrari gets: not much. A person who wanted to reduce their impact on the environment wouldn't be buying a second (or fifteenth) car, let alone one with a conventional V12. Cradle to cradle - manufacture, shipping, storage, actually using it once a year, putting it in a museum someday - it's a major net loss for the environment.

We already know that electric vehicles can outperform Ferraris. So why get excited about it at all? Well, let's look at this from a couple different angles. First, stricter European emissions standards are impacting every car manufacturer with a stake on the continent - everyone is reducing emissions and fuel consumption, and that's a good thing. Now whether Ferrari is simply aiming to comply with regulations or is quixotically jumping on the green bandwagon is anyone's guess, but one thing's for sure: The cars are going to go just as fast as ever.

Amedeo Felisa, general manager of the Italian luxury sports car maker, said Ferrari wanted to reduce CO2 emissions from 400 grams per kilometer per vehicle to 280-300 [...] "We have to face the challenge of reducing consumption but not affecting the performance of the car," he said at the Reuters Auto Summit in Frankfurt. "Otherwise we move (away) from our position in the market and we do not want to do that."

Second, there must be demand for this sort of thing; i.e., the uber-wealthy are actually looking at mileage when shopping for luxury sports cars. Maybe their F1 pit crews are, too: Increased fuel efficiency would certainly help their racing efforts - Audi's Le Mans dominance in recent years is due in no small part to the number of pit stops they skip with their diesel racers - and lighter frames and bodies would have benefits in acceleration, cornering, tire longevity, and stopping distance.

Third, others will follow suit. A trend isn't far-reaching until it affects every market segment, and luxury sports cars have been holding out for a long time... up until very recently, people could be heard bragging about how much fuel their cars used. Now they're bragging about how long they can go between fill-ups... for the record, I average 625 miles (1000+ kilometers) in my diesel Jetta. Maybe Hummers will be the next to reduce their carbon output by 40% by increasing efficiency to... let's whip out the calculators here... a whopping 13.4 MPG. While we all hold our collective breath waiting for that to happen (I bet they go bankrupt first) let's consider riding around in a Ferrari Electric Vehichle!

Comments (14)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Interesting Development
written by Brett, December 12, 2007

I'm not sure whether the impact will be significant, but I am of the mentality that any move toward stricter emission standards is a good thing. Granted, the vehicle's price tag doesn't exactly scream the kind of green environmentalists are looking for, but it's still a positive in my mind.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Green Car of the Year.
written by weee, December 12, 2007

If the Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid can win it this year I see no reason why a Ferrari shouldn't win it next year!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by CNCMike, December 13, 2007

A 40% increase in fuel mileage is impressive in any car. The 40% reduction in fuel consumption mentioned in the article would be an 80% increase in MPG. Now that would be really impressive.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Jack Mott, December 13, 2007

To say that "we already know electric vehicles outperform ferraris" is misleading to such an extent it is either a lie or retarded. You are comparing apples to oranges. An ariel atom has no passenger compartment, no trunk, no roof, and doesn't have the same range as a Ferrari. Also, that electric car is even faster with a supercharged 4 cylinder gas burning engine =)

Imagine it with a ferrari v12!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Bob, December 13, 2007

Jack Mott is entirely correct. Your bias is painful, uninformed, and undermines any sort of argument you actually had. Then again, your actual argument was weak anyway.
You say that the number of Ferraris on the roads means that this will have little to no environmental effect. Thats fine, but if there are so few of these cars there in the first place, why do you care? Thier environmental footprint NOW isn't all that big, and this company is voulentarily trying to make it smaller. This is the sort of thing that you would want any company to try and do.
Incidentally, lets point out that working on gasoline engines is a far more workable solution than hybrid and battery technology. Tell me what we do with those batteries. Tell me what happens when there is battery acid all over the site of every car crash in america.
I'd like to know.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Yes and No
written by Nick, December 13, 2007

I would say you're part on part off... Many people, even rich, will be looking for sports cars that are better for the environment given that's the trend now. It's not about how much money you have, it's about your environmental perception and whether you care or not.

Look at the Tesla, all electric, still powerful, and selling well... oh and very expensive (90k). It's just not about whether you can afford gas or not, it's about whether you care about "green" and if you do, and have the money of course, a "green" Ferrari will look pretty good to you, especially if they're the only high end car that offers such.

Besides I'm sure they've done their market research to figure this out. They'll probably be offering more than one model to adjust for all parties... people who don't care and people who do.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by guest, December 13, 2007

I think a lot of you are missing an important point. If ferrari manages to reduce fuel consumption by 40% with no performance loss that means the methods and quite possibly some of the technology associated with doing so can trickle down to the mainstream. A passenger car getting 80 mpg is great but it's even better if it will actually go up a hill.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

..
written by psychic readings, December 14, 2007

thanks for the information and happy holidays!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

The Trickle-Down Theory
written by Butch, December 14, 2007

Marquis cars like Ferrari have had a very positive impact on "lesser" cars because they aren't as profit-driven as the giant carmakers. Mass-produced cars assimilate the technology slowly, after they find ways to make it cost-effective. The Ferrari 360 F1 was the first road going car to have a paddle-shift transmission just a few years ago, and now you can get one on a Pontiac G6. Hopefully their example for fuel economy will start something more positive.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Jared, December 14, 2007

I would also like to point out that a major part of Ferrari's plans involve size and weight reduction techniques that are by and large unfeasible in, for instance, a mid-sized passenger car or SUV. A Ferrari can become 25-50% dimensionally and weight-wise as long as the passenger compartment is similar in size and it performs well and looks sexy. It can use materials and construction techniques that would not be feasible in the average car for cost, safety and practicality reasons.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

This is a byproduct of weight reduction
written by JCie, December 14, 2007

The commitment to mileage will be more of a byproduct of a commitment to reducing weight rather than increasing displacement as the primary means of improving performance.

FYI: The F1 system in a Ferrari is a true manual transmission with a clutch. The car is changing gears and working the clutch for you to get you superfast shifts. Others have similar systems but only in their exotic/high end models. Lexus, Pontiac, and others just have paddles connected to an automatic transmission - it's not the same (though smoother for daily driving).

My Ferrari gets somewhere between 12 - 14MPG and maybe less because of the way I drive it. Getting their V8s up to 17 - 20 MPG would be impressive especially considering that they would have to be pumping out 500 hp to keep up with competitors.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Trip to Italy in Ferrari
written by PO, December 14, 2007

Here is an opportunity for all of us to win 6 days Trip in Drive Tuscany's Valley with a Ferrari Guide.
http://www.dreamandwin.com has been offering a raffle tickets with dream come true prizes.
Please share your experience if you have been through this.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Dizin Directory
written by Dizin Directory, February 07, 2008

thank you a lot for this ;D

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Consumption charts
written by Car specs, March 11, 2008

An interesting article.
The other day, I wanted to compare fuel consumption for different cars and here's what I've found: http://carspector.com/chart/most_efficient/ (most fuel efficient) and http://carspector.com/chart/most_hungry/ (most fuel hungry cars). And the truth is that most of Ferraris stay pretty high in the "most hungry" category.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment