Ferrari PR Gestapo exposed

  • Thread starter paskowitz
  • 15 comments
  • 3,205 views
3,239
United States
New York
thepatriots
http://jalopnik.com/#!5760248/how-ferrari-spins

"Chris Harris — I told the blokes here at Jalopnik I was pissed at Ferrari and wanted to tell a few people. They said I could do it here. Stay with me, this might take a while."

Chris Harris is probably one of the most respected automotive journalists out there. Usually outspoken and insightful. While automotive companies controlling PR of their cars in the media is nothing new, this is Ferrari, and this article is rather scathing.



Full transcript below:

"I think it started in 2007 when I heard that Ferrari wanted to know which test track we were going to use for Autocar's 599 GTB road test, but in reality the rot had set in many years earlier. Why would it want to know that? "Because," said the man from the Autocar office, "The factory now has to send a test team to the circuit we chose so that they can optimize the car to get the best performance from it." They duly went to the track, tested for a day, crashed the car, went back to the factory to mend the car, returned, tested and then invited us to drive this "standard" 599. They must have been having a laugh.

Sad to say it, but the ecstasy of driving a new Ferrari is now almost always eradicated by the pain of dealing with the organization. Why am I bothering to tell you this? Because I'm pissed with the whole thing now. It's gotten out of control; to the point that it will soon be pointless believing anything you read about its cars through the usual channels, because the only way you get access is playing by its rules.

Like anyone with half a brain, I've been willing to cut Ferrari some slack because it is, well, Ferrari –- the most famous fast car brand of all and the maker of cars that everyone wants to know about. Bang out a video of yourself drifting a new Jag XKR on YouTube and 17 people watch it; do the same in a 430 Scuderia and the audience is 500,000 strong. As a journalist, those numbers make you willing to accommodate truck-loads of ********, but I've had enough now. I couldn't care if I never drive a new Ferrari again, if it means I never have to deal with the insane communication machine and continue lying about the lengths to which Ferrari will bend any rule to get what it wants. Which is just as well, because I don't think I'm going to be invited back to Maranello any time soon. Shame, the food's bloody marvelous.
How bad has it been? I honestly don't know where to start. Perhaps the 360 Modena press car that was two seconds faster to 100mph than the customer car we also tested. You allow some leeway for "factory fresh" machines, but this thing was ludicrously quick and sounded more like Schumacher's weekend wheels than a street car. Ferrari will never admit that its press cars are tuned, but has the gall to turn up at any of the big European magazines' end-of-year-shindig-tests with two cars. One for straight line work, the other for handling exercises. Because that's what happens when you buy a 458: they deliver two for just those eventualities. The whole thing stinks. In any other industry it wouldn't be allowed to happen. It's dishonest, but all the mags take it between the cheeks because they're too scared of not being invited to drive the next new Ferrari.

Remember the awesome 430 Scuderia? What a car that was, and still is. One English magazine went along with all the cheating-******** because the cars did seem to be representative of what a customer might get to drive, but then during the dyno session, the "standard" tires stuck themselves to the rollers.
And this is the nub: how ****ing paranoid do you have to be to put even stickier rubber on a Scuderia? It's like John Holmes having an extra two inches grafted onto his dick. I mean it's not as if, according to your own communication, you're not a clear market leader and maker of the best sports cars in the world now, is it?

What Ferrari plainly cannot see is that its strategy to win every test at any cost is completely counter-productive. First, it completely undermines the amazing work of its own engineers. What does it say about a 458 if the only way its maker is willing to loan it to a magazine is if a laptop can be plugged in after every journey and a dedicated team needs to spend several days at the chosen test track to set-up the car? It says they're completely nuts –- behavior that looks even worse when rival brands just hand over their car with nothing more than a polite suggestion that you should avoid crashing it too heavily, and then return a week later.

Point two: the internet is good for three things: free porn, Jalopnik and spreading information. Fifteen years ago, if your 355 wasn't as fast as the maker claimed you could give the supplying dealer a headache, whine at the local owners club and not much besides. Nowadays you spray your message around the globe and every bugger knows about it in minutes. So, when we used an owner's 430 Scud because Ferrari wouldn't lend us the test car, it was obliterated in a straight line by a GT2 and a Lambo LP 560-4, despite all the "official" road test figures suggesting it was faster than Halley's Comet. The forums went nuts and some Scud owners rightly felt they hadn't been delivered the car they'd read about in all the buff books. Talk about karma slapping you in the face.

It's the level of control that's so profoundly irritating and I think damaging to the brand. Once you know that it takes a full support crew and two 458s to supply those amazing stats, it then takes the shine off the car. The simple message from Ferrari is that unless you play exactly by the laws they lay down, you're off the list.

What are those laws? Apart from the laughable track test stuff, as a journalist you are expressly forbidden from driving any current Ferrari road car without permission from the factory. So if I want to drive my mate's 458 tomorrow, I have to ask the factory. Will it allow me to drive the car? No: because it is of "unknown provenance," i.e. not tuned. I'm almost tempted to buy a 458, just for the joy of phoning Maranello every morning and asking if its OK if I take my kid to school.

Where I've personally run into trouble is by using owners' cars for comparison tests. Ferrari absolutely hates this; even if you say unremittingly nice things about its cars, it goes ape ****. But you want to see a 458 against a GT3 RS so I'm going to deliver that story and that video. Likewise the 599 GTO and the GT2 RS. Ferrari honestly believes it can control every aspect of the media — it has actively intervened several times when I've asked to borrow owners' cars.
The control freakery is getting worse: for the FF launch in March journalists have to say which outlets they are writing it for and those have to be approved by Maranello. Honestly, we're perilously close to having the words and verdicts vetted by the Ferrari press office before they're released, which of course has always been the way in some markets.

Should I give a **** about this stuff? Probably not. It's not like it's a life-and-death situation; supercars are pretty unserious tackle. But the best thing about car nuts is that they let you drive their cars, and Ferrari has absolutely no chance stopping people like me driving what they want to drive. Of course their attempts to stop me makes it an even better sport and merely hardens my resolve, but the sad thing is its cars are so good it doesn't need all this ****e. I'll repeat that for the benefit of any vestige of a chance I might have of ever driving a Ferrari press car ever again (which is virtually none). "Its cars are so good it doesn't need this ****e."
None of this will make any difference to Ferrari. I'm just an irrelevant Limey who doesn't really matter. But I've had enough of concealing what goes on, to the point that I no longer want to be a Ferrari owner, a de-facto member of its ********-control-edifice. I sold my 575 before Christmas. As pathetic protests go, you have to agree it's high quality.

Jesus, this is now sounding like a properly depressing rant. I'll leave it there. Just remember all this stuff then next time you read a magazine group test with a prancing stallion in it."
 
Not really surprising considering the way they deal with some of their consumer cars. Just look at how the FXX is handled. Or the fact you have to own a Ferrari in order to purchase certain models.
 
Interesting read and, if all true it will demand a quick reply from Ferrari and also from other magazines editorial staff.

There's only one thing I don't understand and makes me a litle suspicious that the author may be "slightly" enhancing things. The "special tyres" that glue themselves to the dyno's rollers. Ferrari doesn't make tyres, so I assume they were from a tyre-manufacturer brand. They had their specs carved to the sides I presume. So, what tyres were these? And were they road legal but in fact NOT the tyres that the Scud was delivered with to clients?
 
I don't think it's being enhanced in any way by Chris. It all sounds pretty feasible. With regard to the tyres, it wouldn't surprise me if Ferrari had asked their manufacturer (I think they use Michelin as OEM fit but I could be wrong) to make them some extra sticky tyres as a special run.

I've certainly heard other rumours before of "unnamed car companies" having certain models taken off the production line and completely hand-finished before being handed to the press, given different engine components, sent through the paint shop twice for a better finish, that sort of thing... and Ferrari have been well-known for ages to be a) very temperamental when a review in a magazine doesn't go their way and b) send out a team of engineers with the cars.

As Harris says, their modern cars really don't even need that sort of obsessive behaviour.

Ferrari the car company sounds no different from Ferrari the F1 team when it comes to their way of doing business.
 
Interesting. I mean I always thought that car companies handle out optimized cars but Ferrari seems to be a little over the top. I mean, it certainly worked for them so far, but I guess times for this kind of behaviour might be over soon. Imagine if only 1% of Ferrari owners read this story, they might tell some of their Ferrari owning friends and those friends some of their Ferrari owning friends etc
In the end there might be a lot of Ferrari drivers who ask themselves : how fast / good is my $300000 car in reality ? Have I been screwed ?

Then again, how important is performance anyway ? You have the sound, you have the design, the prestige and superior handling and power. Maybe YOUR Ferrari needs 5 seconds more on the Ring than the one tested in a magazine, but doe sit matter in the end ?
Probably not, still this whole story is kinda pathetic.
 
but doe sit matter in the end ?

The funny thing is, it shouldn't matter, but Ferrari want to be seen as the best without exception and the sort of people who buy new Ferraris probably want their cars to be seen as the best too.

I don't know what the international press is like, but here in the UK Ferrari quite often don't win group tests. They're always commended in isolation but put up against other cars it's certainly not a dead cert that they'll win. And Ferrari hate it, and quite often go off in a strop and refuse to lend cars out. They've done it with Top Gear TV before amongst others.
 
With regard to the tyres, it wouldn't surprise me if Ferrari had asked their manufacturer (I think they use Michelin as OEM fit but I could be wrong) to make them some extra sticky tyres as a special run.
Back in the day there was an old trick in drag racing where they soaked the tires' footprint in lacquer thinner to soften the rubber. Sounds stupid, but it did actually soften the rubber considerably and create more grip. The tires also had a tendency to destroy themselves in a fraction of their regular lifespan.

I'm not saying this is what Ferrari may be doing, I'm just saying that they could do it with a spray bottle. Could that be water they're spraying to cool the tires between hotlaps? Who knows.

Ferrari the car company sounds no different from Ferrari the F1 team when it comes to their way of doing business.
I've always loved their cars for the looks, performance, and esteem, but the more I've learned about how they work in the past few years the more I despise them. The cars are great (when they're not burning) but the company is sketchy business and I'm not so sure I'd ever do business with them if I could.

I can recall a couple tests where Ferraris didn't win. If I remember right, didn't the Ford GT beat out a 360 Stradale in Car and Driver?
 
Ditto. The "passionate" doesn't stand for crap if they're just a bunch of idiots. It's one thing being flamboyant and passionate and a completely different thing being an enormous pain in the arse.

Just as well few of us will ever get to drive them then, right? :lol:
 
Doesn't suprise me in the least. It seems to fit the image I had of Ferrari pretty well, actually.

A company that has to 'create' a new class of cars just so it can claim a lap record with their FXX (and got beatena t their own game by the Zonda R) isn't exactly the kind of manufacturer I'd trust to handle their PR in an honest way.
 
This has long been hinted at in magazines. Bugatti obviously do something similar too, which is why you see so few comparative tests or track laps on the Veyron.

It's a shame, like the guy says, Ferrari's are good enough out of the box to be more than competitive against their rivals.

Props to Chris Harris for publishing the facts and ruining his relationship with the manufacturer.
 
Finally someone in the industry has come out and said what's been clear to see for years if you looked closely enough and no real surprise it’s Chris who’s finally broken silence… another huge tick against his integrity.

There have always been strong rumours about Ferrari’s paranoia when it comes to their cars, who gets to drive them and what get written about them. 2 examples from the last year…

Autocar car of the year event:
Ferrari turns up at Donnington with two 458’s and a full support crew – transporters, mechanics, test drivers, wheels, tyres… the whole shebang! One of the 458’s has not just been optimised for track work, but was taken to Donnington by the same team of Ferrari test drivers and mechanics in the weeks leading up to the event and was specifically set up for that particular track. When Steve Sutcliffe (a very well respected driver) turned lap times in it slower than a GT3RS and a Noble M600 the Ferrari team told him he was too slow and he needed to go quicker… then they said the car needed new tyres and it mysteriously went 1.5s a lap faster.

EVO car of the year event:
Ferrari apparently cannot supply a 599GTO for the event to go with the 458 they have already agreed to supply. EVO source a GTO customer car and Ferrari say if EVO use it they will withdraw the 458.

Must have really pissed them off when their perfectly prepared £170k 458 got beaten by the £120k Porsche in both magazines.

And over the years there are so many examples if you read between the lines… magazines haven’t actually come out and said it directly, but when a Ferrari doesn’t win a group test there’s often a little bit at the end saying how great the Ferrari is and how close it was to winning and how disappointed Ferrari will be etc etc.

And some of the performance numbers their test cars have turned out have been 'slightly' suspicious too… a 458 on ‘street tyres’ lapping Bedford 2s quicker than a 430 Scud on ‘track day specials’… or a 458 running 0-100 in 6.1s in the hands of an Italian magazine.

Well done Chris 👍
 
As a company and a F1 team, I despise Ferrari. But the things they make are spectacular.
 
Interesting read and, if all true it will demand a quick reply from Ferrari and also from other magazines editorial staff.

There's only one thing I don't understand and makes me a litle suspicious that the author may be "slightly" enhancing things. The "special tyres" that glue themselves to the dyno's rollers. Ferrari doesn't make tyres, so I assume they were from a tyre-manufacturer brand. They had their specs carved to the sides I presume. So, what tyres were these? And were they road legal but in fact NOT the tyres that the Scud was delivered with to clients?

I think it's more to do with the car not being equipped with the tires of a production model but rather with a stickier compound ferrari put on just for the events.
 
Back