Damn you Egan...

Ian F wrote: Didn't the first Ferraris have I-6 engines?

Nah, the first Ferrari's used small displacement V12s.

The only Ferrari 6 cylinder I know of is the V6 in the Dino which was never badged a Ferrari.

Rupert wrote: Only a V-12? I admit I was pretty impressed by my first experience with a 567 cubic inch supercharged V-12. But if you're looking for real power & might, you need to consider a 645 cubic inch V-24 with a turbo, overhead cams, & 4 valves per cylinder. That ride will make everyone else look like they are stopped!

Oh Tom,

I can see by your picture, you didn't understand the whole context of these engines. We're talking about a V-12 with 567 cubic inches PER CYLINDER & a V-24 with 645 cubic inches PER CYLINDER. In addition, the V-24 also has a supercharger for low RPM torque. After mid-range, the turbo kicks in for your basic high RPM power.

Now we're talking about real pulling power! And they're both made by GM.

Joe Gearin wrote:

Ian F wrote: Didn't the first Ferraris have I-6 engines?

Nah, the first Ferrari's used small displacement V12s. The only Ferrari 6 cylinder I know of is the V6 in the Dino which was never badged a Ferrari.

Ferrari did have the Colombo V12 early on, but the early Formula One and Two cars were inline 4s.

Wikipedia list of Ferrari engines

Ok, Ok, you got me! I thought we were talking about Ferrari street-car engines.

Also the 750 Monza, 860 Monza and original Mondial used inline 4 cylinder engines.

At ease folks ... Peter bought an old Ford instead.

yeah... but I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up with a Ferrari within a year or so... must be nice to have AADD and bascially get paid to have it.

Sorry to say, I believe Peter is about ready for a rest home or at least assisted living. I just read his article in the 2012 new car issue & he's apparently gone to the old side. He sold the Mustang and his wife wrecked the BMW so he started using his van as a daily driver.

When you thought things good hardly get worse, he just bought a 2007 Cadillac Deville!! Worse yet, he admits to lusting after a Jeep Wrangler if they can ever improve the mileage!

Yup ... it's a long slide down from a Ferrari 308 to a 2007 Caddy. I loved his columns about his '53 and '62 Caddys from years ago. But an '07? That's ridulous. He needs an intervention, or maybe he needs a job writing for the AARP magazine.

Joe Gearin wrote:

Ian F wrote: Didn't the first Ferraris have I-6 engines?

Nah, the first Ferrari's used small displacement V12s. The only Ferrari 6 cylinder I know of is the V6 in the Dino which was never badged a Ferrari.

Plenty of early Ferraris used non V-12s; Monzas for example. They basically tried most configurations looking for the most speed. The reputation for handling came later; early Ferraris won races because they had strong, reliable, and powerful (for their displacement) engines.

Ferraris are special cars; to an extent, I agree with Mr. Spohn about the specialness of the V-12; when I last toured the factory, they highlighted the fact that the V8s were assembled on the production line, but each V-12 was a single engineers responsibility; each V-12 builder built 1 engine per week.

I have driven the all modern V8 models, except for the 308/328, and they are spectacular and special in a different way than the V12s - they are more highly stressed and more "F1" if you will. To be fair, I've driven several vintage V12 Ferraris, but no modern ones, so perhaps my characterization isn't entirely accurate.

I think they central point - made by Andy and some others - is a Ferrari is a worthy dream for a car enthusiast, but you need to know what it is going to cost you - and the number is basically $5-$10 per mile - perhaps lower if you drive the E30 out it, but then you better never sell, because most Ferraris are low mileage Ferraris, and you will take a massive hit in market value...

Andy - How tall are you? I'm 6'4", and I am curious about what models you've driven (Ferrari) that you fit, or don't.