599 GTB: Cleaner and more beautiful than the Vette. Photo Ferrari Media.
By Wallace A. Wyss
A commentary on the Ferrari 599 GTB , introduced in 2007, and its subsequent versions.
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano
When Ferrari sought to design a new front-engined car to replace the 575M Maranello, they wanted to have one that would be a comfortable grand tourer, and yet incorporate what they call “cutting edge downforce “figures, i.e. stay glued to the ground. Hence the long hood, sloping downward into a built in front spoiler.
One has to admire the long hood vs. short rear deck relationship as continuing a line of front-engined cars of similar proportions like the Daytona. It was designed by Jason Castriota, who created a sensation with the new car in 2006.
The grille cavity shape is standard Ferrari , and the two air intakes adjoining it on either side might be a bit larger than they need to be for cosmetics, but don’t detract that much from the grille cavity shape.
The front hood has two air vents, continuing a theme that goes back to the GTC/4 of 1971. On the 599XX there were louver type vents instead. It also has the usual “power dome.”
In the side view the air vent is also designed to vent out hot air but one has to question whether this vent is in the wrong place. It might be in the right place to vent out the hot air but is higher than such vents are traditionally placed and the top line is at an odd angle, at least the upper line, slashing upward at an angle that doesn’t compliment the front fender line.
There is a rear scoop low down in front of the rear fender; Ferrari says it is for the gearbox and gas tank. It is not too obtrusive, looks about 1000% better than the side scoop on the Corvette Z06 of a few years ago.
Ferrari 599 GTB. Flying buttresses are clearly seen in this view. Photo Ferrari Media.
The cabin has to be the most controversial part. It has a tightly wrapped rear window, but then there are what would have to be called “flying buttresses” similar to those on the Maserati Merak. From a side view these give the car more of a “faux fastback” look. But assuming no great aerodynamic gains are obtained from the buttresses, overall their only value, in this writer’s eye, is that they prevent the car from looking too much like recent Corvettes.
As far as the taillights, we have seen these “peekaboo” top lenses before in the Enzo. At least Ferrari went back to one per side, which looked less busy than on the Enzo.
In a press release, Ferrari bragged that the co-efficient of drag was .33, which might be good for a touring car but it seems like the C4 Corvette had a co-efficient of drag of .34 and wasn’t that decades ago? With all that Ferrari has learned since the ’80s, it would seem they could get below .30.
Ferrari 599 GTO
On the 599 GTO version, introduced in April, 2010, Ferrari added an a rear spoiler molded into the deck. It reflects the more recent realization of automakers that only the center of the spoiler be high, though some would still like a same height spoiler all the way across. But, tt can go 208 mph, coincidentally two mph more than the ’05-’06 Ford GT, thus providing proof that one need not go mid-engined, for all its inconvenience in luggage room (the Ford GT has, in fact, no luggage area), to have an over 200-mph car.
On the GTO the grille is blacked out, and the prancing horse even blacked out. Let me stand up and say the reason for “blacking out” things is forgotten so let’s get rid of it and bring back a little chrome to highlight the paint. I have a blacked out Nikon that I presume was left over from when they used them in the Vietnam war they blacked them out so as not to cause a light flare but the Ferrari 599GTO is not in combat, so let’s bring back the chrome. (of no particularly relevancy here but interesting, Giorgetto Giugiaro, helped Nikon design the F3 and later Nikons) Blacked out chrome is as passé as the white suits that were worn disco stars of the ’70s. On the rear of the GTO, the horse is black and the chrome lettering (which looks suspiciously of Pontiac origin as far as type font) is chrome, so even Ferrari is betwixt and between on painting what should be chrome black.
The wheels are double spoked and an aggressive design though nothing about them looks particularly reminiscent of Ferrari. The bulging out rocker panels have been seen on many other cars and look to this writer like an attempt to make the rest of the body look more shapely as was on the last generation Firebird.
In sum, the 599 and all its variants, except for the convertible, which this writer has not seen in person, is a technical tour de force, and welcome proof that a front-engined GT car can match the achievements of a mid-engined car. But it is becoming hard to deny that the styling was, perhaps subliminally, way too influenced by the Corvette’s current shape, and the flying buttresses looks like a vain attempt to disguise that fact.
Getting their Goat. Ferrari's GTO may not be different enough from GM's sports car. Photo by Ferrari Media.
Which is, by the way, a backward complement to Chevrolet; they got a shape so close to what Ferrari would deem ideal. The Corvette has slowly been adopting one Ferrari design cue after another, such as the faired-in Plexiglas covered headlights, and the use of similar side vents on some models and wheels that are almost identical, so one wonders if the next generation Corvette will look more like a Ferrari than the next generation Ferrari? Looking at the new Aperta, the Corvette influence has not abated.
This late model Corvette is a Ferrari hunter in Ferrari clothes. Will the 2012 model be even more Ferrari like?
Consider the vast price different between the 599 Aperta and the Corvette. Then think about the outstanding performance of the Corvette ZR1, which is also capable of over 200 mph. The closing gap in both the styling and performance is a problem that requires addressing by Ferrari. Corvettes will always be fast, but we hope that some serious effort will be made to get the next generation back on the path to a shape that will be unmistakably and uniquely Ferrari.
Wally needs to to do more/better research. The designer of the 599 was Jason Castriota.
I must disagree with Mr. Wyss’ assessment that the new Fiorano’s styling is much better than the Vette’s. While I’m not a particular fan of the current C-6, I don’t think the Ferrari is any better. Personally, I think the Prancing Horse has lost it’s way, style-wise.
I fear the golden days of Italian styling may be over…
Robb Northrup
First, we are honored to have Mr. Queener as a reader and very much appreciate his comments.
Secondly, the buck stops here. Wally gets the blame for my oversights. As editor, I am the proofreader (boo!) main writer (ugh!), layout guy, WordPress guy, the ad guy, and fact checker (since we can’t afford a Jim Sitz). And here is what happened.
Last night (actually about 3 am this morning) I did indeed check on Stephenson’s role at Ferrari based on Wally’s statement.
When I Googled Stephenson, all readily available sources indicated that “He moved to Ferrari in July 2002, working on the Maserati MC12 and Ferrari F430. He also oversaw Pininfarina’s work on the Maserati Quattroporte and Ferrari 612 Scaglietti.”
However, none specifically mentioned the 599 design, but I assumed would have been on the table during Stephenson’s tenure there and under his watch.
I also referred back to our own interview with Castriota, in which we stated
that “In 2006, Castriota made headlines with the technical and highly
sensual Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano..” but perhaps wrongly assumed that the
Castriota team was under Stephenson at the time. So I let it run as is.
So, while I’m not yet entirely clear as to Stephenson’s role, we are most certainly comfortable with Mr. Queener’s correction and our earlier interview with Castriota, and will make the corrections to the text.
Robb, thanks for you comments. I do, however, recollect reading in the above article, “we hope that some serious effort will be made to get the next generation back on the path to a shape that will be unmistakably and uniquely Ferrari.”
which all sound suspiciously like ‘the golden days of Italian styling may be over..”
Although I own and have been a Corvette fan for over fifty years I certainly wouldn’t
pass up the chance to win a Ferrari. Problem is that I can’t locate where or how to enter the contest within the site here. P.S. Ive never seen a competitor mention the
Corvette as many times in one article as this one. BRUCE E. HART
None of the 599 models look right. For that matter, neither does the Corvette. The area between the front wheel arch and the A piller is too long, making the shape ungainly and big. I do not think that Italian design has lost its way, however, there are more government mandated impediments to design around. Clean, simple lines make for good design and the 599 does not have clean simple lines.
It may be an “age” thing, but I find the lack of glass makes the cockpit feel claustrophobic. No doubt structural issues dictate much of the material that limits the amount of glass, but it is nice to be able to see the world, which is possible if you drive at less than 200mph. And I agree entirely with Mr. Wyss about the “black chrome” problem. As to tail lights, Ferrari having lost the monopoly on the simple round rear lights long ago, seems to failed to find any beautiful alternatives. The “peekaboo” lights aren’t good. Check how good the rear of the 360 looks in comparison to its’ successor. As a final remark, in my view if you have to put the shields on the fenders to insure everyone recognizes the car as a Ferrari, the designer has failed and had to resort to “jewelry”.
My first impression was that it more than closely resembles the Alfa Romeo 8C.
As you know Enzo Ferrari was employed by Alfa Romeo before striking out on his own.
Have the pigeons come home to roost?
Let’s face it; all recent Ferraris have been ugly, including this one. In my mind, the last really good looking model was the 456 and even that had strong overtones of the 365GTB/4. I accept that function over form is required for ultimate performance, just look at a current F1 car for evidence of this, but for a road car, Ferrari drop should drop all the unnecessary “go fast” tat and return to a purity of line. It is no coincidence that over here in the UK, the most desired car is an Aston Martin not a Ferrari. Consumers can see the difference between something beautiful and “right” and something not so. Ferrari has now come perilously close to creating something very expensive that looks very cheap. Maybe this is intentional. A perfect reflection of the current aesthetics of the affluent world, designed to sell more cars. I hope not. It would be great (and probably very naive) to expect that the company return to the first principal that a true Ferrari is a fabulous engine wrapped in a sublime body. Then a Ferrari would once again be a wonderful thing to treasure. In the meantime, I’ll just go on putting the pennies aside towards a 246.
Mr. Wilmont has hit upon the crux of the problem. Ferrari has first to deliver a car of superior performance to most cars, so that means thousands of hours in the wind tunnel (they have a nice new one at Pininfarina). But that also means what gives you good numbers (Cd, downforce, etc.) in the wind tunnel might be considered ugly. And yet, fundamentally, almost by defination, you expect a Ferrari to be beautiful. So there’s a problem there, in that what might be beautiful to the eye might give you some bad numbers in the wind tunnel. I personally feel like you that Aston Martin is more on the right track than Ferrari in this regard–their cars are beautiful and fast. And so is Lamborghini on the Murcielago spyder. I am not in the market for these high-ticket cars but as a critic I can say I think over at Pininfarina they ought to think about leaning more toward beauty in their next design decisions for fuure models rather than obeying wind tunnel dictates that will give them better performance over 180-mph because beauty is more important to maintaining the Ferrari mystique than is performance. But not only do I expect the future cars to be beautiful but more unique in their shape, not easily mistaken for any other marque on the road. Am I asking too much?
Ferrari, flying buttress and Corvette in the same line? I’m puzzled at the angle of the article but pitting the 599 and the 06 together is just not comparable, especially in the design center. Yes, Ferrari has lagged evocative designs the last few decades but it is back now. Corvette is… still what it is and for a pushrod engine, the price isn’t bad. But it cannot be compared to a 599. Maybe a Maserati, or other Teutonic car?
Hi Wallace, and that really is the major problem these days, where is the passion in the design?
OK, the last decades were spent working on aerodynamics with great results. It’s true that the last pretty Ferrari goes back a decade or more, although I like the California Spider I feel rekindles that spectacular Italian savoir faire. On the bottom end, design has been so stretched thin in order to attract as many people as possible that we need a place for something new and provocative. The 8C was interesting and I think the Italian days will be back. In the meantime, since modern cars leave me feeling… blah. So I turn my attention to electric cars that have shown more freedom of design than our internal combustion beauties have in a while.
The article, as well as the comments accompanying, point to our collective desire that great auto firms keep their brand unique in the ever-devolving world of blase auto design. But auto companies regularly steal ideas from each other, as we witness when we compare the 599 and the C-whatever. It’s a cutthroat world out there, friends!
What is unique and brands the Ferrari? Its engine. Show the engine. Design the body around that. Don’t worry about designing to go 200 mph – we can’t do that anyway. Make a unique, passionate style statement and show off that engine.