UCP Awards 2009: Car of the Decade [The Enzo Issue]

I think it actually has the opposite effect.

It allows the aerodynamic slashes and panel gaps to stand out too much through shadow. Lending the cars a messy aesthetic.

You either have to go Silver or Dark. Either completely accentuate or hide.

[quote=NicFromLA;927831]I can't remember who I had this discussion with before, so if it was you forgive me for repeating myself: First, I really don't think the Enzo works in red; there's a dark blue on in NY and a medium blue metallic in France and I think those two are fantastic looking, it also looks nice in black or yellow. Second, I like the Enzo because it's very design-y, where I think most people like the F40 because it's very race-y looking and looks great in red.[/quote]

Maybe, but it doesn't help that I don't like the car any much more even after changing the colors. :D

[quote=IBrake4Rainbows;927865]You either have to go Silver or Dark. Either completely accentuate or hide.[/quote]

Dark hides the ugly.

Bright exposes it.

In any case I'd rather have the slower, more cumbersome and heavier raging bull from Sant'Agata.

[quote=Ferrer;927882]Bright exposes it.

In any case I'd rather have the slower, more cumbersome and heavier raging bull from Sant'Agata.[/quote]

with awd? your consistency is faltering. i'd take an enzo over pretty much anything out there. veyron included. i am with you that it is hideous, but sometimes you have to look past the form to get to the function.

[quote=cmcpokey;927885]with awd? your consistency is faltering. i'd take an enzo over pretty much anything out there. veyron included. i am with you that it is hideous, but sometimes you have to look past the form to get to the function.[/quote]
I'm not too interested in the Enzo to be honest. Yes it is fast, but it's also ugly and there's no proper manual and on top of all it is a Ferrari. Ideally I'd rather have a Zonda, which has everything you want in a supercar, including style, speed and charisma and drama. And in second place lies the good ol' Murcielago. Yes, it is four wheel drive, and it is slow and it's too wide and it is an anachronism in these day and age of exotic material. But, like the Zonda it has this little something which makes you overlook all its defects and just love it for what it is. There are few cars which can do this, and that's what makes it great in my opinion. It's a bit like the Arnage, a dinosaur and clealry surpased by all its rivals objectively but it had such character that it didn't really matter.

[quote=cmcpokey;927885]with awd? your consistency is faltering. i'd take an enzo over pretty much anything out there. veyron included. i am with you that it is hideous, but sometimes you have to look past the form to get to the function.[/quote]

I agree, he seemed to have flip flopped. :D

[quote=Ferrer;927892]I'm not too interested in the Enzo to be honest. Yes it is fast, but it's also ugly and there's no proper manual and on top of all it is a Ferrari. Ideally I'd rather have a Zonda, which has everything you want in a supercar, including style, speed and charisma and drama. And in second place lies the good ol' Murcielago. Yes, it is four wheel drive, and it is slow and it's too wide and it is an anachronism in these day and age of exotic material. But, like the Zonda it has this little something which makes you overlook all its defects and just love it for what it is. There are few cars which can do this, and that's what makes it great in my opinion. It's a bit like the Arnage, a dinosaur and clealry surpased by all its rivals objectively but it had such character that it didn't really matter.[/quote]

Fair enough. But I don't like the Arnage.

I notice the Ferrari because it' s crazy expensive, not because I actually like it.

the arnage is brilliant because it is because it doesnt compete with any other car out there. people who want an arnage buy an arnage, and nothing else. it is like a morgan in that regard. the murcielago et al tries to compete with the upper crust ferraris (sans enzo) and does so as an anachronism and for that it will always be behind the red cars. they dont develop technology, they use it after it has been proven. compare that to ferrari who are often the first company to put a technology on the street. even the lowest level ferrari often brings tech the highest level lambo cant even dream of.

the enzo sought to be the best all around car, without trumping anyone. do the fast 0-60, go over 200 (but not bother with 250), but they designed it to go around a track faster than damn near anything. it isn't an icon of good design, and it didnt set any records that will stand for ages like the F1. but it is a car, like the F1, that people will try and match for decades.

I think you overestimate its importance. A mere hotted-up F430 can beat it around Fiorano.
Other than the engine I'm really not a fan.

[quote=cmcpokey;927899]the arnage is brilliant because it is because it doesnt compete with any other car out there. people who want an arnage buy an arnage, and nothing else. it is like a morgan in that regard. the murcielago et al tries to compete with the upper crust ferraris (sans enzo) and does so as an anachronism and for that it will always be behind the red cars. they dont develop technology, they use it after it has been proven. compare that to ferrari who are often the first company to put a technology on the street. even the lowest level ferrari often brings tech the highest level lambo cant even dream of.

the enzo sought to be the best all around car, without trumping anyone. do the fast 0-60, go over 200 (but not bother with 250), but they designed it to go around a track faster than damn near anything. it isn't an icon of good design, and it didnt set any records that will stand for ages like the F1. but it is a car, like the F1, that people will try and match for decades.[/quote]
But that's the thing precisely. I don't want my italian supercar to be perfect. To have the most technology.

I want my italian supercar to look good, to make a lot of noise and to break down every hundred yards. To me this is why I don't like the Enzo. And why precisely, despite all, I like the Murcielago.

Look at the first 50 or so seconds of this video. It explains perfectly my point.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hovbx6rvBaA]YouTube - Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder supercar review - Top Gear - BBC[/ame]

[quote=Ferrer;927930]But that's the thing precisely. I don't want my italian supercar to be perfect. To have the most technology.

I want my italian supercar to look good, to make a lot of noise and to break down every hundred yards. To me this is why I don't like the Enzo. And why precisely, despite all, I like the Murcielago.

Look at the first 50 or so seconds of this video. It explains perfectly my point.
[/quote]

and that is precisely why lamborghini exists (as the video says), for people who dont care that it isnt as good, isnt as fast. here's the thing though. i do. i want to be the fastest. i want to work to get that last 10th. i want a car that i can take the track and abuse, and it doesnt break down at the end of the first straight. thats why i would never have an old ferrari, and why i desperately want a new one. i don't care how it looks. i don't really care how it sounds, although there is something magical about a ferrari engine. i just want it to be fast, and be rewarding to drive.

lambos have always been too 'look at me' for my taste. in fact i find them to have a complete lack of taste. but thats fine if you are a new moneyed, wanna be racer with no clue about racing. i think that is why i dislike them. they are designed purely for the poseurs. they are slower than they could be, performance is a an afterthought, and driving position is compromised to say the least. that is not what i want.

I second pokey. Just not as eloquently.

Edit: @ Hellcat 1. An F430 is never "merely" anything. 2. Fiorano rewards a lot of tire grip. Since tire technology has improved quite a bit in the intervening years, that and the combination allow the Scuderia to match the times of the Enzo. At other tracks the Enzo is still faster since it brings a more well rounded performance envelope than even the Scuderia.

[quote=NicFromLA;927774]Disagree. First, there's a LOT of Diablo in the Murci's chassis and engine. Second, it didn't push the envelope in any spectacular way; it didn't set a new standard for performance or top speed or handling or performance/usability. That being said it is a GREAT looking car and I'm totally a fan.[/quote]

I don't think that any of that matters at all. I'd like to think that the Murcielago was the representative for supercars, the one that did not excel in any area but showed what supercars were about. It's been alive for the larger portion of the decade and its performance has evolved over time to compete, from 570 to 630 to 660, it's never been a low point of supercars.

[quote=092326001;927958]I don't think that any of that matters at all. I'd like to think that the Murcielago was the representative for supercars, the one that did not excel in any area but showed what supercars were about. It's been alive for the larger portion of the decade and its performance has evolved over time to compete, from 570 to 630 to 660, it's never been a low point of supercars.[/quote]

It didn't excel in any performance area, and never really competed with the other supercars. Even its various evolutions were just trying not to fall too far behind, rather than bumping it anywhere near the front of the pack. It's really more a competitor of the 550/575/599 than the Enzos, Carrera GTs, S7s, Zondas and Veyrons.

[quote=wwgkd;927960]It didn't excel in any performance area, and never really competed with the other supercars. Even its various evolutions were just trying not to fall too far behind, rather than bumping it anywhere near the front of the pack. It's really more a competitor of the 550/575/599 than the Enzos, Carrera GTs, S7s, Zondas and Veyrons.[/quote]

exactly. unlike the ones you mentioned (although i would be loath to include the S7 and Zonda in there), they never once moved the game on. they merely fought irrelevance, and sought to bolster slumping sales at the end of very long model lives by adding hp and trim options. the reventon was a highlight of their decade, but was merely an interesting styling exercise. unfortunately the murcie and gallardo are still just rehashes of the diablo, which was itself a rehash of the countach.

the same could be said of the 430/360/355/348 et al. but we are discussing the enzo, and there is very little other than insane styling that connects it with its F50 predecessor.