• May 8th 2010 at 6:38PM
  • 55
Ferrari 599 HY-KERS – Click above for high-res image gallery

By now, you've likely seen the various hybrid vehicles shown off by Ferrari, both for racing and for street-legal models in concept form. Purists might be more than a bit put off by the idea of a supposedly eco-friendly vehicle wearing the famed Prancing Horse badge, and it seems that Ferrari head Amadeo Felisa commiserates with them.

Speaking to Autocar at the recent Beijing Motor Show, Felisa had some rather interesting remarks on the future of his company, notably regarding the powerplants needed to meet future emissions and fuel mileage requirements. Says Felisa:
Our customers are looking for the essence of Ferrari – the emotion, the performance, the technology and so on. The way in which we fix emissions is not their problem but ours. If we are not able to fix it, only then will it become a problem for them.
That's rational, we'd say. But here's the point where Felisa's comments seem sure to garner a few raised eyebrows amongst the environmental set:
[Hybrids will come in] 2015, if we are forced to by the [government] regulations. The issue of emissions for Ferrari is more a political one than real one. Lowering emissions of every Ferrari will not save the planet, but it will cost us a lot of money... In the next five to 10 years, hybrid technology will develop and maybe something else will come up. Maybe it'll be hydrogen, but for our cars only hybrid is ready.
So, hydrogen isn't ready for Ferrari (or vice versa) and the only reason the sportscar manufacturer is even looking at hybrids is because the various governments of the world are making them. Oh yeah, and nothing with more than two doors. At least that much we can all agree upon.

[Source: Autocar]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 5 Years Ago
      I can't get over the blatant sense of entitlement among the wealthy of the world and those that provide them with their gross excesses. I have neither pity nor respect for their concerns.

      Here's what I have to say to them: cry me a river so that I can put up a dam and generate electricity for my (eventual) EV.

      Besides, as nep and jake said, if they were smart (kind of like Porsche and Lotus), they could be moving forward, pushing the envelope of current alternatives and actually be at the forefront of future tech.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Boy you granola chewing, jesus sandal wearing, tree hugging hippies whine more than anyone I know.

        That being said, the typical Ferrari owner doesn't really care about the price of gas. Is that entitlement? No, you're just pissed because they can afford gas at $10 a gallon. Ferrari owners love the sound of the ICE engines their cars make. Going EV would take that away. Will Ferrari "save the planet" by going EV or hybrid? Certainly not. There's not enough Ferrari's to make a dent. Oil isn't going away in the next ten years or more. That's plenty of time for Ferrari to decide on what it needs to do to best suit its needs and market. Ferrari is always on the cutting edge of technology in their cars. They're not going to just let that slip away. You Greenies need to get your act together and go after the Big Rocks (automakers) first. They're the ones doing the most damage to the planet right now.
        • 5 Years Ago
        har, har! very funny! ha, ha! It is to laugh! ;P

        Seriously, though, what put me over the edge was that they feel entitled to be exempt from pollution standards (emissions, etc.). That was the last straw for me. It's bad enough people buy these cars to begin with: what you call a "choice" I call a "character flaw." That's another reason why I appreciate Tesla - they gave these more-money-than-brains people a constructive outlet for their excesses.

        And, I know you were being semi-serious, LTAW - however, I wish I wouldn't need a car. It can be fun, but it costs lots of money, from the monthly payments to insurance and maintenance. I do walk to work every day, though it is interrupted by a 40-minute train ride, but I do walk to work. But I have to drive just to get to the grocery store 2 miles away. I have to drive to the vet, the drug store, the pet store, my doctor, etc., etc., etc. I walk to my dentist, but I only need those services once a year. I don't know where you live, but even in the densely populated areas of Northern Virginia (giant, sprawling 'burb of DC), very little is within a useful walking distance. And with all the crazy drivers around there that think that the 25 mph speed limit signs are merely suggestions, there's no way in hell you'd catch me on a bike with a basket full of groceries.

        There are so many people here within such a relatively small region, that more public transportation would work. The problem is that many people who have cars turn their noses up at buses, and then bitch about their tax dollars going to light rail improvements. With selfish, ignorant citizens like that, what choices do the rest of us have?

        I like "fark" - may I use it? That is funny.
        • 5 Years Ago
        No human being has some special right to waste and pollute more than any other human. Who do these people think they are? Obviously, I can't let this go easily...what shameless whores.

        I'm almost as angry with this as finding out grids waste power because they can't handle wind power fluctuations.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Oh, we do, daily - it's just the topic of the article at hand. These people are part of this world - they need to play by the rules like everyone else.

        And, yes, that is "entitlement" - the conviction that someone has a right to something regardless of the effects upon others.

        Also, I hate sandals, I prefer to keep my hair short, I don't do drugs, and granola bars are for horses.
        • 5 Years Ago
        "No human being has some special right to waste and pollute more than any other human. Who do these people think they are? Obviously, I can't let this go easily...what shameless whores."

        On the basis of this statement, I *demand* that you immediately give up your automobile.

        Who the fark do you think you are to waste natural resources, and pollute my atmosphere? If I can ride a bike to work, then so can you. For that matter, you should likely also work outdoors, with no air-conditioning in the summer or heat in the winter. No electric lights over your head, either. You self-righteous b@$t^rd...

        ; )

        • 5 Years Ago
        "I like "fark" - may I use it? That is funny."

        Not mine. Help yourself.


        The epic flame wars there make the FCV/BEV debate here look like kittens wrestling. Wait for a bicyclist vs. auto thread...
      • 5 Years Ago
      Ferrari will whine just like Porsche did

      Porsche got the EPA to make a "low volume" exception for certain automakers. And now it is Ferrari's turn to whine to the government to save money.

      This is not righteous outrage at unfairness... just business as normal to save a few bucks.

      If they refused to make hybrids, what would the fines be? So what if Ferraris costs $250k instead of $230k. If a car maker pollutes more than the industry average, then they SHOULD pay more. Keep up or shut up.
      • 5 Years Ago
      I got flamed super hard on regular autoblog for suggesting ferrari stop whining, forget about hybrids and do a pure electric.


      Of course you all know that an electric ferrari could make all their gas powered models look like jokes. $200k-$300k worth of electric goodness would be faster than any production car on the planet. It could handle just the same, as well. BMW manages to make their 4000+lb cars handle like they're on rails, after all.
        • 5 Years Ago
        The brainless petrolheads start whining every time you take away oil, fumes and noise. They'd rather be driving around dinosaur tech than embrace innovation. These are the kind of guys who ran GM into the ground with massive penis extensions.
        • 5 Years Ago
        +1 for penis extensions. I'm not sure about GM, but i've seen a lot of dodge rams which definitely qualify for compensating.
        • 5 Years Ago
        you can see
        • 5 Years Ago
        Penis extension? I have seen a Ram with Truck-nuts. Same basic effect...
      • 5 Years Ago
      "Lowering emissions of every Ferrari ... cost us a lot of money" - and of course Ferrari would have to pass those costs on to their customers. I feel sorry for those poor Ferrari buyers who will struggle to fork over that extra bit of money...
      • 5 Years Ago
      Waaah, we are Ferrari and WE want to be treated special.

      Sorry Ferrari. Now stop whining and build nice eco-sports car.

      The first poster nailed it . . . build a $200K sports EV. Perhaps you can do 0 to 60 in less than 3 seconds. Or build a Tesla clone.
      • 5 Years Ago
      It does seem a strange attitude from them. As for arguments about 'letting the market decide' well I'm sorry they market only considers one aspect of a well functioning human society and that aspect is profit. The fact of the matter is that the market will have a delayed reaction to many somewhat predictable variables. This is the exact situation we are in now. If you believe the recent recession and ongoing financial woes (at least of the West) are totally unrelated to oil that's your choice, but the timing seems like an amazing coincidence.

      For good or bad government regulation on balance is trying to protect the market and society as a whole from itself. As others have pointed out, increased efficiency standard and lower emissions are not a surprise and all manufacturers are in the same boat, it simply would not be fair to allow exemptions for niche companies. Ferrari, step up to the plate and show us what you can do!
      • 5 Years Ago
      Many people thought the Swiss were idiots for not moving entirely to quartz movements. More efficient, more accurate, cheaper to produce... more common.

      Just like there will always be a market for a fine watch, true to it's mechanical roots, there will always be a market for fine ICEs from makers with historic reputations.

      Ferrari may make an EV, and it would like be awesome, but if they decide to continue to deliver the world's finest sports cars powered by ICEs, then that's their decision. I'm sure there will always be someone willing to pay to have whatever Maranello makes.

      I'm more disturbed by the self-righteous individuals on this blog who think that their personal preferences should dictate other people's behavior.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Totally feel ya there.
        I hate this electric or nothing attitude people have on here. It's just as bad as the attitude some autoblog regulars have.

        I don't care about whatever regulations Ferrari may have to face, that's beyond my control. The potential is there to make a new classic instead of dragging their heels, as they've always done. Stop whining about potentially being forced into making a hybrid or EV and focus on making one that kicks everyeone's ass. Porsche is doing it!

        Beautiful cars, but they should have to play by the same rules everyone else does.
        • 5 Years Ago
        "All us EV guys and gals ask is that you and your hydrogen scammer buddies stop trying to continue stealing money out of my tax dollars for your fuel cell hoax."

        I dunno about letstakeawalk and Jason, but i could give a rat's ass about hydrogen right now, you'd know that if you ready any of my posts.

        And that's what this 'green rage' on this site is about - what technology gets the funding. It kind of sickens me because it divides us on here, even though we all ultimately have the same goals in mind: get off oil, pollute less, etc.

        I wish people on here could be level headed about the advantages and disadvantages of each technology, rather than being blind fanboys to one and demonize everything else. They all have their ups and downs.

        As for Ferrari, yah.. what you guys said. They could start designing a record shattering electric car now. Oh well, their loss.
        • 5 Years Ago
        "They're just pissed off now because their flashy little pollution spewers can't meet the upcoming GH limits in Europe."

        Your ignorance shows itself again. Ferrari has shown that they are able to comply with emissions standards in their new cars. They meet all current standards, and there's no reason to suggest that they will somehow fail to meet those standards as they are raised with Euro 6 in 2014.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Thanks for being the only person on ABG with a brain.
        • 5 Years Ago
        The reason why the majority of ABG commentators favor BEVs over FCVs is because they are NOT equal.

        Many people think there can be a Utopian coexistence between the two. There cannot. Nor will there be only one. But one will dominate.

        I predict that BEVs will continue in their obvious lead as the future of the automobile.
        PHEVs will fill in the gaps of those with range needs. And HFCVs will find a niche in places that need both range and good efficiency while minimizing the disadvantages. (commercial trucking).

        It is not being a fanboy... just observant.


        Ferrari will whine just like Porsche did and probably get the "low volume" exception that they Porsche did for the new CAFE standards.

        This is not righteous outrage at unfairness... just business as normal to save a few bucks.

        If they refused to make hybrids, what would the fines be? So what if Ferraris costs $250k instead of $230k. If a car maker pollutes more than the industry average, then they SHOULD pay more. Keep up or shut up.

        • 5 Years Ago
        Nep: "but you saw it coming, so don't whine about it."

        Absolutely right. Ferrari saw increasing emissions regulations for decades now. They're just pissed off now because their flashy little pollution spewers can't meet the upcoming GH limits in Europe. I have no sympathy, they saw it coming.

        We need the same rules for everyone. Ferrari needs to shut up and get to work.

        As for Nep's bitching about EV proponents not wanting our tax dollars going to fund oil company monopolies in hydrogen, the same thing applies. When the first notable gas crisis happened in 1974 we should have seen more coming. When the US reached peak oil production in 1968 - we should have seen today coming. When the oil companies promised Reagan that they'd make us energy independent if he gave them all they wanted - we should have seen foreign oil dominance coming.

        All Americans should be pissed off at the auto companies who aren't going full speed toward EV (ahem, GM) by this late stage in the game. They have seen this day coming since 1974. And carrying water for the oil companies and their hydrogen hoax won't help you or our country when the next oil price gouging session comes (in 2011?).
        • 5 Years Ago
        Okay, okay. The luddites can keep their gas burners for decades to come so don't get your panties in a bunch Jason, lets and nep. I'm not going to come into your garage and TAKE your fossil burner car. All us EV guys and gals ask is that you and your hydrogen scammer buddies stop trying to continue stealing money out of my tax dollars for your fuel cell hoax. It's not that difficult to understand and hopefully you are a little clearer.

        Don't cry. Don't pout or throw a hissy fit. Nobody's taking away your vroom vroom. You can continue pretending you're a Nascar driver on the way to work (on the freeway probably going no more than 32 mph because of traffic). Go ahead. Play your little games in your polluter car.

        Just don't try to stop the rest of us - most of America that is - from being able to support and eventually buy an electric car. And trying to lump us in the category with some kind of enviro-nutjobs is just as wrong as me calling you Luddites, Neanderthals or Troglodytes.
        • 5 Years Ago
        But they are part of this world. They must follow the rules. They cannot, must not, be exempt.

        Ferrari is already in the annals of history and the record books for superior performing ICE vehicles and the marvels of engineering those vehicles represent. However, those days are over. It's past time for everyone to move on, no exceptions. If pure ICE designs don't provide them the performance they want under the constraints of new pollution regulations, then that's their problem. Do not blame society/gov't. We're doing what we, as a group, think is best for the survival of our species. It's up to the automakers to comply, not whine like babies. There should be a pacifier with the Ferrari emblem on it so that I can mail them some.

        Don't even start on the free-market crap. There are no free markets in the civilized world anyway, so it's a moot point at best. Free markets determine nothing beyond short-term profit. Period. There is no value on sustainability, only on the size of quarterly dividends.

        "Rape, steal and murder; God Bless the Almighty Dollar." ~Ozzy Osbourne
        • 5 Years Ago
        They all have their ups and downs. That's right.

        The UP of electric vehicles is that almost no public funding has gone to them till this year yet they're coming to market this year from more than one company and will be purchased by thousands of regular middle class people just like me. And next year there will be more than 100,000 of them on the showroom floor.

        The DOWN of hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles is that after 15 years and over 2 billion dollars of taxpayer funding they AREN'T heading for the showroom until (maybe) 2015 or even later. And if they miss that promised deadline it'll be the 5th time, not the first.

        See the difference? One (EV) is what the people want and companies are finally stepping forward to provide for them. The other (HFCV) is what the oil companies want, and want to force down our throats while using our tax dollars to do it.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Sorry, that was to letstakeawalk,

        and nept, I agreed (to an extent) with you on AB, and I think I like your comments here better than there.

        I come to ABG quite often. I don't post, but it's because I have nothing in common with the populace here. I come, check out the tech, and split. No point in arguing with narrow-minded, ponied-up fanboys of whichever tech.

        I'm not saying this is exclusive to ABG. There are muscle car guys that hate turbos on AB. There are piston-heads that hate rotaries on AB. There are sports car lovers that hate fast sedans. RWD-ers that hate AWD that hate FWD. None of them are equal, it doesn't mean the other one sucks, tho.

        All of it's ignorant. Everybody thinks their way is the only way.

        Right now, neither being "green" nor fuel economy are very high on my list of priorities. I appreciate what they mean, but personally, I'm not willing to sacrifice what I enjoy about motoring, nor am I in a position to need to.

        To those of you who hate me and my dirty rotaries. I live on 80 acres and if I were to count all the trees, when I got done, I'd have more than I counted. You guys keep saving the world with your grocery knapsacks.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I don't think Ferrari should specifically be singled out. But it's like the 1.3 mazda rotary engine in europe - it doesn't meet the new smog regs, so fix it or die out... but you saw it coming, so don't whine about it.

        I think the market should speak for itself also. Gas cars have a place. Sports cars have a place too. CAFE/EPA/Etc is necessary at the same time. You gotta play by the rules.. it's nice to be ahead of the curve though ( 2011 Hyundai Sonata is selling like hotcakes due to the high mpg ratings and horsepower of it's advanced motor, for example ).

        I dislike all the EV hardlining too. People are overly optimistic about EV's and overly freaked out about global warming / oil supplies, IMO. It's almost like a religion to them.

        The ICE will die when EV's kick it's ass, left right & center. EV's are far from that, right now, many of them are like the bare minimum of what you expect in a vehicle, sometimes less.
        • 5 Years Ago
        "Beautiful cars, but they should have to play by the same rules everyone else does."

        I agree, but I'm concerned about who's making the rules. I don't think Ferrari's production should be dictated by government mandates - I'd prefer to let the market dictate the rules on the most general terms; meaning, if Ferrari can survive while building ICEs when everyone else builds EVs, then at least Ferrari is competing head on with those other makers in a free market.

        I'm all for clean and efficient ICEs, but many here obviously want ICEs banned entirely. I can't support that, if only out of respect for a mechanical marvel. Frankly, I think that kind of extremism brands them as nuts, as the vast majority of the population would not agree - they're the kind of people who give us more moderate EV enthusiasts a bad name.

        It's kind of like how wasteful it is to have specialized beef cattle - the land could be used better, the feed for the cow is wasteful, the cow itself is a genetic mutation created by man (unable to breed naturally), but man, does Wagyu taste good. Thank FSM that we have the freedom to choose for ourselves - tofu or wagyu.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @letstakeawalk and neptronix:

        I agree 100%. I'm the kind of person that, when an EV comes out that delivers the kind of performance and range that I want at an acceptable price, I'll be the first in line to buy it. I'm not attached to any particular brand right now, so for my next car, I'll compare everything in my price range, and whichever one comes out on top is the one I'm going to buy (right now it's a Subaru WRX STi).

        I'm all about improving fuel economy and eventually making the switch to EV's, but they're not right for a lot of people right now due to their limitations, so why not just take baby steps until they work for many more? I, too hate the "all or nothing" attitude of a lot of followers of this site, it's narrow-minded and ignorant.
        • 5 Years Ago

        I appreciate your honesty. If you enjoy the legacy technology then you should keep it. There is nothing wrong with it. Just like there is nothing wrong with owning a sports car with 400 HP and a 200 MPH top speed.

        But there is a problem if you want to unleash those horses on public roads. A safety of the public issue.

        Now that the consensus is that greenhouse gases are an environmental concern, it becomes a problem.

        Nobody wants to take your toys away, they just ask that you pay for the cost. And the costs are more now that we know.


        The analogy of fanboys certainly apply to those here that completely exclude certain possible solutions. But there is a fundamental difference between AutoBlog that discuss currently available technology like AWD, turbos, etc... with the very speculative future of automotive technology.

        You guys are fanboys of very specific variants on ICE technology and have hands on experience that make your arguments very fine tuned. But we have Only press releases and a few very select fevers here. We mostly argue in terms of things YET TO COME years down the road.

        With AutoBlog, fanboys will rarely be either right or wrong because they argue over matters of preference. But the big debate here is hydrogen vs pure battery.

        It is like arguing gasoline vs. diesel adoption in the U.S. 50 years ago. Govt regulation and emission standards reduced diesels to trucks and a clear winner was shown in passenger vehicles.

        Sorry to say it, but our arguments are on another level than AutoBlog.

        That said, welcome.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Ferrari will whine just like Porsche did and probably get the "low volume" exception that they Porsche did for the new CAFE standards.

      This is not righteous outrage at unfairness... just business as normal to save a few bucks.

      If they refused to make hybrids, what would the fines be? So what if Ferraris costs $250k instead of $230k. If a car maker pollutes more than the industry average, then they SHOULD pay more. Keep up or shut up.

      • 5 Years Ago
      Typical Ferrari BS, they are old hat. They are afraid of new technology. They are in essence a 1980s company. Sadly they won't go out of business because there are enough dumb customers who think they are a cool and hip product but frankly they are only continuing on their name and not their product. I have much more respect for a company like Tesla who have started recently from nothing and managed great things.
        • 5 Years Ago
        • 5 Years Ago
        Interesting. Their visionary and founder, Enzo Ferrari, died in 1988.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Go EV. They already have the HY-KERS so why not? Just look at the Eliica from Japan. A motor in each wheel. Humongous battery pack underneath the car. Luxury interior.

      "Lithium-Ion batteries and an 80 horsepower electric motor for each wheel. Top speed is expected to be in excess of 230mph, with 0-60 times around 4 seconds already recorded. Power's not an issue, then... What about range? 200 miles per charge."
      (source: http://www.gizmag.com/eight-wheeled-japanese-electric-supercar-shooting-for-250mph-land-speed-record/10702/ )

      Gas burner Ferrari's are already a joke. It's good that Enzo isn't here to see his pride and joy turned into the laughing stock of the performance car world.
      (Wrightspeed EV kicks Ferrari butt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVawYlcQFD4 )
        • 5 Years Ago
        The Eliica is truly astounding, but in spite of its performance it is more of a luxury land yacht than a sports car. But if the Eliica wasn't enough inspiration for a sports car maker like Ferrari, the Tesla Roadster certainly should be.
      • 5 Years Ago
      On the one hand, I can kind of get what they are saying, making Ferraris cleaner will not directly make a huge impact, given their volume.

      However as leader in technology, they can have huge indirect impact by driving enthusiasm for cleaner cars and driving forward technology that can make cleaner cars. That's kind of the role Tesla is playing; the volume is very small, but their indirect impact is huge.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I second your statement Jake. Too bad influential people like Mr. Felisa are too shortsighted to make a difference.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I agree! Tesla is a great example - their direct product may not make much difference per se, but look at the movement that their success has catalyzed across the world.
      • 5 Years Ago
      But of a non-story isn't it? The same applies to the horsepower crazy Germans.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X