The new Enzo Ferrari - the Ferrari F70 - will get 920bhp
Georg Kacher is a man many of us grew up reading in CAR Magazine, a man who made the monthly cost of the mag a bargain all on his own (well, with LJK). So when Georg Kacher tells us that the new Ferrari F70 will have a V12 with 800bhp and a KERS package with an electric motor adding a further 120bhp, we believe him.
As far back as 2009 we reported that although, at that time, Ferrari were developing a turbo V8 for the F70, they were also developing an 800bhp V12 alongside. In 2009 Ferrari felt the world was moving so far against big V12s that they would have to opt for a turbo V8 for the F70.
But the heart at Ferrari was still in the big V12, and in October last year Ferrari CEO Amedeo Felisa confirmed the heart had won and the F70 would get the V12. Ferrarista rejoiced. And now the F70 is getting not just the 800bhp V12 we told you about in 2009, but a KERS package with a 120bhp as well – for a total of 920bhp – we hope the Ferrari anoraks won’t decry that as sacrilege.
As well as the total of 920bhp from its naturally aspirated, 7.3 litre V12, Georg says the carbon fibre F70 will come in at not much more than 1000kg, meaning it has every chance of being not just quicker off the line than a Bugatti Veyron, but potentially faster too. But Georg also says the F70 will almost certainly be the last V12 Ferrari, and the V8 turbo will be the way forward. Which is a shame, but the head has to win eventually.
We expect the new Ferrari F70 to debut at the Paris Motor Show in September, and be the right side of €1,000,000.
Thanks, Georg.
Pete says
Let’s hope it isn’t as pig ugly as the Enzo was, however many horses Ferrari bless it with.
Dteamer says
Ah, L.J.K Setright. Now he really was an interesting motoring writer, just so long as you understood his foibles and loves in advance.
But LJK is gone and Kacher is now as good as it gets. So I too believe the F70 will get KERS and 920bhp!
soessex says
Inasmuch as advancements in battery technology are most likely limited, Flywheel technology is here now and power flow is as smooth as an electric motor; see below.
PRESS RELEASE
January 3, 2012
Reference: US Patent 7,931,107 B2
VEHICLE KINETIC ENERGY UTILIZATION TRANSMISSION SYSTEM. (KERS)
This recent patent enables the reduction of fuel consumption in motor vehicles by the storage of kinetic energy for reuse. This technology incorporates an infinitely variable transmission (IVT) in the form of an eddy current induction device (called a Modulator) coupled to a gear system to conquer the torque flow management problem caused by infinitely varying bi-directional energy flow between a moving vehicle mass and an associated rotating flywheel mass created by the fact that the respective mass velocities move in an inverse acceleration relationship.
To illustrate this phenomenon, observe that as kinetic energy passes from the moving vehicle to, and is captured by, the flywheel it is caused to accelerate, however the vehicle is consequently caused to slow; but to function efficiently, the flywheel requires an ever increasing input-speed factor from a source which is ever slowing. This always changing speed dichotomy can only be effectively managed by an infinitely variable transmission, and, other than that offered by the above patent, none have been successful for the subject purpose.
The technology reflected in this patent involves very few parts, and is therefore economical to manufacture. It is in addition, long lived, requires little maintenance, and is very durable. Importantly, this system is suitable not only for passenger car use, but also for delivery vans, trucks, and buses.
The conservation of kinetic energy through the use of battery energy-storage technology is exceedingly inefficient while such a mechanical approach is well known to be very high in efficiency. As may be realized, existing battery hybrid technology was developed because it was a way around this, now solved, torque-management problem. As these complicated and costly battery-related electric energy arrangements only avoid, and do not solve this problem, the penalty for this has been the great loss of efficiency as compared to a mechanical storage system such as that proposed by the subject patent
Thank you,
South Essex Engineering