Everybody knows you cannot judge a book by its cover but nor, it seems, can you judge a car by its photograph. In this space last month I wrote about the new Ferrari Luce making this precise point: like the vast majority of people who went public with an opinion, I didn’t like the look of it at all, but pointed out that I couldn’t really reach an informed opinion until I’d had a real and proper look at it.
Well I have seen it now, and while I’ll reserve final judgement until I view it on the road, I have now at least had a good look inside and out. And I’m not sure I’ve known another car whose photograph has done its subject greater disservice. Don’t get me wrong: I’m going to need a lot more convincing before I might even use the word ‘attractive’ in its presence, let alone gorgeous, but nor did I feel that instinctive, knee-jerk rejection of – if not revulsion at – the design of which so many have spoken. Its proportions make more sense, you see details your eye will never pick up on page and it looks better in silver grey rather than municipal swimming pool blue.
The interior is wonderful, full of beautifully rendered details from the weight and action of its switchgear to the cool metal feel of its beautifully designed grab-handles. It’s vastly spacious too – all 6ft 3in of me could sit behind myself with space to spare and if you fold down the rear seats you really could use the load area as a bed.
However, and to me at least, it still doesn’t look like a Ferrari. But I am beginning to think that maybe that’s the point. I am told that if you gathered up all the people in the world who could afford to buy a new Ferrari, you’d discover that 95% of them had never owned one. So to Ferrari, it has only dipped its toe into the waters of its potential customer base and that’s what the Luce exists to address. It would not be unfair to call it a Ferrari for people who don’t want a Ferrari. So in fact it is quite possible that all those people who rushed to denounce it for that very reason were actually making Ferrari’s point for it, while bringing the car a level of attention Maranello could not otherwise have hoped to achieve.
You can read on the following page my brief impressions of the Denza Z, a staggeringly fast Chinese supercar I’ve just driven, a machine that will go faster than any other standard production car available for similar money, but charge faster too. Not far off four times faster in fact.
“The Luce doesn’t look like a Ferrari. I’m beginning to think that’s the point”
And it’s got me wondering what existing brands can do in the face of such a technical onslaught on their once traditional turf. The answer lies in the one thing they have that their new rivals won’t be able to exploit not merely for years, but generations to come: their heritage.
Some manufacturers try actively not to remind you of their illustrious histories, I guess through fears of journalists like me writing stories saying that things aren’t what they used to be, and that new cars of today have but a fraction of the charm that oozed out of every inch of many upon which their reputations were built. As an example, in the UK both Renault and Mercedes-Benz had built up quite large fleets of their more important historic vehicles which they’d lend to any reputable journo with a decent story idea. But both got rid of them for reasons unknown but because I suspect they thought their maintenance costs outweighed the number of column inches they gained and perhaps because they didn’t want unflattering comparisons to be made too.
