But handing over responsibility for the exterior is quite questionable IMO.
To me, the exterior has lost almost all of Ferrari's identity. It's a nice car-design, but if you'd tell me it's a Hyundai, Lexus or BYD I would believe you.
I wonder what political struggle was behind that within Ferrari. I can't imagine this design was received well, and I doubt that Ferrari actually asked for help on exterior design. It's more likely that Jony Ive demanded it...
(Also the fact that they presented the interior much earlier than the exterior could be an indicator for internal disagreements...)
I'm sure it's an awesome car, and also a high quality premium experience. The question is whether it can command supercar prices - they are selling it for $650,000, and I don't quite understand the value proposition of a superior Tesla selling for that much.
Now you can say, well what is the value proposition of the other ICE Ferraris selling for that much? And that's the point, when they first came out, they didn't sell for such high prices, it was a long period of decades in which collectors were bidding up the prices due to their interest in collecting Ferraris and reselling them, at which point the cars became an investment and collectible item, rather than just "expensive high end vehicles".
So when you break from that tradition, but assume you can carry over the collector premium -- particularly for a disposable tech-heavy EV -- then that is where Ferrari made a mistake, and not only Ferrari, but there is a reason none of the EV supercars have sold well, or will sell well. Tech and collectables don't mix.
If you want an example of a brand that is doing this well, look at Rolls Royce. Rolls is selling actual luxury experiences, and their prices reflect the unique ownership experience, not the collectible value, as all Rolls Royces suffer massive depreciation, and have always suffered massive depreciation. No one buys a Rolls Royce expecting it to go up in value, it's understood that in 30 years, you can pick it up for less than the cost of the tires on the brand new model. In that environment, EVs work very well, and Rolls is having success with their high priced EVs that none of the automakers are having in the hypercar market.
The management knows that they need something new and out of their comfort zone. Someone (from within or without) suggests an idea that would never been accepted in the olden days.
The management, for the sake of their company, would suppress every instinct they have built over the years, often over-correcting. This inevitably results in some questionable choices seeping in, in the name of openness to new paradigms.
And not every time this goes well.
I'm not saying this is what's happening here. These are world-class engineers and designers, but nobody is immune from a bad decision or two.
That's why I can imagine Ive's company wowing the management with an early interior concept pitch, but then demanding also exterior design ownership as part of the agreement because "it needs to be a coherent design, like an iPhone".
Sounds perfectly reasonable and easy to vouch for. Management feels like they are anyway in control because they decide whether to launch the product or not.
But if the product starts to shift over the course of the development, someone in management has to make the call. And that's a very expensive call to make.
I've personally been with companies which had such big-name collaborations that "deviated" from expectations in very advanced development-stages.
I've seen companies successfully intervening, but more often than that scale-down the project or cancelling the entire collaboration and ending the project, as no partial solution could be agreed on.
The latter was especially common with Design Companies (e.g. Porsche Design, Prada, the earlier LVMH), as their contracts were not phrased for collaboration but for creative control. I would assume Jony Ive sees himself in the same bracket...
As the saying goes: It's good to keep an open mind, just not so open your brains fall out.
>> the Aztek was to signal a design renaissance for GM, and to "make a statement about breaking from GM's instinct for caution. One designer said that during the design process, the Aztek was made "aggressive for the sake of being aggressive." Peters, the Chief Designer said "we wanted to do a bold, in-your-face vehicle that wasn't for everybody."
This thing isn't even bold, it's just ... a generic car?
If they had made it outrageous (think: teardrop which is most efficient aerodynamically or something) it'd make more sense.
How bad does a design have to be that this is a valid attack?
The Luce is so generic it borders on nihilism - destroying the very concept of Ferrari precisely because Ferraris are good.
1. It doesn't look like any other car, though it still obviously looks like a car
2. The buzz, good or bad, is going to mean people hear about it, talk about it, and see it
3. If you see it in public you're likely to recognize it; whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen
To me it's like how a sports car would look in a video game which has no license to use actual cars.
A "McLovin Testosterona"...
For me, the first reaction to the Ferrari Luce was utter shock, but after looking at it again several hours later I'm starting to see some of its exterior elements differently (although my brain finds it hard to call the car "beautiful" in the same way as some of the other recent Ferrari models).
It looks like a decision was made to depart from the "modern"-looking Ferraris, but the direction of that departure seems to be very different from what the competitors are doing and what the general public is looking for visually in such a car (but it's worth keeping in mind that members of the general public aren't really customers of this car).
But it's not a Ferrari design, it dropped almost all of the brands' identity and design language in favor of becoming a more "uniform sportscar design".
To me personally this is quite on-brand for Jony Ive's past work, where the exterior design of the product is diluted to the "least-offending version of its kind", a vessel to the high-quality interior experience which is focused to "excite the user".
In the mobile phone space this was disruptive, because (accidentally) it created the "normalized mobile computing platform" needed to transform the industry into a Smartphone industry.
But I'd say the sports car industry is different, I don't see a benefit in having the "most normalized sports car"...
But it doesn't scream "Ferrari" nor does it scream "look at me I'm driving a half-million euro car".
An electric Roma successor would have been much better received and possibly cheaper for them to develop (who knows?).
The silver lining in all this is that it means that the EV arm will not cannibalize their ICE cars.
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-09/ferrari-s...
It looks like the EV version of Apple widgets and the iPhone home screen. There's so much rounded squares /rounded rectangle bullshit...it looks like something that was designed in 2010 and is about to get the shit sued out of it by Apple.
Every automaker is desperately trying to chase Chinese buyers. Most of them are too stupid to realize the Chinese can just....buy better Chinese EVs, and if they're not buying a chinese EV, it's because they don't want a Chinese EV, they want the foreign company's design and cachet.
Peopel don't buy Ferraris because they look like Chinese EVs. People buy them because they look like Ferraris and are exclusive.
Audi is doing stupid shit, too. They recently started making cars under the "AUDI" brand. Yeah. "AUDI". Versus "Audi" with rings.
If Ferrari wanted to sell more cars in China they could just stop be absurd dicks about a)who can buy their cars b)what people can do with them.
Things like "prohibit people from lending them to reviewers so Ferrari can game the review by putting on different tires and tuning the suspension for the specific track the reviewer will be using." Although might actually impress Chinese buyers since it aligns with them so well, culturally.
> https://www.euronews.com/next/2026/05/26/ferraris-550000-ele...
> https://nypost.com/2026/05/26/business/ferraris-new-640k-ele...
> https://www.barrons.com/articles/ferrari-stock-price-luce-ev...
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/26/ferraris-475...
etc
But that's not because Asian EVs have a specific identity, but because the Luce's design has NO identity. It has no heritage, like a sports car from a company that didn't exist 15 years ago.
At the moment I don't even see alot in it to BUILD a design-heritage upon, not many accents you could carry onwards to other cars.
The Hyundai Ioniq 5 is also an Asian EV. But it has character, it has accents, it has "rough edges". I can see aspects of it carrying onwards to the point that I see a van on the street and instantly know "it's a Ioniq". I don't see much of that in the Luce right now...
This is the type of car that will be seen in the hands of people buying Cybertruck or the UK chavs that now buy Rolex. The moment that happens your brand is dead. Your customers will flock away back to Buggati and Aston Martin.
Massive Ferrari mistake.
The objective of a luxury brand is not volume sales.
There is the well known anecdote of somebody asking André Heiniger, then chairman/president of Rolex: "How is the watch business?" and he answering something along the lines of: "I have no idea. Rolex is not in the watch business..."
Wild assertion. Ferrari is currently #8 largest market cap for a car manufacturer. They're valued above Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagen and every other Euro car brand.
They couldn't be more successful as a small automaker if they tried. But you think they need to do something like this to drive attention and sales?
A while back I read a couple books on the history of Ferrari and came away with the clear sense that Enzo was one of those unique iconoclastic entrepreneurs who was brilliant, flawed and irreplaceable. After Enzo, Ferrari's management has mostly hovered between being inconsistent and incomprehensible. From the racing team to road cars, the company has become legendary for political fiefdoms and internal conflict.
I agree the Luce exterior may be the least Ferrari-looking Ferrari ever. I suspect it's going to be a disaster for the brand.
I hope they didn't put the charging socket on the bottom.
I don't like the interior. I think this style can work for some things, it reminds me of a NuPhy keyboard, blocky plastic that looks nice in some circumstances.
For me this is not a Ferrari-standard of car, Ferraris are strikingly beautiful, and this just isn't.
They also do not do well in CR's annual surveys.
They're still bad, and there is ample objective evidence.
Our dealer was fine, and it's been fine. It's a car car, not really doing anything amazing.
Brands, but especially Asian ones, seem to go through cycles - this thing is absolute shit, nobody buy it, company fixes the problems and gets reliable, but still thought of as crap, company keeps improving, people start to notice, becomes known as a real good and reliable deal, company starts charging more and more. Kia's on the ascendant right now, where Toyota was 20+ years ago.
> To me, the exterior has lost almost all of Ferrari's identity. It's a nice car-design, but if you'd tell me it's a Hyundai, Lexus or BYD I would believe you.
Ferrari already got their exception from the EU regulation for CO² reduction via the E-Fuel loophole, which was tailored for them and allows them to continue selling V8 and V12 ICE-based cars beyond 2036 if they only use synthetic e-fuels.
This secures their existing business model for customers who insist on ICE-based cars and are willing to pay the premium for it.
A portion of their addressable market shifts to EV-based sports cars though, they are shooting themselves into the foot by not establishing a BOLD identity in this space soon. A bland product with a "we used to be big in ICE" brand won't cut it there
But Porsche has a much wider palette of cars, if ICEs would be banned without exception they could adapt.
Their concern was that Ferrari could be exempted entirely from the regulation due to their low total volume, with Porsche ending up unable to compete on ICE sports cars with them because they're no longer allowed to build one.
Hence the "Ferrari loophole". Not just for Ferrari, but BECAUSE of Ferrari
"Look, we tried to create an EV and no one bought it. So we need to retain that carve-out in the regulations that mean we do not have to electrify our entire product line or we will go out of business entirely."
I'd totally buy this car if it looked like that and was from a mainstream manufacturer (i.e. priced normally), but yeah I cannot see a typical ferrari owner buying one.
Googling this ruined my day
Just being a legendary brand like Ferrari doesn't mean that 100% of us understand 100% about 100% of your products.
The shenanigans manufacturers like Ferrari and Porsche are allowed to get away with is so frustrating. But when people treat cars like collectibles and never even intend to drive them, I suppose there’s little reason not to.
"Introducing a team from outside the Ferrari Design Studio led by Flavio Manzoni invited a new perspective and cross-fertilisation, enabling a new design language to be introduced."
"LoveFrom was given the creative freedom needed to define the design direction of the project from the outset, translating this design language into an authentic Ferrari experience."
[0] https://www.ferrari.com/en-US/corporate/articles/ferrari-luc...
That, or they truly have insight into where consumer trends will go, and like the F50 etc, this will be better received in a decades time than now.
As many legacy brands, Ferrari is looking to refresh itself in order to stay relevant to a new generation of buyers, and not "die out" together with their existing customer base. They need to do this rather sooner than later while still standing on a pillar of good legacy identity, to not end up like Jaguar does...
What is the "EV game"?
The performance is certainly what you would expect from Ferrari, but it doesn’t matter. This isn’t a car that should have a Ferrari emblem on it. This will go down as one of the all time automotive blunders.
I think Jony Ive is done too. He was responsible for those awful MacBooks that generated a class action lawsuit and now this. It’s hard to come back from two consecutive flops.
I don't agree. Polestar has their own "design language", they do not look the same.
I think that I prefer the look of a Polestar 5 to this Ferrari. Of course, I've never seen either vehicle in person, so what do I really know.
Teams inside Ferrari despise EV's (because they lack 10,000 moving parts and loud noises), so they pushed hard for this design, ensuring a flop, and giving ferrari cold EV feet for the foreseeable future.
The whole point of Ferrari is high enough volume to print money, low enough to make almost bespoke cars whose sheet metal can change quickly. If the platform is adaptable for that purpose, it will be a success.
Agree that the Interior and rest is all nice enough though.
I too would pick fun/weird stuff to play, but if I had Ferrari money I wouldn't be touching this.
P.S. It’s kind of like when Porsche entered the SUV market with the Cayenne, which didn’t have a conventional SUV look but still crashed the market.
I think this will flop. Even amazing halo car EVs have poor resale value, and this one isn't it. It will not keep value like an analog Ferrari, but may be better than Rimac because it's a Ferrari and if they limit supply.
I'm all for EVs by the way, I drive a Model 3 Performance and I love it. Just not feeling this design at all.
This design looks like a friggin' Kia design, sadly. It's not a bad thing if it were a Kia, but I would expect much more from Ferrari.
Looks more like a design for a premium fairly-mass-market EV from any number of other brands.
In case it wasn't clear, the Luce is a 1,000+ HP car and will cost over $300,000 USD.
Are there? That's a pretty bold claim.
I'm sure they think the same at Ferrari, but plenty of successful companies create products that flop miserably based on the wrong assumptions.
I would personally think that the public interested in high-performance combustion-engine luxury cars is not interested in generic-looking electric cars even if they come from the same company.
Behind every stupid design there are apologists, who claim that the critics don't get it.
Imagine them boiling this down over the years into a ‘battle tested’ streamlined 160k EV -- they do not require the first version to be sold much ‘at all’ at this price point; it is now out there and the goal seems to be to mark the top of the line of this segment longterm; and if this succeeds, they ported the co into the future in style
There is soo much great design in this but it might be required to get closer to really experience and appreciate
So likely longterm: very good move
Which Ferrari had general public as its target audience?
Maybe it feels an extreme change, but the solution like making batteries core part of the body might pay well. I am looking also for the first track tests, to see if their claims are real
But Ferrari is intentionally low-volume with everything they make, and this car will also be extremely low volume. Even if it is dearly beloved and becomes ultra-high demand--and the jury is out on that--Ferrari wouldn't dream of selling that many, because it takes away from the exclusivity.
But I'll agree that Ferrari will likely hit its goals for this car in a way that Tesla hasn't hit its goals for the Cybertruck.
Especially at ~ $650k USD.
I'm sure there are buyers out there -- with questionable taste -- but whether there are enough of them... I guess we'll live and see.
This car is what the Apple Car should have been in the 2010s, sold at around 40k USD. At that price point, it would've been just fine. What it most certainly is not, however, is a 500k+ Ferrari.
This is the car apple was working on, slightly modified. Ive just (re)sold previous work, and Ferrari is holding the bag.
The reason this doesn't look like a Ferrari is because it was originally conceived as an Apple.
That's why the Ferrari tail lights don't work - it's an Apple car.
My strong guess is the buyer of the electric Ferrari is not your typical Ferrari buyer.
These same people probably criticized the Porsche Cayenne for 'not being fast enough' or 'lacking features that Toyota SUVs have'
The target buyer is probably more like Dubai housewife with kids.
They have a different aesthetic. They LOVE their iPhone.
Everyone hating on it probably needs to reconsider. There's almost 0 chance that a company like Ferrari did this to not embarrass Jony Ive.
They legitimately expect this thing to sell to its target audience.
Every other expensive EV is doing awfully on the resale market, Rimac, Lucid, Taycan, Bautista, etc.
For Dubai you gotta consider the resale value. Which doesn't seem very high to me once the initial hype bump is over. (Sir why dont you buy this famous ugliest ferrari ever for the bargain price of 500000)
Exterior is not my style, but then again, I'm not the target.
> people want either $30,000 electric cars (Tesla), $100,000 electric cars (Tesla), or $500,000 electric cars (Ferrari)
I do think Ferrari is trying to expand their audience with the Luce, but not to Dubai housewives. Ferrari's are for Ferrari collectors. There exists the guy with a few already, who daily drives a Tesla. Probably hundreds of those guys! This is for them (IMO).
The Urus is at least to me the equivalent kind of car. Captures a market that does not appeal to traditional lambos. I could see this doing the same.
This thing might sell incredibly poorly but one thing I have always found to be true. The taste of HN commenters is wildly different than target demographics.
performance and aesthetics s would be more important, surely?
You guys are defending this to death. I am only pointing out that it would not surprise me it fits a demographic they were targeting.
Why?
IDGAF if Dubai Housewives like it. My world doesn't revolve around what they think.
And if a bunch of SUV buyers want to subsidize my 911 habit--I have no complaints.
But in any event, Porsche sold more cars in 2025 in North America, than any year prior.
https://newsroom.porsche.com/en_US/company/porsche-cars-nort...
It did take a big hit to profitability in 2025, mostly on one-time restructuring charges. But until then it was one of the most profitable auto-manufacturers out there. And its annual revenue is still higher than most of its history, especially on a per-car basis.
So sure, recently Porsche hasn't done well. But it has very little to do with SUVs and that transition. And I would argue that the brand itself is still very strong, even if operationally they have mishandled the electric transition.
Ives also had a ton of really excellent and classic designs, but maybe the world needs to stop pretending that everything that man touches is instant classics and best in class. Maybe consumer electronics design doesn't translate well into other fields. I still think it due to companies refusal to take risk, and in some cases, like with OpenAI, wanting to get some association with Apple. Better hire Ives, because then no one can critic the design, because everyone know that Ives is the world greatest designer.
For Ferrari I don't get it. They already have good designers and I think their customers would prefer an EV that looks like a Ferrari, not a Ferrari that looks like Mac.
I suppose the iPhone 6 was bendable but that was a hardware engineering issue as shown by the same form factor not being bendable for the 6s through 8.
You buy a Ferrari for the sex appeal.
But you nailed it. It's the Ferrari Priuso.
Not much has really changed with them, and I'm not sure much really can.
How can this make any sense when he designed every iPhone until 2019? None of which would have existed without his original design and all of which remain relatively close to that original design.
I know it’s Ferrari, but one of the interesting things about EVs is that there’s minimal technological differentiation marketed to customers after a certain point. As in: a buyer wouldn’t know or care about a Ferrari battery pack vs. a Tesla or BYD battery pack. Whether you’ve got 300 or 1000 horsepower, the brand of the motor la delivering it is mostly irrelevant.
The suspension may be cleverer (and more expensive) and the tuning (or coding) of the power delivery may be different, but underneath it all this does not have a 5x higher BoM than a Model S Plaid. And without the ‘benefits’ typically sold by Ferrari to justify their price point (e.g. heritage, F1 association, high-revving flat-pane crank engines, F1-derived gearboxes, handling, the typical Ferrari appearance) the price premium seems ever harder to justify.
At some point, EVs are going to pull ahead of ICE cars not just incrementally, but categorically. Instead of 0-60 in 3 seconds, it'll be 0-60 in under a second: the limits are physics and the human body, not the engine. Full self-driving, native to the architecture. Over-the-air updates that do things like improve the car's range by 5% (Tesla did something like this). And more no one's thought of yet.
So, this is their beachhead. You've got to start somewhere: they're starting here.
The point of the Ferrari is it's high price point. People turn their heads to look at a Ferrari because it's expensive, not because it's a practical and reasonably priced luxury car (eg some lower end Porche models). The higher price makes it more attractive to a certain demographic and most of us in the comments don't belong to that group.
Fortunately everyone will laugh and cringe, the usual car "journalists" will bite their tongues because they don't want to lose access, time will pass and it will be forgotten because Ferrari can afford to make these mistakes ( for now.. )
someone wrote it, someone performed it, someone mixed it, someone approved it, someone developed marketing for it, someone helped get it on shelves, and then someone played it.
There were plenty of points along the way where the disaster could have been averted.
Money/time/effort is spent on the wrong thing. It's a disaster for them. Not for you.
And sometimes it's a runaway hit.
Haha, you just perfectly described every porsche dealership employee I've ever met.
Regarding the car itself, it's great. It's obvious that car existed in sketches and concept long time ago (compare it to the other Newson car – Ford 012C), maybe it's an Apple car and just materialized with a few Ferrari signature details now. It's very cool looking and could be a banger with a $50-70K price tag produced by a Lucid or some other US car neo-brand.
I find it quiet disrespectful to ignore Italian craftsmen and Flavio Manzoni (head of design) particularly by Ferrari management as they assumed that they have to hire "tech" guys to make tech product as local engineers and designers couldn't solve so complicated task. Manzoni team would introduce something like 12 Cilindri in sedan form and it would worth every pence of whatever price tag they would place for it.
The design is bonkers though , a major blunder
The top EV manufacturer started as a battery company. The second place EV company started as an EV company.
Various ICE manufacturers have spent decades innovating and refining ICEs and building logistics chains optimized for ICEs.
The big problem that the high end ICE manufacturers have is that the things that made them special in the ICE market don't apply as well in the EV market.
You can potentially justify 6 figure price tags if you're in the luxury market. Hire famous designers, pay for premium materials, and leverage your brand name. If you want to sell cars for 6 figures based on performance, they actually need to perform significantly better. There are a bunch of much cheaper EVs that have better performance.
Just jacking up the price and relying on conspicuous consumption is how you get the Fyre Festival.
For roughly 17% of the price.
And it looks the same.
What an abomination!
(You can probably find similar Chinese EVs that also outperform similarly.)
Will it? I've owned a few Ferraris and I've driven quite a few others. They're lots of fun, but I would never describe Ferrari as a company with high build quality standards.
Whether or not it’s well put together is another topic entirely.
There is really no way to justify the price tag. With combustion engines at least you knew that you had an extremely rare feat of engineering.
The fact that I like the interior and I can't get it for less money is what justifies the price tag.
It's only since 2018 that they stepped up, but that's still not the focus of a Ferrari even with the Roma or Purosangue.
Even at low mileage, even for the new cars, wear and heat ruin the car extremely fast. Plastics and glues break down very soon on those cars, other surfaces become sticky and gummy.
Ferrari is a car made for the driving experience, if you're looking for interior quality you can get way better materials and build at a fraction of the price from other GT cars makers.
To be fair, what, three, four people will see the interior? But thousands see the exterior.
Buying an ultra-premium EV Ferrari over a faster, cheaper is a evolutionary broadcast (Costly Signaling Theory), proving the buyer possesses such immense excess wealth that they have no practical need to optimize their dollar-to-spec ratio. Everybody drives Teslas, the highly exclusive Ferrari satisfies a deep human drive for elite group differentiation (Social Identity Theory) while perfectly mirroring the buyer's aspirational ego and public identity (Self-Congruity Theory). Ultimately, this choice optimizes for intense internal sensory and emotional pleasure rather than objective efficiency (Hedonic Consumption Theory) by making (at least at the beginning) the owner feel that he is a super special dude.
The whole point of this fiasco is that this design doesn't work as a Veblen signal. It has none of the usual Veblen signifiers - overt use of premium materials and/or ironic fragility, sculpted elegance, conspicuous high-touch over-engineering and stat play, aggressive animal magnetism, high-effort minimalism, distinctive heritage design.
Instead it's nice - happy colours, toy car curves, improved ergonomics.
It's literally all of the things you don't want in a premium product.
It literally looks exactly like a cheap Chinese EV. (And, to add insult to injury, you can almost certainly get a cheap Chinese EV with comparable specs.)
Ferrari also presells the vast majority of its "special" cars. Which this one is. The run is probably already entirely sold out.
Apparently they're aiming to produce about 2500-3000 Luces (Luci?) a year, and they're building about 14,000 cars total annually. So not too many in keeping with their scarcity strategy. That has worked great for them so far, but I doubt they can replicate it with the Luce.
Who is the customer for a Model S? What fancy full-size sedan would they otherwise buy?
Certainly not the person who'd buy a BMW 7er or a Mercedes S-class. Model S does not offer the basic comforts required to compete in this segment.
Perhaps the person who'd buy a BMW 5er or a Mercedes e-class? Possibly, but the Model S is still an uncomfortable, noisy and cheap feeling clunker compared to those two.
It's not like the full-size luxury sedan market is doing too bad. We've got at least:
Audi: A8
BMW: 7er, i7
Mercedes: S-class, EQS
Porsche: Panamera, Taycan (sort of)
Rolls Royce: Phantom, Ghost
Bentley: Flying spur
raises hand
I like EVs for their ripping fast 0-60. It's the only performance metric I can actually use. Top speed doesn't matter.
I drive a Model 3 Performance. I would have upgraded to a Model S Plaid a couple years ago, but Elon made a hard right turn politically and so I don't want to give him any more money. Also, Tesla has still been unable to fix quality consistency. My M3P has been great, but I've seen too many stories. Even people paying $100K for a Model S Plaid end up with things coming unglued or misaligned. I've seen them try to deliver a car with obvious gnarly scratches in the paint.
With the weather getting dryer in the PNW, I'm now looking for a convertible for my next car. Still looking to keep electric though, so now I'm just waiting patiently for the Porsche 718, Polestar 6, or Corvette EV convertible if they ever make one. Basically, whoever makes the first EV sports convertible for $200K or less that doesn't look ugly as sin will likely get my money.
Yeah! My first though about the design was "This looks like a Tesla SUV-type thing" and about as sporty as a minivan. It is 1544mm high. The Lotus Esprit (which is my standard for a cool sportscar) is over 400 mm lower. The batteries do need to go somewhere... but isn't there room around the cockpit instead of under? Or a way to have a thin layer of batteries below the entire car?
Previously it had been known that Jony Ive was working on the interior of this car, but it seems his firm is responsible for the exterior as well[0].
> LoveFrom was given the creative freedom needed to define the design direction of the project from the outset, translating this design language into an authentic Ferrari experience.
[0]https://www.ferrari.com/en-US/corporate/articles/ferrari-luc...
The article mentions low center of gravity and 0-60 time. At 2.5 sec, I'm not sure this is much of a differentiator. Teslas can match it, but even a full-sized work truck is already hitting 3.5s. BMW sedans sit at 3.1s. Sure, the Ferrari is a bit faster, but I'm not convinced it's a qualitative difference.
I wonder how it corners. There's no mention of weight in the article. That's been the main differentiator I've noticed between EVs that feel sporty and ones that handle like a pickup truck.
I also wonder how many people will immediately turn off the "authentic sound". I get that the octegenarian crowd is still running the global economy, and likes their lumbering shitbox tuned-exhaust gas guzzlers, but I don't see many gen-x'ers (hitting 50!) or younger that prefer gratuitous road noise.
It's doubly a shame because Jony actually owns one of the all-time most beautiful classic Ferraris – the 250 Europa. I was hoping they'd do a modern re-imagination and revival.
The Luce however has zero Ferrari design language in my opinion. It has no visual cues that say Ferrari. The powertrain obviously doesn't have it. The interior is like the ghost of Ferraris past, you can see the ideas there but it still doesn't say Ferrari to me.
The whole package feels like something in the $80-100k price bracket for sensible consumers - not someone looking to spend half a million dollars on a performance car that hawks back to racing pedigree.
I don't feel that this addresses anything a Ferrari buyer is asking for. However they'll still probably sell heaps of them because Ferrari buyers are often purchasing for clout.
The interior is very nice. The rest of Ferrari can hopefully borrow from this.
It’s the outside I don’t like. I don’t hate it… just looks like it could be a Kia EV.
If you’re goofy enough to buy a Ferrari I expect you want people to really have to see that you’re driving a Ferrari.
Not a problem - because you'll also be wearing a Ferrari hat and jacket, just to make sure.
by the time this depreciates the Kia might hold better value
$650k is a fine price for a Ferrari, but not one that looks as plain as that.
If I had to spend 650k on a single car, I wouldn't buy this.
Ugly is the word for things like front end of Gen 1 Tesla or Gen 4 Prius, not for this. wtf.
If the dashboard was set up for a normal person and I could see this be a great sedan. But as it stands, it just seems horribly out of touch.
For me it looks like a nice “car” and I was shocked to see it was an Ive doing because I associate with him rather designing things for the sake of designing things far from reality and real world usage. Looks like he learned after all.
https://ferrari-cdn.thron.com/delivery/public/image/ferrari/...
Not sure about the cupholder position. I wonder if the G-force is customizable (e.g, all the screens are?) or if it's fixed. If it's fixed, I'd almost prefer it to be the one analog instrument, perhaps taken from an acrobatic plane.
That G-force thing is a gimmick. You already know the ballpark without even looking, and unlike speed I’m not sure what’s the use case for precise readings.
The fact that it's extremely boring and conventional?
>That G-force thing is a gimmick. You already know the ballpark without even looking, and unlike speed I’m not sure what’s the use case for precise readings.
In this car? A gimmick, could maybe help someone who's trying to learn to drive a bit smoother. In a track car? Useful cornering data
So a complete lack of anything actually useful.
I am not into cars and I will certainly not pay for a luxury car anytime soon, so not the most relevant opinion. Still, when I buy a car again, I'd love to have this interior design. The exterior on the other hand, I don't know what they tried to achieve here.
Designers seem to struggle with exterior electronic car design in general. Are they trying too hard to be iconic?
A "McLovin Testostero"...
Then again, I'm the definition of "not the target market" as that thing costs more than a California house.
I like the front. I like the interior. Controls and touches look great on video.
But rear is awful. So far anyways. Reminds me of this Chevy Impala model family:
https://www.rvinyl.com/products/chevrolet-impala-2000-2005-t...
The Rimac Nevera is a different car category. Ferrari just decided to not make this a 2 seat hypercar.
This is the daily driver Ferrari for a small family, similar to the Porsche Cayenne or Panamera.
Fun fact: The original company was founded in 1930 in Turin as "Società anonima Carrozzeria Pinin Farina". "Pinin" means the youngest son of the family, and Farina is the family name.
Be careful not to take the Jaguar road for there is no coming back.
Then the Ferrari image loaded. Wow.
It really is a game of spot the difference. A difficult game.
edit: I don't want to reduce hypercars purely to their "Wow!" factor, but a huge huge part of their value is definitely the feeling they evoke when you see one out of the corner of your eye and your head snaps around. This Leaf/Luce side-profile similarity is completely antithetical to that "Wow!" factor.
It is a very generic shape for sure!
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangwang_U9#/media/File:Yangwa...
.jpg){kind=link}
Long live the Ivesmobile.
This car has absolutely ZERO life to it for any manufacturer, much less a Ferrari.
God, Jony Ive is such an insufferable person.
I can definitely see these used as lighting devices on luxury boats.
I honestly like Ive as a designer, but dear lord.
It's possible that those buttons are not Jony Ive's doing, but I still find him insufferably pompous.
I spotted probably the only cybertruck in Taiwan the other day. It was waiting to turn on a busy road, and people were jogging over to take a picture of it. "Woah cool! Awesome! Handsome!" Lots of stuff like that being said.
People share ai slop cat pictures on Facebook.
There's HN commenters, there's the subset of HN commenters smugly criticizing all the very obvious flaws of things like this... And then there's just the entire rest of the world which simply does not give a shit.
Everyone then complains that the automakers aren't making what they want... But the blame isn't with the manufacturers, the blame rests with consumers and how mindlessly apathetic they are to... basically everything.
This is not apathy in my opinion. This is rational. Cars are just tools. Metal boxes to enable mobility. Car people have turned them into this cult of personality that I think is batshit insane. It's not just cars mind you, we do this with watches, shoes, you name it and it's all very peculiar, but cars are my pet peeve because they are so obviously wasteful and dangerous. Not just directly like killing 40k per year in the US alone, but also through obvious geopolitics.
People want to move around and they want to smile smugly and think they are better than others. Those two things are pretty much universal. I say we separate those issues. You can move around all you want but smiling smugly you do in some other way than in your "car". We'll have really good public transport and you'll assert your dominance in some other fashion. I personally recommend we reintroduce dueling to the death.
By the way I don't know anybody that would buy a new car every two year to keep up with the Joneses and I live in a pretty "Jonesy" place. That's a bit hyperbolic at least in my neck of the woods (Netherlands). Most people here keep their cars until they become unreliable.
The people in the video are literally smiling smugly. I kid you not.
I’m talking about all those fancy Audi, Tesla, Volvo and BMW drivers that want to feel superior in their mobile box of death and waste. They are not car enthusiasts. Car enthusiasts do maintenance work on 80s Alfas for fun. I know the type and those are alright.
Car culture is much larger than the mechanics. It’s the idea that cars need to be nice at all. The idea they have “personality” and are indicators of social status.
I’m not at all against social status. I’m against using such wasteful, ugly and dangerous machinery as a delivery mechanism of the winnings in your particular genetic and cultural lottery.
Talk to various people with $100k+ cars and you often find they bought it "because they needed something and the color was nice" or "they always buy from Joe" and other similarly seemingly insignificant reasons.
So the rest of the world not caring doesn't matter as the audience for this is probably a million people at best
The cybercar turned out to be a massive failure though. So, it kind of mattered?
This looks like a child's toy.
This sounds kind of fun. It’s curious they weren’t allowed to drive though..
> But I can say that the Torque Shift Engagement system — which gives the driver five power levels on the right paddle and five engine-braking levels on the left — is one of the most intriguing ideas I’ve seen in an electric car. It doesn’t simulate gear changes. It creates an entirely new torque language controlled by the driver, introducing an active decision-making element to trajectory management that sounds like it could restore the kind of driver engagement that many enthusiasts fear EVs have lost.
Oh wow, sounds like some corporation BS if I ever read some. My EV works by pressing the gas pedal and the torque is right there - not sure what revolutionary new invention is required?
Way too many people stomp, release, and repeat. This works in Mario Kart when the A-button input is a boolean value but in a Tesla with one-pedal driving turned on you end up repeatedly accelerating or decelerating and never go a constant speed.
If you're going to drive this slowly you might as well buy a Tesla
Model S Plaid has faster acceleration than Luce and they have similar top speed.
Reportedly, the Luce has more nimble handling.
People don’t get sports cars just for the acceleration.
For a absolutely tiny fraction of the price!
It also looks better than this Nissan leaf knock-off!
I'm not the target market, this thing costs more than my house! But I do think the specs are... Disappointing...
Whatever its merits, there wasn’t a market for it.
Lamborghini Urus sells well even though it’s inferior on every metric to cars a fraction of its price.
Tesla lost its premium brand cachet and consequently the Model S/X market.
Ferrari presumably has some data that there are buyers for a $500k scifi sports car with their logo on it.
I don't know why people insist on EVs being kind of ugly and boxy, but Ferrari had a chance to do better and didn't.
I think they are just falling into the same trap all other manufacturers do at first. They think the customer buying the EV is a different customer, who didn't like their other cars. So they make the techno-future mobile for a customer that doesn't exist.
Just make the same cars with an EV drivetrain, that's what the person who loves your brand but is in the market for an EV wants.
The retrofits usually are less preferable not only because of pointless inconveniences like transmission tunnels, but because they'll be the manufacturer's first toe dipped into the EV waters. The retrofit chassis speaks to either a rush to market, or a cautious approach not wanting to commit too many resources. The former says it'll have issues, the latter says they might bail on it and leave you stranded for service and repairs. Or both at once.
This is correct, but I really don't see why Ferrari would care.
And when you're not going the speed limit on regular public roads here's plenty of "driver engagement" to be had going too fast round tight corners (hopefully on a track, but we can't all be perfect ;)) regardless of whether there's some weird obfuscation between you and the actual mostly flat torque curve of the electric engine as long you build good suspension, body stiffness, put decent tires on it, don't make it too heavy etc.
I would love Lotus to make another road legal go-kart and slap an electric engine in it.
The car manufacturers are well aware of what their vehicles achieve in real world usage.
It would be trivial for them to give and prospective buyer indicative ranges for any particular geographical area.
The actual number of the EPA range is imaginary, yes. But it's useful for comparisons.
But if we're talking about comparisons between two vehicles, the vehicle with a 122kWh battery and a 280 EPA range will go less far and is much less efficient than the vehicle with a 84kWh batter and a 300 EPA range.
Unsurprising, for a Ferrari. I suspect it's designed for performance and not efficiency. Atrocious mileage is par for the course in this segment (see the Veyron)
I've driven manual cars daily for years and once you get used to it, changing gears is not even something you think about.
so how does this reflect the Ferrari history. maybe this should've been a Maserati project.
unless they were going to put massive electric motors or some other performance thing that's electric & not seen in other cars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_R17_Electric_Restomod_...
Not Ferrari’s typical market ;)
In other words, they made an EV do wroom-wroom?
I assume some of it will be adopted from the industry in the upcoming years. Now that regulators are pushing back on touch displays, the integration of tactile buttons with software will be the move forward you still need to have a physical mechanical button it is better in terms of muscle memory and cognitive load. I never understood the central display abominations that car manufactures keep pushing however the rotation and adjustment of the position make it a little more bearable, Audi[0] had figured this out like 20 years ago with the retracting screen in the dashboard, give the users the ability to hide the display it makes the whole interior cleaner and the driver can focus on the driving. I still don't understand the push with the piano black plastics it looks awful this material needs to go from the car interiors once and for all.
I think Ivy did its job great here despite some design decisions the vision and the direction is the goal here with this car the blending of software with mechanical parts.
It is somehow funny tho that it took a designer like Ivy to work on a car project to push for things like that, like who are the people working in the design departments at those companies, the cars that are releasing in the last 5-10 years in terms of interior design are to say at least uninspiring for their price tag.
[0] - pop up screen in interror of #Audi https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TUgqDlzuiFQ
A Ferrari is about driving, and while it wouldn’t surprise me that the driving experience is generally the same as most EVs I’m unwilling to dismiss this based on looks alone.
Is it, though? Most Ferraris aren't driven much at all. In fact, most Ferraris are bought by collectors. If somebody has 10-20 Ferraris, do you think they drive them much? In Parallel?
Though, we do have to be very careful with interpreting online commentary as representative the collective, when trying to understanding whether something is considered good/bad.
Firstly because only a small proportion of people voice their opinion publicly at all - so only a small proportion of opinions get heard.
Secondly because opinions that are voiced are much more likely to be definitive in nature (it's great / it's terrible) as people tend to be less willing to comment "it's ok" - so vociferous voices tend to dominant online discourse.
Finally, because online communities often represent a niche/specific demographic and so if you only see the views from a particularly online community it's a fair bet they are not very representative.
I guess my initial reaction was about presuming that some commenters here are presuming that their taste is the taste everyone has, but a more generous interpretation would have been that they are simply unhesitant to share their subjective point of view. So, I revise my take to the more generous one.
Granted, that is not the market that would buy a Ferrari, but one of the point of buying luxury cars is the status they grant. There is not much status in a car mocked by the public.
Again, a heritage brand ruined by an obnoxious, pesky iPad like display that has no business being in a Ferrari.
The front profile is hideous too.
iFerrari XS
It's 140% better than the previous Ferrari Enzo
And 20% thinner
With a brand new Magnesium case
It's the fastest Ferrari we've ever built.
Range up to 10 Km.
But starting at $600k for that?
It's clear they'd like to have a Lamborghini Urus like sales success that's not exactly a traditional style Ferrari but this thing seems like a total miss.
But Ferrari being who they are they'll do the same scummy crap of making dealers and customers buy the turd if they wanna get an allocation for the next highly collectable supercar.
Presumably the range is only a few KM, since Ive said, "You don't want a bigger battery."
And after ruining Apple's computers for years with his POS keyboard and embarrassing emoji bar, he's all about "tactile controls" now? Or was that the will of someone who ISN'T just a pompous hack?
Oh wait: Someone pointed out that there are KNOBS on the steering wheel. So there are wheels on a wheel. That has Ive all over it.
I find the interior quite adequate for an EV, not too minimal neither gaudy. It does look like an interior designed by the iPhone designer, though. It would be a great interior in any car.
It seems this will be one of those divisive designs, because it totally broke with the Ferrari tradition.
This car has nothing to do with Ferrari, except they paid him for work he already did once before.
The design though, it seems very... uninspired? It has hints of throwback in the design, but imo it does not have the look of luxury or sports car.
Really hard to grasp who would want one (I'm too far down the wealth ladder to understand how the rich think and work), but that's what stood out to me initially.
I'm glad more and more manufacturers care more than exterior looks, but focus on interior, esp on technology side.
Ultimately the probably should've gone with SUV tho - it's what people buy and looking at interior it what should've been - mass produced, luxury, performance car for everyone.
p.s. Car ethusiasts suck and nobody should listen to them. All they want is v8 manual from 80s with all the "character" which means it's impractical, unreliable and just terrible in every possible way, except the looks which you know what sort of buyer appeals to.
I was generally with you until those lines.
Car enthusiasts are as varied as cars themselves. Whether it's F1 lovers or the V8 manual lovers (an experience to appreciate but I didn't care to own), the MX5(Miata) lovers, the offroad lovers or the lovers of classics like VW Beetles and Mini's or more esoteric cars.
There are dreamers who read the latest car magazine and fantasize about the latest Porsche, Ferrari or Mercedes S class.
Everyone has an opinion and unsurprisingly electric vehicles are a hot topic right now. You will get a range of both rational and emotional responses, depending on whom you speak to.
To derisively state "they suck and nobody should listen to them" is unreasonable.
Luxury car makers should look to handbags for inspiration. If Ferrari wants to expand the market and reach new customers they shouldn't be making something that looks like an upbadged BYD.
It's like if Hermes started making a Jansport backpack, absurd. Instead they sell lower cost, but still premium designs like the Picotin. The Lamborghini Urus might be one example.
Interesting product advice you have to offer. Who do you think is the target market for expensive Italian sports cars, if not “car enthusiasts”?
lol most of them posers with money.
Lambo's 60% of sales is an SUV.
I'd argue there's certain brand toxicity in their cars.
The Jaguar redesign / rebrand has been a complete and utter disaster! A 97% drop in European sales. That’s not a misprint - 97%!!
No one would call the cybertruck a success either.
This design is a massive mistake for Ferrari. Looks at Porsche’s first electric, the Taycan. I can tell it’s a Porsche as soon as I see it. Look at Lamborghini- looks like a Lambo. Look at this car - looks like a Volkswagen. This is going to be a bomb.
Car hasn't even been released.
You can't argue Cybertruck isn't an icon. IIRC it's in top 10 for notoriously critical Doug Demuro.
Oh. No price?
Compare that to the next car on the list, now that's thrilling.
That is the criteria by which I judge these things and Ive's blue soap dispenser does not do it for me.
Emission regulations I'm guessing.
How do two people get in at the same time? Both go for the door handle right next to each other then let the other get in first because there's not enough room for two to get in at the same time on one side.
IDK, if you look at the other modern Ferraris it fits in with their design, other than the weird front.
It looks weird/ugly because electric cars no longer need to be longer and have enough space for massive sport engines. Maybe we'll get used to it over time, still I would prefer the front of a Ferrari 458
The interiors look really nice, I'm a fan of the dashboard elements, blending touch with actual physical buttons.
So is this what it takes to get nice physical buttons these days?!?
"Certain brands, certain styles cannot switch to electric; the Green Deal doesn't apply to everything. Some machines need pistons!"
EVs, by contrast, feel more like appliances meant to be used and enjoyed. And there will always be a more advanced model coming out just around the corner.
They've kind of hinted at the fact that this is meant to be more of an appliance than other models, with a more accesible price:
> “We were excited about a five-seater car that was flexible, versatile and inherently luxurious,” he tells TopGear.com during an exclusive walk-round. “Of course, the price point means it’s exclusive but it’s more accessible and relevant. That’s a new paradigm, and also the biggest challenge.” He gestures to the roof-line. “Imagine how much easier our job would have been if we’d been able to pull this point down two inches.”
Although I suspect the price will still be very much out of my range, there may well be some wealthy buyers out there who would love to have a Ferrari as a family sedan. Look at the success of the Cayenne - something that a lot of people snubbed their nose at initially. Honestly if I had the means I would be much more interested in this than any of their other cars. I'm definitely in the cars-are-meant-to-be-driven camp.
Edit: oh the estimated price is $640k. Yeah I don't think it will sell well at that price - though I also don't pretend to understand the market for super cars or the motivations of super car buyers.
The real beef was Porsche enthusiasts (911 purists) thought SUVs were for unwashed masses and soccer moms. They thought Porsche was jumping on the the relatively new (at the time) premium/luxury german SUV bandwagen establised by the X5 and ML500 (GWagen excluded).
Once they got over that they became customers.
This..thing...on the other hand is a tasteless abomination. Aside from the badges and tail lights there's nothing in it that's inherently Ferrari.
For the vast majority of people, a Ferrari is something aspirational. But for those who can afford one but would rather have “normal” car, this might appeal. It has the form of something practical while still signalling wealth.
Before now, that generally meant those equally-ugly but for different reasons 4-wheel drive and SUVs.
If you view this as (for example) something for rich mums to take their kids to school in, then it makes a lot more sense.
At least that’s the demographic I think they’re quietly going after.
That’s why Porsche makes their SUVs which are really popular.
High end luxury brands should technically be able to serve both upper-middle and top end at the same time. The important thing is the products are good. And if they aren’t some Chinese or other brand will do it. The age of choosing between a couple 100yr old car companies might be ending soon.
Indeed, that's why I referenced SUVs in my post.
My point was that not everyone wants the SUV form factor but still desires something that can be argued as a practical family car. This is why you see executive models like saloon or 4 door coupes. But those cars are often catering to a male-orientated market and have more attainable models (eg Audi A6) that cheapens the brand for the ultra rich.
The Ferrari badge is a bigger signal of wealth and there isn't a whole lot out there that signals that kind of wealth while still being a practical car. Austin Martin sell smaller SUVs (DBX) and 2 door coupes, but nothing like an Audi A5 or A6. Maserati have a few older models that fit this niche but they too have discontinued them for SUVs. Likewise with Jaguar.
The SUV design has basically killed off all other 4-door family cars in the mid-range luxury price range. But at least the Ferrari Luce is at a price point where they're already catering to a smaller demographic and thus they're not relying on the economics of mass production.
At least this is my assumption of Ferrari's target demographic. I could be completely wrong.
And on a personal note, this car isn't to my tastes either -- though as I said before, I'm not the target demographic. But if I had the kind of money to buy a Luce, I think I'd rather by an older Jaguar for the school run and have a modern Austin Martin (2-door coupe) for personal trips.
This is absolutely not a car that screams "Ferrari" though.
My eew comment is the design of the body
I guess not having large air intakes and generally a slightly larger frontal area helps with that (the coefficient of drag is always multiplied by the area, so this might not be the most aero Ferrari ever, that's a different claim).
A less worthwhile point: Especially especially low drag, when people don't drive it.
It would have been trivial for Ferrari to just make their classic style but now, electric! And it would have been full of compromise.
Ferrari has made, in their opinion, the best design for the constraints and challenges of an Electric Vehicle. 4 motors, battery, human.
Good for them for putting real effort into it. And not just making a cash grab.
Ive's work is bubbly symmetric bland crap.
Then again the uproar might be the point of the experiment.
Edit: As an electric Ferrari family car it’s not too bad imo. Making it look like a mid-engine v12 would be silly, since it’s not that.
The Mercedes GT EV is faster than it, so the performance doesn't stand out.
I personally feel like it looks like a disposable tech hardware product, but to each their own. I'm sure a lot of people will love it.
Maybe it is really a functional prototype, but Ferrari as a company does strange things. They live off of their name brand, but they make buying and owning their cars a pain and frankly I don’t think they are very high quality compared to what other car makers in their price point are doing.
Steering wheel looks like its trying to be old school, but really shouldn't be.
Otherwise, I think this car has a lot of excellent new tech in a package that just won't get the motor(s) firing for most people - especially at a 650K price point.
It's a shame they couldn't figure out a way to make the shape look a bit more sporting. Who cares about practicality when you're driving a ferrari?
So they have an app specifically for this car and not a general app for all Ferraris? What are the chances it is a good, usable app? What are the chances it's loaded with trackers?
[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20260216163304/https://www.ferra...
It would be a great car at about 20% of the price.
Man, I miss the 90's. Best decade for electronic music ever.
It could be like the specialist supercar garages keeping a specific model of 90s Compaq laptop which run DOS with custom cards as they're the only way to interface with McLarens F1s. In 2050: "We keep an iPhone 13 with the app loaded which has never been allowed to connect to the internet so we can move the seats back".
All EV designs should converge to monovolume or van shaped vehicles as it is simply the best internal space to external space ratio while allowing decent aero.
Boring as f. imho as Tesla Never had their proper design language, the model S being a 4 doors copy of an Aston Martin DB7 and the other models very Ford inspired.
I blissfully ignore the cyberpunk era.
And the back kinda reminds some of the past. But it also looks like smaller car inside bigger car... What is going on?
At least it isn't as hideous as the monstrosity shown in the Jaguar ads.
Interestingly enough the i3 and i8's carbon structure helped the G11 & G12 (short and long wheelbase BMW 7), the G14/G15/G16 (BMW 8 series) and the F91/F92/F93 (BMW M8) shed a lot of weight.
But for the newer version of the 7 series don't use that structure anymore, as the weight savings are nullified by the battery pack.
I scrolled further and saw the front of the car, and now I get what the comments meant. Holy moly. That‘s worse than the Jaguar rebrand on my scale.
Well, just history now.
It's just a powertrain change why mess up all the styling.
I’m not the target market for this and never will be but nobody is going to make a poster of that for a teenagers bedroom. Yuck.
I think that's the key. This is meant to go up against the Lamborghini SUV and its ilk: a vehicle for the very wealthy who don't really like cars but have to mark their status in everyday interactions. It will sell well.
Do people still do this tho?
Though it's more common to see smaller framed art, and model cars.
"Hmeep!"
Ferrari horns are in my opinion legendary wonderful toots. And I'm troubled that this car offers very little "Ferrari" while sitting atop its brand.
You could buy a V12 Ferrari at that price, if a Ferrari is what you want. Or a Rolls Royce Spectre if you want something quiet and luxurious.
Wow. It's a Ferrari and the top things about the car is how the lights shut off. Way to go Ferrari.
What would you rather have?
But practically,
> start buttons
What is a difference from switch on button on laptop? How do you tell the car, that you are ready to drive?
> physical keys
So when your phone will not be working, are you walking home? I like physical keys because it does not create dependency on single artifact and thus single point of failure.
This is more like his mouse designs than his imac design.
Sure it’s fast, but a Corvette ZR1X is faster. I’d rather take a ZR1X to a custom shop and have them redo the atrocious Corvette interior.
Edit: I’ll acknowledge that I’m not the kind of person to buy a Ferrari even if I could afford it, so maybe Ferrari doesn’t care about my opinion, but I feel like Jony Ive pulled an “emperor’s new clothes” on the Ferrari execs.
I'm pretty sure they realize perfectly well how ugly it is.
But Ferrari has an obligation to the populistic world too, trying to wheel in customers for an EV end ending up selling them a real car with a V8-12 engine.
Looks terrible. But they know it.
And just to be sure you get it, "Ferrari" is also spelled out.
Edit: I do love the analog buttons in the interior though. I despise those big screens with all the controls, and no tactile feedback.
Just saw it and wow, that's an accurate description. Gone is everything that makes a Ferrari a Ferrari
This looks like if an iPod Mini had sex with a Norelco Shaver.
This is totally impossible to read without hearing it in Ive's soothing voice.
Even if this car had been the most beautiful object ever crafted, it would have faced an “EV bad, should be 12 cylinders” reaction.
Even if it had been the fastest or efficient EV, since that would currently be achieved through extreme aerodynamics, it would have been burdened with “that’s a moose, kill sir jony”.
Since it’s not the fastest EV, it gets compared unfavourably to a discontinued car from a discredited kleptocrat, or more reasonably with a Rimac. One of those nobody with 600k to blow on a car would comparison shop against (and they probably have a few in their garages anyway), the other they’re probably on the waiting list for or looking for used, and the Luce will fill in the gap nicely whilst they wait.
Keep huffing and puffing. Me? I’ll wait until some driving reviews emerge and in the meantime applaud Ferrari for stepping outside their comfort zone. This is undeniably a huge risk for them.
Well actually the whole car industry has converged to these design languages.
Unbelievably ugly stance.
Typo on the Ferrari website...
It’s time for Ive to stop working.
The supercar EV market had such huge potential to innovate and inspire but no we decided to follow these average EV design trends instead.
We want your car, but electric.
All people want is an electric Audi allroad. Instead, we get an e-tron.
All people want is an electric V90 wagon. Instead we get a polestar.
All people want is an electric Jeep Wrangler. Instead we get "Recon EV".
The reason for this is that the incumbent manufacturers understand clearly that the electric versions would completely eclipse the ICE models and their existing investments in design and tooling would rapidly diminish.
... and so, all of the eInitiative, iMobile, TronCars ... it's all a desperate (and lame) attempt to continue selling the ICE line and grow marketshare with the addition of the electric car consumers.
It's a nice idea and it won't work.
The Ford F-150 Lightning is a clear indicator that the reverse is true: The market for “like my ICE vehicle, but with BEV tradeoffs instead of ICE ones” is today quite small, especially in the absence of major government subsidies to the consumer.
Looks like a school project not the kind of thing from a proper automotive designer.
Nothing about this conveys fast, lightweight, Italian sports car.
Do you know why no one has ever put rotating switches on a steering wheel face before? Because it requires two fingers to operate the switches and thus taking your entire hand off the wheel. Those knobs and switches might as well be in the center console because it takes a similar amount of effort and diversion of attention to operate.
This looks like a car designed by someone who's never driven before. Did the early prototypes feature bubble domes before they were forced to tell Ive that won't work?
https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/press-kits/taycan/Die-Driver...
I hate this car as much you do, it looks like a vape cartridge on wheels to me. That being said, there are F1 cars with rotating knobs on the steering wheel. Different category and all, but still worth it to point out.
It's galling to see pompous, no-talent douchebags like Ive continually held out as some kind of innovator.
I believe another motivation for manufacturers is that they can turn the car’s UI into a software problem, which from a human-centered design perspective means that they can throw it in the trash and never spend a dime on it.
The design exterior looks glued together from more interesting electric cars, so no surprise the interior does too.
EDIT: I just learned that Jony Ive did the interior. Further proof that without Steve Jobs goading him, Ive is just a stylist.
[0]: https://www.thedrive.com/news/touch-controls-are-50-cheaper-...
I like the handles on the interior display
The display & controls do look very nice!
I love how they found a way to make the sound provide real feedback. I wonder if the cabin gets feedback faster than the speed of sound in air would travel, that would be neat. I'm skeptical they kept the loop fast enough to beat speed of sound in metal though (5000~6000 m/s for steel).
> The Luce’s sound system doesn’t generate artificial noise. Instead, a precision accelerometer mounted at the center of the rear axle captures the actual vibration of the rotating electric components. That signal is then filtered, equalized, and amplified — essentially working like an electric guitar’s amplifier. The result is a sound that’s rooted in the real physics of the machinery, not synthesized from a speaker library.
https://electrek.co/2026/05/25/ferrari-luce-first-electric-f...
Like I mean, isn't there a risk of the driver slapping or pinching a passenger that is boarding while shutting his door without taking enough care?
Parsimonious product design with IMHO out of date conception of what's "cool". I think Ive is pretty washed up at this point.
I don't think that really solves much?
The body lines? What body lines? I’m a vocal critic of derivative design, but this space egg usually is little more than a Junior Study drawing at best. It’s so bland it might as well be still made of clay.
I’m not being unfairly harsh here, there’s a huge tradition of sorting a car’s emotional response - yes, Countach being a prime case study - but I get more “This is interesting” from the latest Prius than anything with this design, in parts or taken as a whole. I can’t be alone, and I suppose the reactions will be savage. I am kind of giddy thinking about what some of the more crude phrasings might be from the likes of Clarkson or Harris.
This is a design for the Super Yacht club. If it was a concept car for a Chinese knock off of a Honda, it would be rightly panned at first sight. Was it designed on a first generation Macintosh?
It has no character whatsoever. The interior looks like patio furniture intended for a retirement home. To call it a failure is not quite right, because sometimes things like the Pontiac Aztek have coherent thought and risks involved. This has none of those things. Mayo on white bread with a glass of room temperature tap water.
In a strange way I love it because it might as well be called the Ferrari Hubris. Just…wow…
Can't believe they are asking 600k for this thing.
It is almost like Ferrari is trying to punk its customers.
Ps. Everyone is hating it on FerrariChat
PS - its a real shame because the inside is perfect
Nothing new to see here, plenty of high end watches and luxury bag makers do the same.
Even the color they chose for the reveal speaks to me like "rich luxury car without personality"
Maybe there's a reason why I'm not a designer.
the phone screen shots show a pathetic 270km range...
The interior is head and shoulders the best I've ever seen in a car too.
Might not look like other Ferraris, but why should it? It's NOT like other Ferraris.
The way I'd phrase your last sentence would be: "It's NOT a Ferrari."
That's the whole problem. If you told me this is the latest Chinese luxury EV, I'd shrug my shoulders, say "hm, not bad" and "not for me," and move on.
For a Ferrari however it's horrendous.
Don't get me wrong, it's a stunning car. But I miss the screaming reds and yellows most of all. And the interface, polished as it is, feels almost too intuitive. Ferrari shouldn't feel effortless!
Now, if this were badged as an Apple car with a sticker price under $100k, we'd be having a very different conversation.