Talk:Ferrari Enzo

Downforce

From the article: After a maximum downforce of 775 kg (1709 lb) is reached at 300 km/h (186 mph) the rear wing is actuated by computer to maintain that downforce.

1) Force isn't measured in Kilograms. It appears that someone just did a crude conversion. Do you mean Newtons? Where does this information come from?

2) The owners of the Enzo includes Pope John Paul II. I suspect this is wrong. There is also much other misinformation in the list of owners. But, it's been my experience that maintaining accurate lists on Wikipedia is near impossible. 63.99.16.91 21:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

List of Owners

The List of Owners section was originally contributed by User:Belgian man on 24 Dec 2004. It was moved to this page by cut-and-paste. Since cut-and-paste does not carry the contribution history forward, this attribution is necessary in order to preserve GFDL. Rossami (talk)

The Glickenhas section is now accurate. Quadritacs edit isn't.

=="THE GLICKENHAUS CAR" is now accurate. Quadritacs edit wasn't. The vin # is NOT changing.

Name of article

This should really just be "Ferrari Enzo" and not "Ferrari Enzo Ferrari"

No, it should really be "Enzo Ferrari" since that is the actual name of the vehicle, but that name is already used! I'll add a note. --SFoskett 21:54, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

As I see it, the car is named "Enzo Ferrari" but the correct title of this article is "Ferrari Enzo Ferrari" &ndash: i.e. the name of the manufacturer followed by the name of the model. SamH|Talk 22:52, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wouldn't renaming the articles Enzo Ferrari (car) and Enzo Ferrari (person) be more in line with Wikipedia naming conventions? I can't imagine anyone calls it the Ferrari Enzo Ferrari. KeithD (talk) 17:24, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

I was concerned that the term "Ferrari Enzo Ferrari" may be obscure, but apparently it has many hits: [1]. Shawnc 18:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)~

While it is evident "more likely than not" that "Ditrich Schmidt" ad for sale of Erikson's Ferrari is a prank, I see NO reason that it should be removed!

                The  pictures  from the  accident  sceene are REAL!  :)
 

http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp?tracktype=usedcc&searchType=21&paId=192139536

PRANKS make also history!

18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)67.53.204.87 18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The prank is cute but should at least be labelled as a prank in the article. My guess is the link will stop working soon. If you're going to keep it in the article you might want to paste a few juicy quotes. Phr 13:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)67.53.204.87

I agree that is very QUTE! :)

I guess that the reader should have more fun finaly determining that it is more likely a prank ;)

Well this ad might be there for a while as long as Microsoft Auto Sale Service will survive.

The NAME OF THE ARTICLE should be changed to "F60 ENZO Ferrari". PS.

Would you by chance be able to correct the location of page and assign "F60 Enzo Ferrari" instead of "Ferrari ENZO Ferrari"?

It will be more accurate than all the time calling the old man, who when disturbed must be rotating himself in the grave every time anyone want to see those wheels!

There is also" "Ferrari Gallery": *[2] with photo from Ferraris stables.

18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)67.53.204.87 18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

A good name for this article would be "Ferrari, Enzo". Andrew zot 02:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Generally people say, "Ferrari F355, Ferrari Testarossa or BMW M5" not "Enzo Ferrari" who is a person. I understand with this car people are in the habit of saying "Enzo Ferrari" but this doesn't follow the normal standard. "F60 Ferrari Enzo" or "Ferrari Enzo (F60)" would not be totally out of place either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.253.232 (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

William J. Pulte

I've removed William J. Pulte from the list. The referenced article actually mentioned him while describing the actual owner, Bob Rapp. I'd list Bob Rapp, but it appears that his Enzo was sold (or at least listed) on eBay in late 2005. quadratic 11:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Picture

If anybody wants to use this or this picture instead of the current one, I (the photographer) will let them be used under a GFDL license and a note saying they were taken by me at the Scarsdale Concours. Nrbelex ^(talk) 22:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I have uploaded all three to the commons and will replace the main image. These are great photos!--SFoskett 01:13, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yo send me ur article on dis baby yeah????

You might use actual picture of FERRARI made by Ferrari and realesed at the initial press release: http://downloads.redjupiter.com/users/images/FerrariForSale/F601b.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.53.204.87 (talk • contribs) .

Ferrari F60?

Is it true that the car is alternatively known as the F60?

YES

The proof is also in this picture adress:

http://downloads.redjupiter.com/users/images/FerrariForSale/F601b.jpg

No - Ferrari does NOT call it the F60. This name is not used anywhere on ferrariworld.com, nor is is used in Ward's Auto World, Car and Driver, etc. This is just a name some people seem to have applied. Might as well call it the "sooper dooper Ferrari" since I'm sure someone once said that... --SFoskett 21:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Top Gear said it was a F60 when they test drove the car. --60.234.137.41 05:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Top Gear's web site does indeed have two mentions of "F60" (both are in Google's cache and are no longer on the site). One is a compilation of lap times for the Stig, while the other debunks F60 as the name of the car. So perhaps they have used this name on-air in the past, but they certainly no longer claim that it is the name of the vehicle. --SFoskett 20:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

This was one of the Names ferrari considered before the final "enzo" name. And at one point when the cat had a Rear Ring it had the embossed "F60" on it like the F40 had. Obviously I have no sources for this as I seen it (with my own eyes) in Fiarano back in about 20002 AppleRobin 16:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The car was originally going to be called F60, in keeping with the F40 and F50 that preceded it. It was very late in the day that they decided to call it the Enzo JonRB (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I think definitive proof that this is crap is the fact that Ferrari have called the 2009 F1 car the F60192.198.151.129 (talk) 09:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Dates for 400th car?

The "Production" section says that in March 2005, Ferrari announced it would built a 400th car, and then in January 2005 it presented this car to the Pope. I don't know what the correct dates are, but surely one of these dates must be wrong?

The March 2005 date is definitely incorrect. I've changed that to "Sometime before 2005", and it shall stay that way until we have the correct date. --HashiriyaGDB 23:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

And doesn't the pope have a popemobile already? Why does he need a Ferrari? Why couldn't they give us poor americans free Ferrari's? I wonder a lot of things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Printatyourownrisk (talk • contribs) 17:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What exactly is going on?

The entire page appears to have gotten bloated and messed up. Do we really need a Wallpaper section? eXotic cars? Fastest cars? Snapshots? The References section appears to have been "replaced" with Accidents and the info on the Ferrari Enzo crash has dominated the Owners section abit. There even appears to be a personal ad for a Ferrari Enzo For Sale!! If someone doesn't explain the justifications for each section, i'm tempted to revert the page back to the last previously unmessed version of this page. --293.xx.xxx.xx 12:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, the page seems beyond repair in its current form. I'll let you have the "honors" of reverting it. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 12:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I left some suggestions at User talk:293.xx.xxx.xx. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm cleaning it up... --SFoskett 22:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool. --293.xx.xxx.xx 23:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

The stuff about the Malibu crash is noteworthy and should be kept (maybe just mentioned, but I'd like to see lots of detail about it somewhere, maybe in an article about Stefan Eriksson). The forsale ad is a funny prank, not a real ad. I think the link should stay as an example of a humorous public reaction to the crash's circumstances. Phr 23:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)~~ Bullshit walks!

You should leave it the way it was.

You might be not interested but others are.

If you disagree, see your best frend who practice PSYCHIATRY!

Do we needed, YES! give me one reason why NOT!

When mountain claimers counquerred Mount Everest Mallory once asked "WHY?", replied "BECAUSE IS THERE".

Your buffonish style and your actions are and should be considered as an example of VANDALISM, as you are destroying very hard work of others!

MAN, Do you really have a SQUARE head?

As far as personal ad for sale, man you have a chip on your sholder.

Look, and read first before you comment, and than sit down and think!

04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)67.53.204.87

Some of the content was a blatant copyright infringement from either here or Ferrari which I have removed. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 03:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)67.53.204.87 04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC) Copyright infringement?

What infringement? What you want to copyright? Car specifications? Seems you do not understand what copyright is all about. To understand copyright you have to know what it is, what can be copyrighted, and how to use it! Have you ever heard of FAIR USE!?

  Don't  ever  comment on the issues you do not yet well understand!

It is NOT blatant copyright infringement, it is your blatant stupidity! 04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)~

First, Please take a look a Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Second, please be more careful with your edits, it is really distorting the formatting on the page. Third, I don't want to copyright anything. I have no idea how you got that idea. I removed a copyright infringement. Copying an entire section of text from Ferrari (or wherever the source was) is not encyclopedic and is a copyright infringement, even if a source is given. See Wikipedia:Copyright. It doesn't belong here. PS2pcGAMER (talk) 05:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

---

The 162 mph figure is disputed/disputable. Probably over 120, but probably not 162.

Cleanup

Some of the language in this article is too casual. For instance, sections like "a current-generation 350 hp V8 Corvette can best this figure nowadays, at a cost of only about 40 grand" and "the Porsche 959 held that title back in 1987" are far too informal for an encyclopedia. Rtcpenguin 22:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the Wallpapers section because it seems to be not in the spirit of Wikipedia. I've also excised the Snapshots section in favor of a gallery format that i'll try to build sometime this week (or someone can do it themselves before me, i'm not that possessive). The Accidents section will be excised in favor of the former References section that was there. I might add this section back in, but I think such links might be better shunted to the External links section. The Owners section also has been reverted in favor of the brief overview of the Enzo crash event and reference linkage to the wreckedexotics.com website, as wreckedexotics.com can handle the ever growing info much more throughly and neatly than Wikipedia. Also added info to further make the entry look more presentable. In popular culture section moved back up above the External links section. I'll go thru the External links section to clean it up and double check some of the links embedded in the article and revert them to the <ref> marks and make the references section nice and big if it seems appropiate. Additionally, the technical section and other parts of the article will require more verification and editing as time permits. --293.xx.xxx.xx 23:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

neutral point of view tag

I've added the tag, because I think portions of this article might be bias and may also have text that might've been taken from a bias source (copyright violation also?) --293.xx.xxx.xx 00:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Designer

Might want to have a mention of the car's designer: Ken Okuyama. http://www.newscenter.philips.com/About/article-14699.html

Nick Mason's book

The word "plug" is not universally understood to mean advertise.

It is better to use the word "advertise" rather than "plug."

86.142.196.16 23:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)Pffff, next you'll be telling us that it's a cheap knockoff of the Corvette, and we have to call cars sedans instead of saloons. And luggage is put in the trunk, not the boot.

Lunacy.

The only reason I understood those words you were using is because I've read some European lit. Like 99% of the people who come here and look at that have absolutley no idea whatchu talking bout. European colloquialisms aren't as universal as you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Printatyourownrisk (talk • contribs) 17:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

unsuccessful

The British automotive program Top Gear tried unsucessfully to obtain an Enzo to test and review. An offer was made by Pink Floyd drummer Nick Mason, but only if Top Gear plugged his new book, Inside Out: A Personal History of Pink Floyd. Host Jeremy Clarkson did not only drive the Enzo, but also managed to plug Mason's book several times during the segment. The show's test driver, The Stig then drove it, with a lap time of 1.19.0 which made it the fastest car the show had tested at the time. It is currently third behind Pagani Zonda C12 F and the Maserati MC12 respectively.

Why were they "unsuccessful" if they eventually did get the car and test it? 68.35.148.201 06:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I edited it to clarify:

The British automotive program Top Gear tried unsucessfully to obtain an Enzo from Ferrari to test and review. However, an offer was made by Pink Floyd drummer Nick Mason to let the show use his Enzo, but only if Top Gear plugged his new book, Inside Out: A Personal History of Pink Floyd

Does that make more sense? --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

List of Ferrari Enzo owners

Why not move the Owners section to List of Ferrari Enzo owners to avoid redundancy? Shawnc 01:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What's better than this car

I think the Porsche Carrera GT awesome. It might not be as fast, but it's cooler. You can spill out how wrong you think I am. I don't mind. -Ez5698 P.S.:The Enzo is UGLY!

Yo, like, if you think the Enzo is ugly, you need professional help, dude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.155.53.66 (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Umm... why not call this article....

Enzo Ferrari(car), or something similar? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scott 110 (talk • contribs) .

There was already a long discussion about this. Look towards the top of the page for the rationale. f(x)=ax²+bx+c 07:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

• The name of this car is Enzo or Ferrari Enzo. See the other wikipedias, especially the italian. So please move this article – according to Ferrari F40 etc. − to Ferrari Enzo (at the moment a redirect to this page). --84.177.105.146 15:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

My fault, i checked the name at ferrariworld.com. Enzo Ferrari (car) is okay. --84.177.105.146 17:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

why???/i think it is fine

It makes no sense for this article to be titled Enzo Ferrari. Every other car article lists make first, then model. For consistency the title should be Ferrari Enzo with Enzo Ferrari (car) redirecting to it. swaq 18:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Surely every other car article lists the name of the car, whatever that is, rather than making something up for consistency? So Enzo Ferrari is correct. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 19:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

But Enzo Ferrari is the son of Mr. Ferrari. Enzo Ferrari (car) is the car you see it belongs in Enzo Ferrari (car) Androo123 (talk) 20:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

PS

It appears to be a measure of engine output, but I can't find what it is on Wikipedia, and it isn't used in many other articles. An explanation would be helpful. --SodiumBenzoate 02:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, I've been told it is German horsepower. --SodiumBenzoate 19:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Mule mention

There is a mention of three mules in testing rebodied as 348s. Is there a source for this.

http://www.supercars.net/cars/3171.html Gives some detail about the car + engine. AppleRobin 10:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Owners

That section is a bit messy, does anyone else think it should be broken off into List of Enzo Ferrari Owners ? There could be a few of the most famous owners (ones with wikipedia articles) in this article and a link to the list which has everyone, and it would be more organised, like alphabetically. James086 ^{Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review!} 05:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

There has been called List of Ferrari Enzo owners until that became merged, I do not agree with that, as for one, having a separate page to lists its owners is like having a wikilists for people who own a Louis Vuitton handbag. Although I am not against the idea of a owners list incorporated into a page, that list needs to be toned down for size. Willirennen 16.14 6 November 2006 (utc).

Each entry really should have a source. I've added {{references}} to make it obvious that this is the case. I'm not even sure of the list should remain, but without sources, it can't be on Wikipedia as it is not verifiable. If anyone puts in the time to find sources, thanks in advance. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

As I have noticed some people have been placing names on that lists when Google search results dosen't mention a single name of them. Would it be a good idea to delete some of the list if there are no evidence of them ot no relevant seatch results, well I'm up for that as I can think of 3 so far. Willirennen 18.14 2 December 2006 (utc).

Just, I have noticed a bit of vandalism, non-notable people placing their own names for the sake of vanity, since nobody replied to the above which didn't prevent that from happening, I have now deleted 5 of them and mark 2 for deletion including the very recent entry as there is no proof of these people on websearches, they will have to deleted. Willirennen 17.02, 6 December 2006 (utc)

I am getting to this point now where I am going to say this, wouldn't we all be better off deleting this list. Well it currently under discussion here. Willirennen 20.51 2 December 2006

I think it should go aswell. It makes up most of the article (where I'm sure it could be much more comprehensive) and makes it unsightly. There was a list of owners in Maserati MC12 (referenced well) but when submitted for peer review, several people said to remove the list. This list is quite horrible so I fully support it being removed. If there aren't any objections I will remove it myself in the next few days. James086^{Talk | Contribs} 08:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll be happy to support that deletion as there is no reason not to, I will try that on the others whenever I can.Willirennen 14:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

400 Produced

There are 400 Production Enzos, not 399. 399 Were sold to the public and one built for the Pope. Thats 400. As far as I know there are no more. (Not including test mules and other such cars.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AppleRobin (talk • contribs) 09:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

A Ferrari built for the pope. Imagine the pope driving an Enzo! Androo123 (talk) 20:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

External Link

Hi i have currently made a new exotic car site here. I was wanting to add the relevant pages to relevant wiki pages and wondering if thats ok to do so? Please let me know.

Thanks

Richard

There is a policy on external links (External links). Unfortunately I don't think your site has anything that others don't. For example the official Ferrari site on the Enzo could be included, and possibly a review (where the reviewer drove and commented on the car), but I don't think your site would be any more appropriate than say, supercars.net or ultimatecarpage.com which also shouldn't be included. It's a well organised site you have though and it can be used as a reference. James086^Talk 23:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Proposition for destroyed Enzo owner list

I know this is Wikipedia and not robb report, motor trend, or any car specific magazine. I can see the value to not having an owners list dominate the page (I personally prefer them, even if behind a link) but nevertheless I agree with the decision. However, there is a much rarer club than owners of Enzos: those who ownED Enzos, and subsequently had them wrecked. Apparently, there are a lot of Enzos that have been wrecked, more than most other extreme exotics. There are a ton of examples, I have not takent the time to tabulate yet, but at least five crashes I know of, here's links to a couple. I thought that this is noteworthy as it is Enzo specific info that is not anywhere near as well reported or as common with other cars. Thanks! http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ferrari22feb22,0,1233660.story http://www.leftlanenews.com/another-ferrari-enzo-destroyed-in-high-speed-crash.html http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/25/another-enzo-crash-and-this-ones-fatal/ http://www.autoblog.com/2006/06/26/say-it-aint-seoul-another-enzo-meets-its-maker/ (That's one percent of all Enzos ever made. There's plenty more, though, all well documented) Useless-Factoids 19:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Useless-Factoids

No.--293.xx.xxx.xx 21:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It's useless to have a list of destroyed Enzos. An external link may be acceptable, or the mention of the high number of destroyed Enzos. —Mr Grim Reaper (talk • contribs • email), 20:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

According to you its 1%, another guy said it was 2%, another said 3%, calculate how much is it really? Androo123 (talk) 20:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

News Accounts

Stemming from Eddie Griffin's "gross negligence" from a couple days back, is it prudent to report all "noteable" accidents of the Enzo? If we allow Griffin's one, then Erickson crash on the Pacific Coast Highway from a few years back is worth mentioning. What say ye?--293.xx.xxx.xx 21:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

BTW, why isn't the Eddie Griffin crash mentioned in the article? More people saw an Enzo for the first time in that video footage than any other. --208.65.188.23 (talk) 03:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Enzo Accidents

Yes, I do believe that Erickson should be included. Whether the crash page should be a split page, with hyperlink to destroyed Enzos, and Erickson redirects to the larger story, Erickson should be mentioned with the Enzo. I say this because of how crazy the entire Enzo situation was: the "other driver", the "SLR Mclaren street race", the "glock handgun clip", the major criminal element, the fake homeland security stuff... he is certainly the most high profile enzo wrecker. So yes, Erickson should be included. I just know that the number of destroyed Enzos is approaching 2% of all Enzos, if it has not met or surpassed that number already. Perhaps looking for other exotic car crash statistics to compare against would bolster my claim, but the Enzo is more high profile and distinctive than others. Additionally, the remaining cars gain so much value after a crash (I've heard a few hundred thousand) that from a financial perspective it is worth mentioning, as Berkshire Hathaway stock is worth mentioning for its extreme value increases. I could get around to writing the article in a couple days, with a little fact-checking/vetting help from the rest of you. I just know that Wikipedia works a lot more like the U.N. than the U.S.-- it's about building coalition support, then making a move unilaterally (I hate edit wars, and insurgencies for that matter.) Thanks, Useless-Factoids 19:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Useless-Factoids

Ownership/waiting list to purchase

 I had heard rumors when the waiting list came out to purchase one of these cars, Ferrari

would not even put you on the list unless you previously owned the F40 and F50 from Ferrari. It would seem to make sense meaning Ferrari only wanted real, proven Ferrari die-hards to be on the list due to limited quantities thus keeping away the "elite" class of people who would have put spinners and curb feelers on it. Is there anywhere to validate this claim/rumor? I figured it would add an element of what it really takes to own one of these beasties.

NEVER MIND IM AN IDIOT

The company sent invitations to existing customers, specifically, those who had previously bought the Ferrari F40 and Ferrari F50

I think it’s a sad state of affairs when a company like Ferrari starts thinking they’re some kind of treehouse club like this. — NRen2k5, 19:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thats why that man who test drives Ferrai's and other exotic cars had trouble getting the Enzo, man the Enzo is one beauty. I think they 'invited' people who had cars from Ferrari because those who had these cars, took more care of them. Also because they wanted money (they want to sell the F40, and F50). Androo123 (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

External link question

I created an external link to the Enzo crash section of WreckedExotics and someone keeps removing it saying it doesn't pertain to the guidelines. I believe this link complies with guidelines since it pertains to the Enzo and links to a topic that is of interest to a lot of Enzo enthusiasts, is original, and is not included in the original article. Can someone tell me why this link does not comply with guidelines?

http://www.wreckedexotics.com/enzo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.126.194 (talk) 09:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not that there is anything wrong with the link you provided, but there are already enough links on this page. Zach4636 (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Zach, There seems to be only 2 external links for the Enzo. Personally, I don't think adding a 3rd link would be too much. I agree that we can't be adding tons of external links, especially if they are redundant, but I truly believe that including something about the crashes that Enzos have been involved in would be of interest to most people. There have been at least 12 wrecks out of 399 produced, that makes up 3% of all Enzos ever produced. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.126.194 (talk) 23:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a rather depressing link, but I guess that we can have it in anyway :-). Zach4636 (talk) 00:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

This isn't really important, but I remember going to a buffet at a hotel, and on the way back we saw traffic on the other side of the road, the road was blocked by ambulances and cops. It was a Testarosso on the side of a road, and in the middle was a 'truck' (not a SUV, not a van, not a 4X4), that was flipped on it's back and the air-bags were covering the windows. What probably happened was the Ferrari was driving like a maniac, and cut the driver, the drived eigther got nicked or stopped and lost control and flipped. Androo123 (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Class?

Should the class of cars like this be considered supercars instead of sports cars--72.226.220.211 (talk) 20:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

No, please read the following:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 11#Car Classifications
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 11#Supercar eradication
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 12#Return of the Supercar category
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 February 11#Category:Supercars
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 March 22#Category:Supercar

swaq 21:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Lack of information at the beginning of the page

Missing:

• peak hp (at which rpm)
• peak torque (at which rpm)
• weight
• power to weight ratio (both in kg/hp and hp/ton, since EU guyes prefer the first way and US/UK guys prefer the second)

And in general, it would be very nice to have the torque/hp curves wrt rpm. In SI units, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.8.162.64 (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Contradictory engine information

I think some clarification is necessary on the heritage of the V12 in the Enzo. On the article Ferrari Dino engine, it is claimed that the Enzo V12 is of the Dino series and is not derived from the newer Ferrari/Maserati V8. This article claims that the engine is new and it is derived from the Ferrari/Maserati V8. So which is it to be, and what is the source of the confusion? Thanks. Chaparral2J (talk) 01:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Owners list again

The owners list should not be removed, this is a rare car, and it is of very big interest to many. That's the idea of wiki. To get as much info into the articles as possible. - Jonas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.255.146.235 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 18 November 2008

For the most part that list was trivia. A lot of the names were red links and gave no indication of notability. The idea of Wikipedia is not "To get as much info into the articles as possible." but to get encyclopedic information into articles. However, other wikis may have different ideas. Also if you look up the page you can see that the consensus was to remove the list of owners. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

For what its worth, Portland, Oregon car dealer mogul Ron Tonkin owns one. I've seen it. --208.65.188.23 (talk) 03:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)