The FOC UK Magazine that I purchased recently had a very good
article about the 365/400/412.
(http://erwin400.blogspot.nl/2015/02/ferraris-limosine-365-400-412-ferrari.html). In that same article it was also highlighted the
fact that the 400 Automatic was not the first automatic produced by Ferrari. If you
recall my blog:
Or if you are a real Ferrari geek you likely knew this. There
are more or less two stories regarding the history of the automatic usage. One
by the US Ferrari importer Luigi Chinetti and one
by the US Ferrari dealer (Hollywood Sports car Inc)
Chic Vandagriff. In any case this article triggered me
to look into this again and search more specific on Ferrari + Automatic + Chinetti. As such I came across this link:
It could have been a bogus link as it’s not unusual to find
websites that are setup specificly to lure traffic
with keywords and buzz information. In some way it was this kind of website
as it had all kinds of advert banners around it. Still it did had all the
working links towards a lot of Ferrari Manuals. And the page also had the
following interesting excerpt – which more or less was the trigger for Google
index to provide me this link.
Most
discussions regarding the Ferrari 400 have always revolved around the fact that
this particular model was the first Ferrari to be offered for sale to the public
with the option of an automatic gearbox. Causing a furore upon its launch, some
considered it almost sacrilegious that any Ferrari should come with what they
believed to be the antitheses of all things the Maranello manufacturer stood for. It had been a long time
coming at Ferrari though, with much of the early development work having been
carried out by Dick Fritz at Ferrari Chinetti Motors
in New York. During the late sixties, Fritz had developed a handful of 330's and
365's modified with automatic transmission. But despite demand for an automatic
model originating from North America, the Ferrari 400 wasn't legal for sale in
the USA without certain EPA and DOT modifications that forced the price above
$100,000 - this in the late 1970?s when a 250 GTO cost about the same. The GT4's
chassis was fundamentally unaltered in its transition to the 400, most changes
being focused on the engine, now a dual overhead camshaft 60 V12 of 4.8-litres.
4823cc was achieved thanks to a bore and stroke of 81 x 78mm respectively, the
latter having been stretched by 7mm (from 71). Output remained at 340bhp
although this was achieved at 500rpm less than before, compression and carbs
also going unchanged with an 8.8:1 ratio and six twin choke Weber 38 DCOE sidedraughts. Transmission was either a conventional five
speed manual or a three-speed GM ?Turbo-Hydramatic?
gearbox as used by Rolls Royce, Jaguar and Cadillac. The auto box worked well
and not as much performance was lost as some people had been expecting.
Automatic examples are referred to as 400 A's while the five-speed manual's are 400 GT's. A few distinctive visual changes were
made to all Ferrari 400's to help differentiate them from preceding GT4's. At
the front, a small lip spoiler directed more cold air into the engine while the
tail featured a pair of circular light clusters at each side, those triple
exhaust outlet pipes being replaced by more familiar sets of two. Further
alterations came in the form of five-bolt light alloy wheels to replace the
GT4's knock-off items but otherwise, Pininfarina's
creation was little changed.The cabin could now be
equipped with a second air conditioning unit intended specifically for back-seat
occupants but this, some minor switchgear changes, new stitching and redesigned
door panels were the only changes of note. Launched during October 1976 at the
Paris Salon, the 400 was an immediate success, despite the furore over its
automatic transmission option. Regardless, nearly two in every three 400's were
auto's, production ending in mid 1979 after the
completion of Ferrari 353 GT's and 770 Automatic's .
I’m
unsure where this text is originating from but it must have been a good source.
I continued my search and stumbled upon an sample from the Cavallino magazine (No 169). It had an
article about the Ferrari 365 GT 2+2 (Queen Mary) and the story about - one of - the
six automatic versions delivered. As such I ordered a back copy for my archive and to learn more about the history (now available in the download folder). It turns out the 365 GT 2+2 was also making use of the same
GM THM 400 automatic transmission. More details about this transmission can be
found in this WIKI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo-Hydramatic
Although
there were some functional troubles the overall tests were positive about the usage. The article
mentions the order for the 365GT4 2+2 automatic versions was given by Luigi Chinetti and carried out by the Ferrari test department. The italic
snippet above does
mention that Dick Fritz specifically also had been building automatics into 330
and 365 and therefore I suspect there must have been a close cooperation between him and
Ferrari. I now wonder how the story from Chic Vandagriff fits in as he had been doing a similar
thing. The given dates mentions that Chinetti and
Ferrari worked on this in 1969 while Vandagriff worked
on it in 1971.
I suppose the work carried
out by Vandagriff was helping Ferrari to further fine
tune the automatic version and straightened out the minor issues encountered.
This is however only speculation from my side. I’m also curious to know more
detail about what was done to make it good and a working fit. Anyone? The
magazine article only mentions the following issues: after a few miles the oil
gets black and it contains aluminium parts.
This
specific Cavallino article was written by the owner of
the Queen Mary automatic version and is apparently a known contributor of the
magazine and the Ferrari scene; Pietro Castiglino. The
car itself is equally known and award winner on various concour
shows. How’s that, a Ferrari Automatic award winner?
As the start of that article
mentions; Nowadays, Ferraris equipped with automatic transmission
are quite common and, for the past several years, even their Formula One have
featured electronic gearboxes. Again this underpins the automatic is a well
valued transmission. And there
is nothing wrong to have it in a Ferrari either. I’m not saying it’s better than
a manual transmission but it certainly is a good fit for a GT car like the 400
series. If it was a true Ferrari sports car I
would prefer to opt for a manual transmission as well. Then again, I can
understand the need to have a manual transmission in a 400 too. Clearly the
majority of the first new buyers had a good reason for the automatic choice. And surely they were not bogged down by de-appreciation, maintenance costs, image or
anything like that. I suspect their choice was made mostly on a luxury and comfy
ride.
From
what I sense on the current market is that a lot of 400 buyers do prefer a
manual version. This might be potentially based on the speculation fact rare is better
(=higher value) and the fact that Ferrari are sport cars and as such ought to
have manual gearboxes. While this is true in general the other facts remain; the
Ferrari 400 is not a sports car and Enzo Ferrari himself was a keen automatic
enthusiast. Besides, shouldn’t an automatic Ferrari from those early days not
be considered rare and unique? And as for performance, the 400 automatic is nearly as good as the manual version. Click the picture to enlarge:
If you
are really that concerned about that performance experience you should not choose a 400 but
the alternative from that same era, the Ferrari BB. Although it will be a V12
mid-engine car and not a front V12. Being on this model, another interesting
aspect that often is being brought forward in a slightly negative manner for the 400 is that it has never been officially sold in the US. Clearly
the demand for an automatic version might have originated from the USA (in
combination with Enzo’s preference). And surely it might had an intend for that
market but the main reason it was not for sale in the USA was exactly the same
as why the Ferrari BB was not for sale in the USA either; Safety and Emission
regulations (http://www.ct.gov/dmv/cwp/view.asp?a=804&q=244900).
For
buyers who are currently in the market for a 400 and need to consider between
Automatic or Manual you might want to take the following into account. The
downside for a manual version is the second gear usage which will require
warming up, just like the engine, before it properly can be used. If you use the
car for an occasional spin and leisure I personally wouldn’t consider it a huge problem but
it’s also pending on your budget as you might run into expensive costs for
clutch and gearbox maintenance. Obviously with the THM400 you will have a laugh,
it’s rock solid and oil and filter change will be dirt
cheap.
First and foremost I think you need to consider your driving style preference in combination for what purpose you will use the car. Happy 400 driving everyone!
No comments:
Post a Comment