F9 Unveiled on FFR Facebook Video

[Papa]

Well, I was surprised to see the F9 unveiled, but with the news from Dave to redo the front end, there was no reason to keep it under cover. Skip ahead to about 12 minutes into the video:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/...atch_permalink

I have to agree that it needs some refinement. In my opinion, I'd skip or reduce all the scoops in the hood and do a cleaner smooth hood with maybe a power bulge if you need the clearance. Something more along the lines of this:

[AC Bill]

I find that the so called exotic look of mid-engine cars that manufactures have been pumping out, are getting boring, because they are all starting to look so similar to one another. Years ago, if you saw a Ferrari, Lambo, Pantera, or a GT40 drive down the street, you would drop everything and just admire it. Nowadays they are all starting to look the same, from the Accura, to the McClaren. FFR already accomplished the mid-engine exotic look with the GTM.

I say if it's not a rear, or mid-engine car, why even try to make it look like one? You can have a exotic looking front engine car, so celebrate that with the design. Look at Panoz for example. There's no trying to fool people into thinking mid-engine with them. It's an in your face, bold, yet still exotic, front engine car.

[J R Jones]

AC Bill I totally agree. The F( and C8 and NSX are all to busy and too similar for me.
The F9 does not impress me as a mid-engine look. More specifically styling is not the only deliverable in a mid-engine car. When you drive a mid-engine car enthusiastically, the feedback is not like a front engine car even if the weight distribution is similar/same.
Besides the NVH the polar moment and roll centers feel different. I find that entertaining.
This attachment is a twelve cylinder mid-engine look.
jim

Jag mid-engine 2.jpgJag mid-engine.jpg

[Cobradavid]

I agree! I prefer the proportions of a front engine car. Ferrari 250, Aston Martin DB5, Jaguar XK150 (and D- and E-Types), MGA, C2 Vette are just some examples of great design shapes in my opinion (it goes without saying that the Cobra is in that group too! ) Other than a Mk1 GT40, there's not a mid-engine car that is on my list of dream cars I want to own.

The F9 looks stunning as it is. I think tweaking the nose by shortening the area in front of the front wheels will make it even better. Maybe I'm just scarred from all the "aadvark" cars of the 70's: AMC Javelin, Dodge Charger, Ford Galaxy, etc. , but I'm not a big fan of long front overhangs.

David

[AC Bill]

Yes, busy is a good term to use for the over done aero's, vents, etc, that the exotics seem to be sprouting more and more of. Personal taste of course, perhaps from the era I grew up, but sometimes a plainer look is much more attractive. I still think the E-Type is one of the most beautiful exotic cars ever built..

[GoDadGo]

Yes, busy is a good term to use for the over done aero's, vents, etc, that the exotics seem to be sprouting more and more of. Personal taste of course, perhaps from the era I grew up, but sometimes a plainer look is much more attractive. I still think the E-Type is one of the most beautiful exotic cars ever built..

Yeppppppp!

[cob427sc]

Yessir! The early E-types were the best looking before the impact standards with the ugly bumpers, etc came into play. Always wanted one but now there value has pushed them out of my budget.

[AC Bill]

Yes, a nice condition Series 1 like the one pictured, is getting expensive..Love to have one parked next to the roadster..

[J R Jones]

AC Bill, The traditional E types have appreciated to a point that they are not daily driver appropriate, and there is the reliability issue.
A couple of years ago I found an XK8 coupe on BaT that has throw-back styling, somewhat updated. After some research I found a XKR in Dallas and bought it. XK8 prices are reasonable.
The V8 is formidable and light (441 lb vs 670 lb for a V12) . A manual trans might be interesting but the ZF six speed does a good job.
jim


16AUG drive.jpg

[jdavis500]

Hard to believe that the entire reveal was from a camera that was not more than 2 or 3 feet from the car the entire time. Tough to evaluate proportions.

[GoDadGo]

I think Factory Five has done a great job so far developing the F9 and agree that it isn't there yet.
My concern is trying to create a midengine look with a front-engine vehicle is going to be tough to achieve.
Personally, I wish they would have gone down a similar path that Panoz did years ago with the Esperante GTR Racer that shocked the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St7W0rzScQw

Heck, for you Fantastic Ford Fans the Panoz was even Blue Oval Powered.

Darn Those Cars Were B-B-B-Bad To The Bone!

[svassh]

Well, I was surprised to see the F9 unveiled, but with the news from Dave to redo the front end, there was no reason to keep it under cover. Skip ahead to about 12 minutes into the video:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/...atch_permalink

I have to agree that it needs some refinement. In my opinion, I'd skip or reduce all the scoops in the hood and do a cleaner smooth hood with maybe a power bulge if you need the clearance. Something more along the lines of this:

Wow I agree this would be a better look. Car is coming along nice but now is the time to perfect it. No point in selling a car you can't get parts for anyway. Great opportunity to get it right and be able to sell in quantity when this supply chain disaster improves.

Makes me feel better every time I see Dave talk about the supplier issues that I put off my build and bought my MK2. My kit was due for production complete on Oct 16th. Maybe I'll keep the MK2 and build an F9 for a stablemate.

[Jeff Kleiner]

I think some of you guys are getting stuck on "mid engine" by thinking only of rear mid engines, where the engine is behind the driver. The F9 is front mid, with the engine behind the front wheels but ahead of the driver. Different architecture requires different styling; a rear mid can result in something more like the Ferrari that Papa showed---a redesign of the GTM platform could do that but you won't get there with a front mid. When Dave first showed me some early concept renderings back in 2018 he said that he wanted a front mid "hypercar" and that the stylistic goal was something along the lines of the Aston Martin Vanquish:

vanquish.jpg

Maserati GranTurismo:

granturismo.jpg

And the Jaguar F-Type:

ftype.jpg

Personally I think the basic F9 shape is pretty good but starts to lose it's appeal when the scoops and strakes are added.

Jeff

[JohnK]

Personally I think the basic F9 shape is pretty good but starts to lose it's appeal when the scoops and strakes are added.

Jeff

I agree 100%. the basic shape and proportions are beautiful, but all the extra "stuff" all over the car just makes it so busy and cheap-looking IMO. Less is definitely more in this regard. I understand that they may be beneficial from an aero standpoint for a purpose-built track car, but in that case I wish they'd offer a "R" version with all the embellishments and a cleaner-looking street version that has more aesthetic appeal.

Also - is the video available anywhere else besides FB?

[PhilO]

I think that is where they are headed. I saw previously they have registered the F9, F9R and F9E names, so I would expect different models. It makes sense they are focusing on the "R" type body as they have already talked to the PGM race team to run it through its paces. I expect if it actually goes to production, the street version will have less of the cutouts, etc, just like the coupe.

[toadster]

I find that the so called exotic look of mid-engine cars that manufactures have been pumping out, are getting boring, because they are all starting to look so similar to one another. Years ago, if you saw a Ferrari, Lambo, Pantera, or a GT40 drive down the street, you would drop everything and just admire it. Nowadays they are all starting to look the same, from the Accura, to the McClaren. FFR already accomplished the mid-engine exotic look with the GTM.

I say if it's not a rear, or mid-engine car, why even try to make it look like one? You can have a exotic looking front engine car, so celebrate that with the design. Look at Panoz for example. There's no trying to fool people into thinking mid-engine with them. It's an in your face, bold, yet still exotic, front engine car.

I agree... I said years ago when the 1990 Ford Probe was released that all cars in the future will look like a bar of Dove soap...
91113361991303.jpg

it's about efficiency in the air, sadly the newer building requirements need to give adequate space above the engine so front engine cars/trucks have a HUGE front face now...

toyota-tundra_100796296_h.jpg Nissan-Z-First-Look-2.jpg 106938841-1631128855917-Silverado_ZR2.jpg

I really dig the F9, a bit pricier than I'd go for instead of just buying a good used pedigree car... but what do I know, I'm building an overpriced Cobra LOL

[J R Jones]

I agree... I said years ago when the 1990 Ford Probe was released that all cars in the future will look like a bar of Dove soap...
91113361991303.jpg

it's about efficiency in the air, sadly the newer building requirements need to give adequate space above the engine so front engine cars/trucks have a HUGE front face now...

toyota-tundra_100796296_h.jpg Nissan-Z-First-Look-2.jpg 106938841-1631128855917-Silverado_ZR2.jpg

I really dig the F9, a bit pricier than I'd go for instead of just buying a good used pedigree car... but what do I know, I'm building an overpriced Cobra LOL

toadster, trucks that is another culture. Bigger is always better, like wearing a fat suit.
I have been existing on Series I Tundras (2000-2006) that are disparaged as 3/4 scale. It takes about 300K (or an oak tree) to challenge cost/benefit.

Your comment on cost is appropriate. In the F9 (or GTM) class a Corvette MSRP is cheaper, and you trade a Forum for warranty.
jim

[DSR-3]

Designed for a world without driveways?
Not a car/project for me, but sales are what counts- so let's see what builders & buyers think.
I'm thinking that a home-built "supercar" may be past it's time. Modern (super)cars are just so much higher tech, design, and finish, that creating a fancy-looking car on a 60's-level platform seems kind of pointless to me.

[Presto51]

And Bringing this thread back around to the original topic :

I think this is what the inspiration for the F9 came from and what FFR is trying to emulate.

Aston Martin Vulcan.jpg

They are getting close.

Ron

[JohnK]

That would be a shame, as the Vulcan is the most gaudy and over-the-top interpretation of the Aston Martin aesthetic imaginable.

[J R Jones]

Designed for a world without driveways?
Not a car/project for me, but sales are what counts- so let's see what builders & buyers think.
I'm thinking that a home-built "supercar" may be past it's time. Modern (super)cars are just so much higher tech, design, and finish, that creating a fancy-looking car on a 60's-level platform seems kind of pointless to me.

DSR-3 Yes and no. You are right at 4.5" ground clearance driveways are a challenge. Some platforms here are 60's level, arguably the 818, 33, and GTM are more contemporary but not contemporary.
Chevrolet is/has been fond of compromise but the Corvette, not so much. A sage once told me it is easier to be a Mercedes engineer than a Chevy engineer. The Chevy engineer has to accomplish the same objectives at a reasonable cost. OK I get the differences.

The C5 (1997) cut-a-ways revealed aluminum structure and now more carbon fiber. Moreover the plastic bits are required to supplement structure and reduce weight. Steel space frames are no comparison.
There is also the economies of scale that adsorb high tech tooling cost and part cost.
BMW does aluminum chassis too. Ever have a BMW crash estimate done?
I feel your point on supercars is spot on. The persons looking for the latest technology are not shopping DIY cars, regardless the styling.
Compromises and technology-fails drive me nuts on the way-less-expensive 818. A series II MR2 is a formidable benchmark.

The niche is small, venturing too far from your "hook" is risky business.
jim

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

I have to admit I'm pretty confused by the video? From what I gathered there, they are making a conscious effort to try to make the F9 look like the engine is in the back?....and their re-design of the front is going to continue with that effort? Why? It's a front engine car. An obviously front engine car. So why make compromises trying to hide that fact? Why not just abandon that idea and just focus on making it a very cool front engine car. Plenty of other manufacturers have successfully pulled that off throughout history. I do hope they shorten up the front overhang. If the engine is mounted well behind the front wheels, why the need for an extra 3 feet of nose sticking out ahead of the tires....which is going to cause issues with every speed bump and curb and driveway entrance?

[JohnK]

I think Jim hit the nail on the head. The typical person looking for a supercar is not looking for DIY car fit and finish. I think that, by and large, people accept the DIY car fit and finish when it's a replica of a car they can't otherwise own. I don't have an extra $3M laying around so I'm OK if my cobra is a fiberglass shell on a tube frame chassis. Would I accept the same thing on a car that's perhaps a cool car but not really a replica of anything? Probably not, but that's just me. There are so many cool cars that the market needs good replicas of, that I don't really get the strategy with the 818 and now the F9.

[Ajzride]

It is for people who care more about building a car than owning or driving one. Some people just love the project, and for them 818 and F9 are perfect. I could easily have bought a nice used Boxster for less than I have in my 818, but then I would have missed out on thousands of hours of fun in the garage.

[JohnK]

I totally get that. No offense intended to you or any of the 818 owners out there. My comment was purely from a marketing perspective - if you're trying to cast the widest net possible, so to speak, a replica of something that's instantly recognizable is going to have a much larger market appeal than a kit of the same quality that's not a replica of anything.

[David Hodgkins]

I totally get that. No offense intended to you or any of the 818 owners out there. My comment was purely from a marketing perspective - if you're trying to cast the widest net possible, so to speak, a replica of something that's instantly recognizable is going to have a much larger market appeal than a kit of the same quality that's not a replica of anything.

I agree, but there is always room for the exception. I think FFR has the potential with their current trajectory to have something unique that will be as popular as their replicas.

[J R Jones]

I totally get that. No offense intended to you or any of the 818 owners out there. My comment was purely from a marketing perspective - if you're trying to cast the widest net possible, so to speak, a replica of something that's instantly recognizable is going to have a much larger market appeal than a kit of the same quality that's not a replica of anything.

John, You are right. Not so much on this end but the transaction is business and ROI.
Jethro Bovingdon (American Top Gear) in a recent interview states that Porsche complexity and cost is driving the resto-rod market. Replica cars are in that category.
So exhibition of skill and self expression are deliverables here, but personally I also appreciate simplicity, reliability, performance and visual statement. I am quite concerned about dependency. I have had a Harley and I don't want to devote my life to keeping it running because it makes me look cool.
This forum has exposed me to self-abuse through technology. I was in the USAF too, and 50 hours of maintenance and repair per flying hour was not a rewarding trade-off.
I see the path for a replica that is legally dead-simple, I haven't plotted that path for a DIY Supercar.
jim

[FFRWRX]

Since we are all throwing our opinions out here, I'll give mine.

First, I hate the term "front mid-engine". It's a mid-engine or it's not. Mid-engine traditionally means the engine is behind the driver. This front mid-engine stuff is just trying to prove that the weight balance is not like a front engine car; but it usually is closer to that weight balance than a true mid-engine car.

Second, I think the trend of scoops and vents all over a car and weird stuff with the fenders (seeing the tire through part of it) can really ruin it. Most Ferraris are such a beautiful clean design and don't need a lot of stuff added on. And, how many people are really going to race their street car? Sure some will, but the rest of us have to put up with a lot of body nonsense for the few that will race them. Do I really need aero to keep my car stable at 180 MPH?

And as to the fit and finish of the interior, yes, that is a good point. If I'm going to spend close to a hundred grand to build a really nice "kit car", then I'm going to seriously be looking at a new Vette or a couple year old other exotic. Almost all the home built cars are a real disappointment when it comes to the interior. Yes, it can be pretty good, but to make it in any way comparable to a production car you are going to have to take it to a custom upholstery place and spend a lot of money.

I'm curious how FF is going to have a flawless carbon fibre body shipped from China and then to the customer without any damage. Minor damage on their current cars is not a big deal. But if someone is planing on not painting over the clear CF body, then it better be flawless.

I realize they want to be leading edge with some of their cars, but if someone wants to spend that sort of money, there are other companies offering choices that have been around for a while and have very good reputations. I would have expected FF to stick with the lower price stuff and sell more of them. But maybe that's not fun?

From what I've seen so far of the F9, I'm just not a fan. Maybe I will be when it is finished and introduced. How many people look at a new Ferrari and complain about the looks? Lambo's.......meh....they all look the same.

Rick

[VRaptor SpeedWorks, LLC]

I totally get that. No offense intended to you or any of the 818 owners out there. My comment was purely from a marketing perspective - if you're trying to cast the widest net possible, so to speak, a replica of something that's instantly recognizable is going to have a much larger market appeal than a kit of the same quality that's not a replica of anything.

I don't agree. While the replica kits are cool....almost all of the old cars worth replicating have already been replicated. Coming out with more and more replicas of cars that already have a dozen other replicas already on the market seems foolish to me......you are essentially fighting for your own niche in an already small niche market. Pretty tough to cast a wide net in an already small pool. Some people don't want to spend thousands of hours building something new that looks like something old. The entire market is filled with replicas of 1960's and 1930's cars already. Any other "cool" older car that you want to replicate is going to be a legal battle with the original manufacturer of the car you're replicating......seems like FFR already fought that battle with the "Cobra"....no? Trying to replicate anything from Ferrari or Lamborghini would result in an instant lawsuit.

I've built an entire business out of building GTM's. I was thrilled to see FFR build an original, new exotic design that was not a replica. I still think there's a huge market out there for the right kit.....and I don't think that kit exists yet. The GTM is too expensive for most people to build. I like the concept of the 818 but don't care at all for the looks. The F9 is going to be their next "halo car"....which means it is likely going to be a bit on the higher price scale of things. I still think there's a huge market out there for a super-simple, inexpensive, original design "sports car" kit....whether it be front or mid engine (similar to the 818 with donor front drive powertrain installed in the rear).....something more in line with the Ariel Atom, Caterham concepts....not necessarily in the looks or construction department, but the performance concept....with all of the focus being on light weight and insane handling....but I guess that's a subject for another thread.....

[FFRWRX]

Trying to replicate anything from Ferrari or Lamborghini would result in an instant lawsuit.

I still think there's a huge market out there for a super-simple, inexpensive, original design "sports car" kit....whether it be front or mid engine (similar to the 818 with donor front drive powertrain installed in the rear).....something more in line with the Ariel Atom, Caterham concepts....not necessarily in the looks or construction department, but the performance concept....with all of the focus being on light weight and insane handling....but I guess that's a subject for another thread.....

I agree completely, or almost completely. I think I read somewhere that Ferrari lost the rights to the design of some cars (the 250 GTO maybe?) since they didn't enforce it for too many years. I know it's been mentioned before, but if FF did a version of that (based on the Coupe frame and bits?) I'd be first in line.

And yes, the simple sports car is what they built their business on and I'd like to see that continue. The really high end stuff makes you think what else you can get for that money.

Rick

[DSR-3]

FFR Spyder would be a great place to start...

[Papa]

FFR Spyder would be a great place to start...

Like this?

https://www.rcnmag.com/fresh-finds/t...-type-65-coupe

[CobraboyDR]

Like this?

https://www.rcnmag.com/fresh-finds/t...-type-65-coupe

It doesn't look "right" like an open cockpit Cheetah doesn't look "right."

[Cobradavid]

I'm still waiting for the Ford Cougar II kit - it could be heavily based on the Mk IV chassis (the original was built on a leaf-spring cobra chassis). Maybe not super-/uber-/hyper-car territory, but it sure looked nice.

I'll take mine with real wire wheels, thank you very much

David

[David Hodgkins]

I'm still waiting for the Ford Cougar II kit - it could be heavily based on the Mk IV chassis (the original was built on a leaf-spring cobra chassis). Maybe not super-/uber-/hyper-car territory, but it sure looked nice.

I'll take mine with real wire wheels, thank you very much

David

I had to look that up:

[Newkitguy]

personally building a flagship car is usually over the top. If you look at the flagship of any of the aforementioned car brands they have always been over the top (for the time period). So I'm all for it. The new high end super cars have some crazy dramatic body lines, scoops, vents and everything. Seems like the biggest population here are guys that built old cobras and enjoy that type of body. The flagship car is certainly not that

[John Dol]

I think they’ve done a good job so far but don’t care for the windshield extension. It makes the hood proportions seem weird.
I think their approach is smart in that they want to use the same platform for different models (widely used in car manufacturing) which will greatly reduce the cost of manufacuring.
I would love to see an 818 frame based Lancia Stratos, but a 250 GTO based on the coupe frame would do me in!

John

[JohnK]

A Jaguar E-Type based on the coupe frame would be wicked-cool! Seems like the overall shape and proportions are nearly perfect.

[Itsa GTM]

I really like the concept, but the overall design is a bit too busy for my taste. As a few have said, it seems they are working hard to go upscale and shrinking the market due to price and complexity as a result. A carbon body is cool, but why add that much cost? Will it make the car that much more attractive to justify the cost difference? I do not think so. A better option might be to go with a similar but cleaner design with fewer individual pieces, more like the Ferrari Roma and spend time on a better interior. Keep the body fiberglass like everything else they build, keep it simple, and get the thing to market. It's obvious that they are having problems getting this car developed due to the complexity and materials chosen. My suggestion would be to step back, review the outstanding development issues and simplify the process.

[J R Jones]

Itsa, I agree with you. Entering a market segment a company (should) reduce risk with focus groups yielding the VOC, voice of the customer. Who is the customer?
I left this thread alone to let the image steep in my mind, then you made me look again. The F9 looks worse to me now than it did before, and I find the objective to "make it look mid-engine" a sham objective.

"Form following function" results in honest design that legitimizes performance.
The rationalization that crossed my mind is the "transformer look", as if the odd shapes will codify something that the F9 is not as it stands.
Last night my analogy was my Kubota tractor. It is a mechanical platform that various equipment attaches to for function. Not an exotic form like a SR71 aircraft or a submarine.
The carbon fiber appears to be a talking point, and does not deliver performance beyond (perhaps) low weight. Speedkore in Grafton WI builds carbon fiber replicas at around $400K. They are engineered beyond the styling.
jim