Ford buys Ferrari

kernals12

Banned
In the early 60s, Henry Ford II came very close to buying Ferrari. But Ford's insistence that Enzo had to get permission for any racing budget over 450 million lire (equal to the entire racing budget for 1963) caused the Italian to throw out a bunch of curse words and walk away. Ford got revenge with the GT40 which curbstomped Ferrari several times at Le Mans. Then in 1969 Fiat bought 50% of Ferrari and bought the other 50% in 1988 before divesting in 2016. The prospect of this deal going through would make many car enthusiasts puke up blood but let's entertain it.

The good things:
Ford, the company that invented modern mass production would certainly bring the Modena factory up to scratch with automated stamping and welding. This would mean much lower costs and higher quality.

Ferrari may be a famous brand but by any objective standard, their cars were quite awful and wouldn't have sold a single model if they didn't have a prancing horse. They had heavy clutches, gearshifts, and steering. If Ford took over, it would probably mean power steering and automatic transmissions as well as air conditioning and power windows.

The bad things:
Ford has not shown itself very good at managing its acquired brands. They did crappily with Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover, and Volvo. They would struggle with how to place Ferrari in the marketplace.

Ford could end up wiping out the company's prestige through bad brand decisions. They might think it's a good idea to offer a "Mustang by Ferrari". If the company ran into financial troubles, we could find big block V8s under the hood of the Daytona. It's almost certain that Ferrari would be a much less exotic brand today, closer to Porsche in price. They'd almost certainly be selling an SUV.
 
Last edited:
A butterfly would be that F1 would have looked a lot different in the 70s. With Ford buying Ferrari, I don't think it's likely Colin Chapman would have persuaded Ford to make the Ford Cosworth, which had a significant impact in the 70s and won a lot of races and championship as the engine of Lotus, Tyrell, McLaren, Williams, Brabham and others. Races and championships would have looked totally different.
 
I think the world would be a totally shit place if this had happened. Off the top of my head I can think of the following cars that would not have existed if Ford bought Ferrari.

  • Dino cars and engines
  • Lancia Stratos
  • P2/3/4 Racing cars
  • Lola T70, T160, T163, T220 Can Am cars
  • Ford GT40 Mks I, II, III, IV
  • 612 Can Am, 312 and 512 sports cars
  • All F1 and sports cars using the Cosworth DFV V8
  • Maybe the Shelby Cobra 427
  • Maybe Shelby GT 350
 

kernals12

Banned
I think the world would be a totally shit place if this had happened. Off the top of my head I can think of the following cars that would not have existed if Ford bought Ferrari.

  • Dino cars and engines
  • Lancia Stratos
  • P2/3/4 Racing cars
  • Lola T70, T160, T163, T220 Can Am cars
  • Ford GT40 Mks I, II, III, IV
  • 612 Can Am, 312 and 512 sports cars
  • All F1 and sports cars using the Cosworth DFV V8
  • Maybe the Shelby Cobra 427
  • Maybe Shelby GT 350
I think the Dino would see the light of day as a Porsche 911 competitor. Also, I would love a Lincoln Mark III with a Ferrari V12.
 
I think the Dino would see the light of day as a Porsche 911 competitor. Also, I would love a Lincoln Mark III with a Ferrari V12.

Not in its OTL form, the Lancia run made it worthwhile to develop the V6 iron block engine. If Ford bought Ferrari they'd likely develop some other engine and put it in Cortinas or some such.

Indeed the Lotus-Ford connection would be severed or bastardised into oblivion.
 

kernals12

Banned
Not in its OTL form, the Lancia run made it worthwhile to develop the V6 iron block engine. If Ford bought Ferrari they'd likely develop some other engine and put it in Cortinas or some such.

Indeed the Lotus-Ford connection would be severed or bastardised into oblivion.
I guess GM would take Lotus earlier.
 
A cheap Ferrari Grand Tourer (cheap in relative terms) could doom Aston Martin and Maserati.

Would Ferrari build such a thing? What purpose would it serve? The Dino was to build 500 engines to homologate the V6 for F2 racing and the full-size Ferraris were to generate income to fund the F1 and sports car racing. Making a Thunderbird-Ferrari would serve no racing purpose and cheapen the brand.
 

kernals12

Banned
Not in its OTL form, the Lancia run made it worthwhile to develop the V6 iron block engine. If Ford bought Ferrari they'd likely develop some other engine and put it in Cortinas or some such.

Indeed the Lotus-Ford connection would be severed or bastardised into oblivion.
Ford at the time had no V6 engines, they were very rare since they only became really useful in transverse front drive layouts. If Ford owns them it'll be a V8.
 
Ford at the time had no V6 engines, they were very rare since they only became really useful in transverse front drive layouts. If Ford owns them it'll be a V8.

Ferrari had no V6s either, they developed the Dino V6 for F2 racing. The requirement to develop a 1.5 litre F2 engine by 1967 will still exist, as will the requirement to put them into 500 cars. If Ferrari develops the Dino V6 (or some other small engine, maybe a 4 cylinder) with Ford's help then instead of them going into Lancia Stratos and used for international rallying as per OTL they'll get put into the 1968 Ferrari Cortinia and used for European Touring Car racing.
 

kernals12

Banned
Would Ferrari build such a thing? What purpose would it serve? The Dino was to build 500 engines to homologate the V6 for F2 racing and the full-size Ferraris were to generate income to fund the F1 and sports car racing. Making a Thunderbird-Ferrari would serve no racing purpose and cheapen the brand.
Cheapen is a relative term. A Porsche 911 in 1974 cost the inflation adjusted equivalent of $54,000. A car in that price class would still be quite a status symbol. And in 1966, a Ferrari 250 2+2 cost the equivalent of $65,000, just $10,000 more than a Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham. So really, what happened is Ferrari was a Porsche competitor but over the years their prices spiralled upward.

Edit: A 1975 Ferrari Dino cost slightly less than a Mercedes 450SL.
 
Last edited:
Cheapen is a relative term. A Porsche 911 in 1974 cost the inflation adjusted equivalent of $54,000. A car in that price class would still be quite a status symbol.

Not cheapen in terms of money, I have no doubt Ford would charge like a wounded bull for a Thunderbird-Ferrari, I mean cheapen as in cynically using the racing pedigree to make money rather than make cars closely linked to the racers and that can be used a racing cars themselves or absolute top end road cars among the fastest in the world.

Its the general uselessness of Ferrari that makes them special, if they become just another car then they become just another car.
 

kernals12

Banned
Not cheapen in terms of money, I have no doubt Ford would charge like a wounded bull for a Thunderbird-Ferrari, I mean cheapen as in cynically using the racing pedigree to make money rather than make cars closely linked to the racers and that can be used a racing cars themselves or absolute top end road cars among the fastest in the world.

Its the general uselessness of Ferrari that makes them special, if they become just another car then they become just another car.
Ferrari stopped making useless cars in the 90s, didn't hurt them at all. And I'm not imagining a Thunderbird-Ferrari. It would not be a giant boulevard cruiser, it would be more like a Mercedes R127 or BMW 6 Series. The point of this would be to sell more cars. If Ford owned them, the days of the car business being just a way to fund the racing business would be over.
 
Last edited:
Ferrari stopped making useless cars in the 90s, didn't hurt them at all. And I'm not imagining a Thunderbird-Ferrari. It would not be a giant boulevard cruiser, it would be more like a Mercedes R127 or BMW 6 Series.

By the 90s both the market had changed and technology had advanced to the point where absolute performance could be combined with drive-ability and usability, the Honda NSX and at a lower level the Toyota MR2 are prime examples of this. But even as late at 1988 the Ferrari F40 was a stripped out racer in order to be the fastest car in the world.

Bear in mind that Ferrari did build the 330 2+2 in 1964-67, but this was a bloody fast car that was doing 150mph in 1964 using the 4 litre V12 that was also used in the 330P2 and P3.

Ferrari_330-GT-2+2_STRADA_xMAM6510_653610.jpg


Are you suggesting that Ferrari build something slower, bigger and more sluggish than this?
 

kernals12

Banned
By the 90s both the market had changed and technology had advanced to the point where absolute performance could be combined with drive-ability and usability, the Honda NSX and at a lower level the Toyota MR2 are prime examples of this. But even as late at 1988 the Ferrari F40 was a stripped out racer in order to be the fastest car in the world.

Bear in mind that Ferrari did build the 330 2+2 in 1964-67, but this was a bloody fast car that was doing 150mph in 1964 using the 4 litre V12 that was also used in the 330P2 and P3.

Ferrari_330-GT-2+2_STRADA_xMAM6510_653610.jpg


Are you suggesting that Ferrari build something slower, bigger and more sluggish than this?
Take that and give it power accessories, air conditioning, and an automatic transmission.
 
Top