From £152,116
Chassis and engine updates, and weight-saving redesign, put Ferrari’s entry-level model on a stronger dynamic footing

What is it?

The new and improved version of the Ferrari California – a car that divided opinion like few others from Maranello in recent years when it was launched in 2008. Some didn’t like the idea of it: thought that this grand touring coupe-convertible, like the 1980 Mondial, somehow cheapened Maranello’s world-famous brand.

Read our review of the 2016 Ferrari California T Handling Speciale here

Of those who could get past that philosophical misgiving, plenty weren’t particularly taken with the initial execution of the car – specifically in reference to its handling. And in the latter respect, we’ve been amongst the critics.

As have a decent proportion of California owners, it turns out. The V8 drop-top has sold strongly through a challenging time for Ferrari, hitting 8000 global units in four years. Seven out of ten California owners are new to the Ferrari brand. Most are won over by the idea of a car they can use everyday, for a wide variety of occasions, and need to make very few allowances for.

But feedback from many of those owners – those giving up AMG Mercs and Porsche 911 Turbos, for example - also suggested (perish the thought) that a little more outright speed and dynamic poise from this £150k supercar wouldn’t hurt.

What’s it like?

The mid-life revisions to the California run deep. The car gets a redesigned aluminium body-in-white now made of sixteen different alloys, which contributes to a 30kg overall weight saving for the car without compromising rigidity. The California’s suspension and power steering has been retuned, and its 4.3-litre atmospheric V8 updated to produce 30 additional horses, and 14 extra footpounds of torque. Ferrari’s 0-62mph claim drops by a tenth to 3.8sec, while the weight-saving and suspension update promise cleaner dynamic responses, improved body control and a slightly quieter, more comfortable ride.

Those who still find the California wanting can also now specify Ferrari’s ‘Handling Speciale’ pack, which brings with it stiffer suspension springs (15 per cent up front, 11 per cent at the rear), a more direct steering rack (2.3 turns lock-to-lock rather than 2.5) and a more aggressive setting for the car’s magnetorhelogical dampers. Costing less than £5000, it seems a well-priced option by Ferrari’s standards – and many will probably have it just because they can. But should they?


Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

Back to top

Ferrari had both standard and ‘HS’ specifications to try at the 2012 California’s launch, and while the latter certainly has greater lateral grip and agility, it’s not quite as sweet a drive as the new ‘basic’ model.

The ‘HS’ steering setup in particular is hard to take confidence from; it picks up speed off centre quite suddenly, but without any corresponding increase in steering weight. It’s the kind of rack that makes a smooth cornering line hard to follow; that encourages you to throw the California around energetically, but that also makes it all-too-easy to bring about unnecessary understeer. It doesn’t help that the ‘HS’ model’s body control is similarly non-linear: there’s a little body roll at first, but very little detectable build-up of cornering forces thereafter until the car starts to slide.

The new regular California, by contrast, is an easy and enticing machine to drive, and a much more poised one for its chassis changes. Suffering with none of the nervous hyper-responsiveness of the ‘HS’, it also has much less of the 2008 car’s tendency to roll and dive under duress, and communicates its handling limits clearly.

Should I buy one?

It’s certainly a much simpler car to recommend than it used to be. With a little more fury from its already impressive and uproarious V8 engine and a fine twin-clutch gearbox, the California is now a car that few could argue is anything but a credit to its maker, and a strong and appealing alternative to any high-end open-top.

Our only serious caveat, now, would be to stop short of ticking every last box on the options list. The ‘HS’ pack should certainly be sampled before order; in this tester’s opinion, the additional grip and composure it brings isn’t worth corrupting the standard car’s pleasing new handling and ride compromise for.

And if you’d rather not take my word for it, look to Maranello’s chief test-driver Raffaele de Simone. Asked whether he’d have an ‘HS’ spec car or not, he says he prefers the standard car: that “it represents a bigger improvement over the 2008 car than the ‘HS’ does over it.”

Ferrari California

Price: £152,086; 0-62mph: 3.8sec; Top speed: 194mph; Economy: 24.6mpg*; Co2: 270g/km*; Kerbweight: 1735kg; Engine type, cc: V8, 4297cc, normally aspirated petrol; Installation: Front, longitudinal, rwd; Power: 483bhp at 7750rpm; Torque: 372lb ft at 5000rpm; Gearbox: 7spd twin clutch

* figures for car fitted with optional HELE start stop system

Join the debate


19 April 2012

I hope that pink-brown interior is a trick of poor colour reproduction.

19 April 2012

Pleased to hear the dynamics of the standard car have improved - it's a pity they didn't improve the looks of the back end at the same time ... it still looks like the wide-mouthed frog to me !

19 April 2012

It's a fantastic looking beast with searing performance. Bravo Ferrari!

19 April 2012

Pleased that they've sharpened the performance and reduced weight. Pity they didn't make it look any less like a stunned mullet.

19 April 2012

IMHO, best viewed at a distance, otherwise the protruding grille makes it look a bit 'toofy': Smiley

19 April 2012

A pretty ferrari none the less, you could buy an aston martin vantage roadster at £50k cheaper.

19 April 2012

[quote disco.stu]like a stunned mullet.[/quote] Lol. I've never seen a stunned mullet, but I'm sure this is what it would look like. Looks better in the flesh, though. Even has a certain delicacy about it. And the big arse is not as clumsy as it looks in pics.

19 April 2012

Sorry, but I've tried and failed to like it over the years. There are plenty living around the arc from Knightsbridge to Wimbledon, but I have yet to see one in any colour or wheel combination that looks right. Sounds good on full throttle, though...

19 April 2012

[quote disco.stu]but I have yet to see one in any colour or wheel combination that looks right[/quote]

All black. I get what you are saying, and the combo in the pics is just wrong (I actually like the interior colour though). Most seem to be the light metallic blue, which is just wrong on anything that isn't a supermini.

I think it is because the styling introduces many shadows, and there is lots of black trim too, so it just looks a bit too messy. All black does away with that and, something of a back handed compliment, it diminishes the styling, so it is less fussy, leaving one to concentrate on the growl.

19 April 2012

So it only managed 0-62 in 3.9s before?! What a slouch!! 3.8s... Now we're talking (!) I, for one, love this car, and I love the fact that there is a Ferrari that you can drive without a knife in one's teeth. And yes, it's "toofy". But guess what: so was the original (, and I can't hear anyone complaining about that one... (and I am NOT saying this one is as pretty)


Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week