Agreed.It would be hard to make an honest documentary that didn't mention his flexible ethics. If nothing else, he 'disappeared' millions of dollars of public money and likely would have faced a long prison sentence had he not died.
Yeah, the paper thing sounds like something out of a Monty Python sketch, doesnt' it ? I'm imagining John Cleese trying to convince the officials that the paper is perfectly safe....rotflI can't believe how little he cared about his drivers. Except Jim Clark!
Lightness is important but using paper as the firewall, that’s just crazy! Honestly, how much more would have an aluminum piece weighed?
I’m surprised anybody wanted to drive for him. Granted Grand Prix racing, or motoring racing of any kind in those days wasn’t safe at all, but when you’re cutting corners to that extreme, that’s just a recipe for disaster.
I’m not disagreeing with you about Enzo Ferrari. From what I’ve read, he seems to be a bigger a$$ than Colin Chapman. In fact if Enzo wasn’t such an a$$, Lamborghini would never have gotten into the sports car business.You can't get away from "flawed" - but "scumbag" is a bit strong.
The premise of this documentary series was to focus on the "dark side" of its subjects.
As a society we often make allowances for our "geniuses" - perhaps if he had been an "artist" rather than an "engineer" a lot of his "foibles" would have been readily accepted.
Even among his contemporaries he was hardly unique.
That nice Mr. Ferrari had two families in the same village and regarded his drivers as unfortunate necessities.
Why did drivers drive for him? Because his cars were quick. In those days a driver knew there was a ridiculously (by today's standards) high chance of ending the day on a mortuary slab. You might as well be killed in a car capable of winning....
He was never a particularly "nice guy".
He became a financial crook.
There are thousands of people like that - politicians, presidents even, CEOs of companies like Enron, you name it.
He knew he was a brilliant engineer - but - unlike an artist who just needs paint and brushes - he needed money to keep his company in business - and the time he spent chasing cash must have made him a frustrated and bitter man.
I know a little about those pressures - so I'll cut him some slack.
the one thing that counters the image from that film (and that you interpret as him being an a$$ is that people that worked for Colin were fiercely loyal to him. People that are a$$es seldom earn loyalty from people.I’m not disagreeing with you about Enzo Ferrari. From what I’ve read, he seems to be a bigger a$$ than Colin Chapman.
You have to take it context. I don't know what the rule was about, but consider that most (all?) the F1 car constructors were good at twisting the rules for an advantage - Colin was just better at it than the others.But come on, paper as a firewall! Give me a break!