We expect some cars to be great: others, even more so. A brand’s history often dictates the level of expectation we place upon them. Which means it’s especially tough being Ferrari. Because if there’s one automaker where anything less than utterly, mind-bendingly spectacular is unacceptable, it’s a car from Maranello.

The California, first debuting as a stand-alone model in 2008, is Ferrari’s most successful car in history, with more than 10,000 sales during its term – in part due to its sub-$200,000 starting price tag. Worryingly for Ferrari, 70 percent of those buyers were new to the brand. And I say worryingly because the California has never been all that good, meaning those new customers weren’t experiencing the mind-bendingly spectacular Ferrari they may have expected.

As Ferrari’s most “affordable” vehicle, it was too clumsy on its feet and decidedly ugly in the flesh. For 2015, there’s a revamped California. And it arrives with a “T” in its name for turbo – the first turbocharged Ferrari since the iconic F40.

This is big news; it foresees the future of Ferrari (and indeed all manufacturers, many of which are downsizing and implementing turbos as well). There is a difference between how the turbos were applied in the F40 versus the California T, however. With the F40, they were designed to eke out all 471 hp, whereas with the Cali, they’re purely to appease fuel efficiency regulations.





The concern is that this may dampen that high-revving Ferrari madness we all love, while adopting a dollop of bothersome lag. And the 3.8-liter twin-scroll turbo V-8 seen here forms the basis for upcoming models, including the 458’s replacement. It’s a sign of the times: Naturally aspirated motors will in the not-so-distant future become extinct, thanks to fuel mandates around the world.

So this motor’s success is important, and Ferrari has been working on it for years. The eye-watering statistic is that it boasts 49 percent more torque than the outgoing California, complementing its 560 prancing ponies with 557 lb.-ft. But there’s an asterisk with that. The full 557 is only available in seventh gear. In lower gears, it’s artificially limited — not to spoil the fun, but to feign a lack of turbos. By regulating torque, and fiddling with the mapping to match Ferrari’s desired torque curve, it offers the sensation of requiring high revs to extract its full potential, making it feel like the 7,500 rpm redline is higher than it actually is.

Story continues

And 7,500 rpm is sky high for a turbo motor. But even still, from behind the wheel, you do miss those extra revs (the 458 tops out at 9,000 rpm). Fuel efficiency jumps 15 percent compared to the outgoing model, which is the whole point of this experiment anyway.

But does it neuter the Ferrari experience?

Driving the car, you immediately sense the lack of body roll, thanks in part to the engine's compact size and 30mm lower center of gravity, as well as an 11 percent increase in shock stiffness. It feels poised and together, something the previous Cali did not. It's also blisteringly fast, shaving two tenths off its 60 mph sprint time to 3.6 seconds, while hitting 125 mph in just 11.2 seconds.

Talking of speed, the steering rack has been quickened. It’s precise and agile, but the power-assist does feel over-boosted — a little light and floaty, especially on center. Much of this is by design. A California buyer doesn’t want a screaming track-carver. They want a comfortable cruiser with those Ferrari traits embedded within.

When hitting the brakes, the Brembo carbon-ceramics deliver an odd sensation, like there's a pocket of air added beneath the pedal to make them feel, and behave, more like steel stoppers. They’re not grabby, and they're very easy to modulate, but you must get used to that initial stab of nothing. On a track, which is where carbon brakes usually shine, it wouldn't be ideal. But given how few Californias ever end up there, it's doesn't really matter. The only difference when compared to cheaper steel brakes is the weight savings, therefore improving handling.



Ease of use is an evident focus with the car, as it remains effortless to drive. It cruises around town like a Caddy, and at low revs, it’s rather quiet — too quiet for my taste, but perhaps I’m not the intended buyer here; my wallet is a bit thin for starters, but I also posses an unhealhy fetish for racetracks (yes, I'll stick with a 458 Speciale please). When you get it rolling, however, and you crest 4,500 rpm, the sound comes alive. With each pull of the carbon paddle, shifting through the dual-clutch transmission, you’re greeted with the most evocative of pops, like Captain Jack Sparrow lay over the twin-rear seats shooting Mercedes SLs with a sawn-off shotgun.

The power delivery is as linear as any turbo I’ve driven; Ferrari’s torque trickery has indeed worked — even if you aren't keen on the "artificial" part of that equation. You do notice a little lag in the early gears at low speed, but providing you keep it wound up in the smallest cog possible, you become completely oblivious to it.





On the twisties, the California T performs precisely as you’d hope from a Ferrari. The gearbox and throttle response sharpens by switching the manettino from Comfort to Sport mode, and when doing this, you stiffen up the new, faster-responding magnetic ride suspension. On Italy’s most hole-y roads, it can be a tad too stiff (which is where the "Bumpy Road" setting bridges the gap by softening the dampers half way). When the road smooths out, however, I did find myself wishing for another step up in stiffness. Because racecar.



The T's balance is neutral, without even a hint of understeer. Despite sensing the car rotating heavily mid-corner, when you stand on the gas, the rear tires simply hook up. You can shake it loose, but it takes provoking. To do that, you need to switch ESC off. With it engaged, it appears to kick in for no apparent reason, cutting power significantly. (Dear Ferrari, I know we aren’t building a car for racers here, but come on, let a guy have a little more fun. Thanks awfully.)

Many high-powered supercars can initially be intimidating on a country road, but not the Cali T. It's inviting. Just a couple of turns in I found myself playing with the throttle, chucking it about. It's familiar and predictable. And the power and grip from the Pirelli P Zero tires compliment the open road; too often it's impossible to truly use today's powerful supercars without hitting the racetrack, whereas the California T's pace felt just right.



I drove 220 miles during the day and never once did I feel uncomfortable. The California T is a true GT, and compared to the car it replaces, it’s far more well sorted. And it looks better too. It’s restrained but still evocative and engaging to gawk at, like any true Ferrari. It also attracts a mound of attention, as I found out with a horde of rowdy school kids outside an abandoned castle somewhere in the middle of Tuscany's wine country. But this was in Italy, of course, so I shouldn’t be surprised.



Arriving in September for around $198,000, the Cali finally does justice to the Ferrari name. But what about the engine? While I do miss those extra few revs, the artificial tinkering makes it feel as naturally aspirated as possible – which is to say very good. And while this does foretell the future, we all know what will ultimately become attached to these turbo rigs in around five years or so: An accompanying electric motor, which will eliminate all turbo lag and replace it with thumping, instant torque. For a million dollars, you can buy a car like that now. And when the technology cheapens to the level where it trickles down to lesser models, all this concern over turbo lag and keeping the revs high will be irrelevant.



So don’t lament the slow death of the naturally aspirated lump just yet. Change is coming, and it promises to be rather special. In the meantime, the Cali T’s turbocharged V-8 does a damn good job of pretending to be something it’s not. And that’s not a bad thing at all.

Disclosure: For this article, the writer’s transportation, meals and lodging costs were paid for by one or more subjects of the article. Yahoo does not promise to publish any stories or provide coverage to any individual or entity that paid for some or all of the costs of any of our writers to attend an event.