In an issue of Autocar from October last year they were doing a 'best drivers car 2010' test in which a 458 was included. Steve Sutcliffe said this in his column in that very issue:
...Ferrari turned up with in force with not one but two 458's - one set up for the road, one set up specifically for circuit work - plus a small army of tyre technicians, engineers and test drivers. And when I returned in the 458 ... team Ferrari didn't seem very happy. The lap time wasn't fast enough, they said (they'd timed the car around Donington the week before and gone half a second quicker than me), which meant they were worried about the competition going quicker. Which is precisely what happened when I climbed into the Noble, and then the 911, and went eight-tenths and five-tenths quicker respectively. ... When the Ferrari boys realised that their car had been beaten first by the Noble and then by the Porsche as well, they threw what can only be described as a bit of a wobbly. And then they produced another set of tyres, filled with a little less pressure all around and asked if I would have another go. ... Hence the reason it went a second quicker than originally, placing it ahead of both the Noble and the Porsche. Which presented us with something of a poser: should we publish the slower, original lap time for the 458 and incur the wrath of Ferrari, which, to its credit, had decided to take our event very seriously indeed? Or should we go with the faster one and incur the wrath of Porsche and Noble, neither of which had turned up with a truck full of tyres and technicians?
I was gonna mention that aswell. It's fucking pathetic.
Too late...
I KNEW the McLaren would annihilate the Ferrari. I thought the Porsche would've done a bit better tho.