×
I Tested Dozens of Heat Protectant Sprays to Find The Best

I Tested Dozens of Heat Protectant Sprays to Find The Best

Other Heat Protectants We Tried

Photograph: Kat Merck

R+Co Bleu Hypersonic Heat Styling Mist for $36: This high-tech-looking aerosol in a recycled aluminum bottle was a favorite during the early weeks of testing—I liked its protection up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit and its frizz-fighting properties. However, it does use a polymer and resin complex to smooth hair, and over time I noticed it was leaving a sticky residue on my hands and heat tools.

Sutra Heat Guard Blowout Cream for $24: I love Sutra’s IR2 hair straightener, so I had high hopes. This thick and almost fragrance-free cream is meant to protect up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit and reduce drying time, but my hair felt dried out after use.

Moroccanoil Perfect Defense Heat Protectant for $15 (2 ounces): All of Moroccanoil’s products come infused with argan oil, and this spray that protects up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit is no exception. It can be used on wet or dry hair, and it’s extremely lightweight—I thought it felt and acted like a light hairspray, for better or for worse. I didn’t love the scent or the super-fine, alcohol-based mist—in fact, I was worried it would dry my hair out, but it didn’t.

Image may contain Bottle Cosmetics and Perfume

Photograph: Kat Merck

Pureology Instant Levitation Mist for $32: Pureology is known for its formulas made specifically for color-treated hair, so I was hoping this would be a great-performing solution for those who don’t want to risk ruining their expensive highlights or balayage. However, it seemed to leave a dull residue, and neither I nor my short-haired tester found the volumizing feature to be very effective.

IGK Good Behavior Spirulina Protein Smoothing Spray for $38: This aerosol felt like it dried my hair out a bit, and it has the same unpleasant scent as the 4-in-1 (above). I didn’t care for it in a liquid spray, but it was overwhelming in aerosol cloud form.

Milk_Shake Lifestyling Amazing Anti-Humidity Spray for $28 and Smoothing Cream for $24: I love Milk_Shake as a brand, and these products were just fine, but didn’t stand out enough to qualify as top picks.

Sutra Heat Guard Heat Protector for $18: Imperceptibly scented and light, this pump spray seemed promising for use on dry hair, but it had the same issue as Briogeo’s Farewell Frizz. Even after multiple passes at high temperatures, my hair was unmanageable and would not cooperate with the flat iron.

Milk_Shake Lifestyling Thermo-Protector for $40: I usually love Milk_Shake products, but this aerosol spray felt like it dried out my hair and amplified my already hard-to-handle frizz after blow-drying. It also did not add a discernible amount of shine as promised.

FoxyBae Cool AF Heat Protectant + Biotin for $16: I like the cheery design of this pump spray bottle, as well as the fact it can be used on wet or dry hair. However, it didn’t seem as effective as other brands and was greasy when used on dry hair.

Image may contain Bottle Cosmetics and Perfume

Photograph: Kat Merck

Biolage Thermal Setting Spray for $28: I like the Biolage brand, and the fact that this can be used on either damp or dry hair (though it doesn’t give a temperature limit). However, whether I used it wet or dry, I found it left parts of my hair stiff. Some online reviewers, though, found they quite liked it for setting curls.

Briogeo Farewell Frizz Blowdry Perfection & Heat Protectant Creme for $26: I have thick, unruly hair, and this cream protectant felt like it actually made my hair unmanageable and harder to style. It may speak to its effectiveness, but I felt like I had to take too many passes with a titanium flat iron turned up to max temperature.

Reverie Milk Anti-Frizz Leave-in Nourishing Treatment for $44: I loved this cream’s spicy botanical scent, stylish glass bottle, and the fact that it protects up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit (according to Reverie; it does not say so on the bottle). It worked OK, but unfortunately, there are just too many better options for half the price.

Cloud 9 Miracle Repair 3-in-1 Leave-in Conditioning Spray for $28 and Cloud 9 Blowout Blow Dry Serum for $26: People rave about Cloud 9 online, and I really like parent brand Beautopia’s vibrating hair straightener, but neither of these products did much to cut down frizz during my tests.

Image may contain Bottle Cosmetics Lipstick and Lotion

Photograph: Kat Merck

Hairstory Primer Smoothing & Protecting Mist for $36: This leave-in mist protects up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit and is designed to work with the whole Hairstory New Wash Method ($64), which involves a detergent-free “cleansing cream.” I tried it and it reminded me of the whole “no ‘poo” movement of the early aughts, where partctioners eschewed modern shampoo for more natural options like baking soda. This method is not for everyone, but if you do try it, I don’t think the mist adds enough to justify the cost.

Chi 44 Iron Guard for $19: This drugstore stalwart works well to protect from heat while also tamping down frizz, and the new Botanical Bliss scent is an improvement over the original formula’s. However, it left a sticky residue on my hands and heat tools.

R+Co Chainmail Thermal Protection Styling Spray for $36: I appreciated this spray for its ability to add lots of visible shine, but the aerosol nozzle was not as targeted as I’d have liked, creating such a wide-ranging, fine-mist fog that it was nearly impossible not to breathe it in. I also found the cologne-like scent overwhelming.

FAQs

How Do Heat Protectants Work?

Ingredients vary, but most heat protectants work much the same way: by deploying ingredients like copolymers or silicone that coat the hair shaft to slow (though not totally stop) heat conduction. Many heat protectants also include moisturizers to help seal and smooth the cuticle to reduce frizz. Because heat protectants can only slow, not completely stop, heat damage, it’s still important to use the lowest heat settings you can for your hair for the least amount of time.

How Do We Test?

I wash my 3a curly hair twice a week, then blow-dry and follow up with a straightening iron. I touch up my hair with a straightening iron daily in between. I tested the heat protectants in this guide in the course of my normal day-to-day life over a period of four months. I used each product on either damp hair before blow-drying or on dry hair before the straightening iron—whichever was indicated by the instructions. If a product could be used on damp and dry hair, I tried it both ways.

What’s Up Next to Test?

I’ll be testing Tresemme’s Protecting Heat Keratin Smooth Spray, Redken’s Quick Blowout, and products from Neqi.


Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting that’s too important to ignore for just $2.50 $1 per month for 1 year. Includes unlimited digital access and exclusive subscriber-only content. Subscribe Today.

Source link
#Tested #Dozens #Heat #Protectant #Sprays #Find


Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off.

Or at least now I know it’s not just me.

Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits">Random People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with Lawsuits
                Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off. Or at least now I know it’s not just me. Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed. It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds. Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

 According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017. The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

 To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean. I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.      #Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits">Random People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with LawsuitsRandom People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with Lawsuits
                Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off. Or at least now I know it’s not just me. Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed. It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds. Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

 According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017. The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

 To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean. I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.      #Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off.

Or at least now I know it’s not just me.

Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

We have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.

It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids">Let There Be Luce: The Electric Ferrari Is Finally HereWe have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.Courtesy of FerrariThe numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.Courtesy of Ferrari#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids

Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids">Let There Be Luce: The Electric Ferrari Is Finally Here

We have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.

It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids

Post Comment