Currently the market is putting rougly equal (and bargain) values on both the 12 cylinder poster king Testarossa and the 8 cylinder 348. Aesthetically and era wise they are very similar cars. Which would you buy and why?
Testarossa vs. 348
1 reading
Boxer
81 - 100 of 161 Posts
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
Both of these cars to me represent a design era where Ferrari lost its way. No offense to anyone who likes them - I just hate these rivets and flares and such. The 348 is still a pretty car because it was based on the 328, but I do not find anything praiseworthy about the Testarossa looks, and even less about the 512TR and 512M.
The Testarossa engine is, of course, an absolute beauty. I just can't live with the packaging.
So I would buy neither, but prefer the 348 over the Testarossa.
Onno
The Testarossa engine is, of course, an absolute beauty. I just can't live with the packaging.
So I would buy neither, but prefer the 348 over the Testarossa.
Onno
Joined
·
116 Posts
Interesting view. I hate to say it, but the 550 is a Ferrari I would not buy either.
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
Not surprising, perhaps, since I would not buy any of the three cars you have in your profile. But I still appreciate them and will certainly give them a second glance every time. Enjoy your cars, and I will do so mine.
Not that this will change your mind (and by no means should it!), but the 550 is BTW a car that most will only truly appreciate when they get to know it. It represented a great achievement for Ferrari, but this is not immediately evident. The styling is also too subtle for some, and maybe even dull if you like your TR's, Diablos and Vipers as you evidently do. But it wasn't declared car of the decade ('95-'05) by EVO Magazine, and best handling car of the '90ies by Top Gear, without reason.
Of course, by now it has been well and truly surpassed by the next generations, but even now few people are left unimpressed the first time they experience a 550 when the hammer is put down.
Onno
Joined
·
116 Posts
All I know is that the Viper hands down beat Ferrari in the Lemans when the Oreca team raced them. Evo magazine or Top Gear I would put very little weight in what they say...especially Evo which to me is a ricer mag. But like you said to each their own car. Everyone has different taste.
Joined
·
26 Posts
tr for me
I pick the TR, I am not too familiar with its dependability but as far as aesthetics I cant help but appreciate its influence not only on aftermarket tuners but on the whole auto industry. I think if someone was to ask me what the late 80's was about I would point to the tr.
Another apreciation, the strakes. My car design teacher taught us that a good design needs to have a well developed 1|2|3 factor. 1 is the basic shape things like the greenhouse, the hood, and the trunk. 2 is the additional factors like the fender flares. Finally (this is often missing or poorly developed) 3 a vibration, some kind of repetative or not accent. I find the old cords and the TR being great examples.
![Image]()
I pick the TR, I am not too familiar with its dependability but as far as aesthetics I cant help but appreciate its influence not only on aftermarket tuners but on the whole auto industry. I think if someone was to ask me what the late 80's was about I would point to the tr.
Another apreciation, the strakes. My car design teacher taught us that a good design needs to have a well developed 1|2|3 factor. 1 is the basic shape things like the greenhouse, the hood, and the trunk. 2 is the additional factors like the fender flares. Finally (this is often missing or poorly developed) 3 a vibration, some kind of repetative or not accent. I find the old cords and the TR being great examples.
Joined
·
116 Posts
That's a cool car! Lots of curves!
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
Joined
·
116 Posts
Not attacking you. Just conversation. You gave your two cents on the TR's and all the cars I own..I am fine with that. I just think I would have not come on here and indirectly insult the TR or 348 owners here. Look at what you wrote. Saying Ferrari lost it's way with those cars? The TR was the icon of the 80's for Ferrari. Anyways...not trying to insult you. Just conversation. Each their own. You're Ferrari is still a nice one.
This thread has been "entertaining". Several views have been expressed, and as with opinions about styling there is no right or wrong. I would like to say that we must consider the 348 and Testarossa in the era in which they were designed and produced. We must also consider what the public wants and expects. With each new model of car, the public wants more of everything, more performance, more visual appeal or "wow" factor, etc.
The Testarossa was mainly designed for the U.S. market and remember folks this was the disco era. Plus the Lambo Countach needed a rival, and while the Boxer was a great car it didn't have the "bling" factor to take on the Lamborghini. So Ferrari and Pininfarina decided to create a car that would have improvements over the Boxer, and also have the "bling" factor to try and compete with the Countach. The Testarossa in fact is an absolutely great car, expecially considering what else was available when it was introduced. Remember the Corvette with 5.7 liters of V8 put out only 230hp while the Testarossa with only 4.9 liters of V12 put out 390hp. The sales numbers speak for themselves, and even at that the Testarossas had a 2 year waiting list for buyers wanting a new one. The secondary market boomed and it was not unusual to see a Testarossa be resold for over $200k - and this is back in the late 1980s! Now that says something!
The 348 is what many consider Ferraris first truly modern car with computer controls for many vehicle functions. And since the Testarossa was a hit, the styling was carried over to the V8 Ferrari - although a bit more subdued. The 348 had 300hp from it's small V8, and again I must compare it to what was available at the time of introduction. There wasn't much competition out there except for another exotic car.
The TR and 348 were the right cars for their time. My personal opinion is that the 348 is a great car that you must experience to truly appreciate. The testarossa is a bit more "in your face" style-wise, but it backs it up with great performance and even great reliability if properly maintained. The Testarossa is a grand tourer and is most at home on the highway, but it can deliver decent performance on the track too. If the brakes, wheels and tires are upgraded the Testarossa can do quite well on the track. Better shocks and sway bars and the car is a killer despite it's size and weight. The 512TR is a VASTLY improved version of the Testarossa line, with lighter weight, bigger wheels, tires, and brakes. A better transmission. A stiffer chassis. An improved nose with symmetrical inlets. A very nice interior. And even the engine cover/rear bonnet was inproved. There is NO downside going into the 512TR from a Testarossa. The 512M is only a slightly better car than the 512TR but it's looks are a definite turn off for most people.
So after reviewing this thread, I'm glad to see that some of you are passionate about your cars. I'm also glad to see that emotions didn't get the best of you and that things stayed relatively civil. Good Job Guys.....
The Testarossa was mainly designed for the U.S. market and remember folks this was the disco era. Plus the Lambo Countach needed a rival, and while the Boxer was a great car it didn't have the "bling" factor to take on the Lamborghini. So Ferrari and Pininfarina decided to create a car that would have improvements over the Boxer, and also have the "bling" factor to try and compete with the Countach. The Testarossa in fact is an absolutely great car, expecially considering what else was available when it was introduced. Remember the Corvette with 5.7 liters of V8 put out only 230hp while the Testarossa with only 4.9 liters of V12 put out 390hp. The sales numbers speak for themselves, and even at that the Testarossas had a 2 year waiting list for buyers wanting a new one. The secondary market boomed and it was not unusual to see a Testarossa be resold for over $200k - and this is back in the late 1980s! Now that says something!
The 348 is what many consider Ferraris first truly modern car with computer controls for many vehicle functions. And since the Testarossa was a hit, the styling was carried over to the V8 Ferrari - although a bit more subdued. The 348 had 300hp from it's small V8, and again I must compare it to what was available at the time of introduction. There wasn't much competition out there except for another exotic car.
The TR and 348 were the right cars for their time. My personal opinion is that the 348 is a great car that you must experience to truly appreciate. The testarossa is a bit more "in your face" style-wise, but it backs it up with great performance and even great reliability if properly maintained. The Testarossa is a grand tourer and is most at home on the highway, but it can deliver decent performance on the track too. If the brakes, wheels and tires are upgraded the Testarossa can do quite well on the track. Better shocks and sway bars and the car is a killer despite it's size and weight. The 512TR is a VASTLY improved version of the Testarossa line, with lighter weight, bigger wheels, tires, and brakes. A better transmission. A stiffer chassis. An improved nose with symmetrical inlets. A very nice interior. And even the engine cover/rear bonnet was inproved. There is NO downside going into the 512TR from a Testarossa. The 512M is only a slightly better car than the 512TR but it's looks are a definite turn off for most people.
So after reviewing this thread, I'm glad to see that some of you are passionate about your cars. I'm also glad to see that emotions didn't get the best of you and that things stayed relatively civil. Good Job Guys.....
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
Cool.
In terms of "losing its way" - I just think that the TR and to limited extent the 348 are designs unlike any other Ferrari, and whilst they were being built Ferrari had overlapping designs which do not feature the characteristics (like the ribbed look) of those two models such as the 308/328 and 456.
If you like the TR and 348 you must long for those days, because they are not typical of Ferrari design through the ages. They sit quite different in the Ferrari catalogue than they would do in the Lamborghini one.
You are right - they are icons of the '80ies and early '90ies, no doubt about that. And some people will always dream about them. Me? When I was 16 in 1986 I was dreaming of a 512 BBi. I still find it hard to believe that there was no model in between those two. What a radical change of look!
Onno
Joined
·
453 Posts
The 348 is about only as good as paving the way or the 355, which, AFAIK, is the best-selling Ferrari to date. Otherwise, the 348 is a sort of half-measure follow-up to the TR.
And as far as I know in layperson terms, the 348 is a nightmare to maintain, being among one of the most unreliable of all modern era Ferraris. I would never consider owning one ever. There are much better looking and more reliable (if I dare use that word at all when talking about Ferraris) cars than the 348 for the same money.
I'm biased to the TR, with the 512M being the best iteration of that body style, IMHO. But honestly, I would neither own a TR nor a 348, even though in person they're nicer than what you see in pictures, with the TR being the nicer of the two, commanding much more presence and stare-factor; better overall design aesthetic.
For a cheap Ferrari, I like the 550M. That's a true gentleman's car and harkens back to the original premise of Ferrari's touring cars.
And as far as I know in layperson terms, the 348 is a nightmare to maintain, being among one of the most unreliable of all modern era Ferraris. I would never consider owning one ever. There are much better looking and more reliable (if I dare use that word at all when talking about Ferraris) cars than the 348 for the same money.
I'm biased to the TR, with the 512M being the best iteration of that body style, IMHO. But honestly, I would neither own a TR nor a 348, even though in person they're nicer than what you see in pictures, with the TR being the nicer of the two, commanding much more presence and stare-factor; better overall design aesthetic.
For a cheap Ferrari, I like the 550M. That's a true gentleman's car and harkens back to the original premise of Ferrari's touring cars.
Go with the Testarossa
I now have two Ferrari's. One with an 8 cyl (328 GTS), and one with a 12 (Testarossa). Both are aesthetically beautiful cars. Both have their own unique sounds when winding through the gears. I never liked the 348 much, or the 355. When you look at the heritage of the Testarossa, it is true Ferrari form (flat 12). The torque through he RPM spectrum is incredible. The newer cars, (360 and above) really only get the true torque at the higher RPM's (true of 8 cylinders), but the 12 goes like a rocket through the gears, and it's still relatively quiet. For presence on the road and at the cafe, the Testarossa wins hands down.
If you're really worried about maintenance costs, then don't buy a Ferrari. Go buy a production domestic car with a warranty.
Cheers
Bill
I now have two Ferrari's. One with an 8 cyl (328 GTS), and one with a 12 (Testarossa). Both are aesthetically beautiful cars. Both have their own unique sounds when winding through the gears. I never liked the 348 much, or the 355. When you look at the heritage of the Testarossa, it is true Ferrari form (flat 12). The torque through he RPM spectrum is incredible. The newer cars, (360 and above) really only get the true torque at the higher RPM's (true of 8 cylinders), but the 12 goes like a rocket through the gears, and it's still relatively quiet. For presence on the road and at the cafe, the Testarossa wins hands down.
If you're really worried about maintenance costs, then don't buy a Ferrari. Go buy a production domestic car with a warranty.
Cheers
Bill
Joined
·
2,114 Posts
Ciao tutti
Well of course I am being bias but last time I looked the 348 in comparison to the Testa in another poll was the winner on looks. The Testa is simply a very dated auto still beautiful but dated like the Lambo Countach, the 348 still has the new shape appeal and people still mistake it for a new car the same cannot be said about the Testa and last time I looked the 348 was only .1 sec slower than the car with 4 more cylinders. OK so Don Johnson didn't drive the 348 (pause thinking) wait that's a good thing never mind.
Well of course I am being bias but last time I looked the 348 in comparison to the Testa in another poll was the winner on looks. The Testa is simply a very dated auto still beautiful but dated like the Lambo Countach, the 348 still has the new shape appeal and people still mistake it for a new car the same cannot be said about the Testa and last time I looked the 348 was only .1 sec slower than the car with 4 more cylinders. OK so Don Johnson didn't drive the 348 (pause thinking) wait that's a good thing never mind.
Joined
·
15,206 Posts
Not sure I agree with this. The 360 pulls very cleanly from 2000 rpm and at 4000 rpms all hell really starts to break loose.
Joined
·
3,876 Posts
348
I like the 348 more than the Testarossa. I like the styling more, and I like the sound more. I hope to one day own either a 348 or a 355, although I won't be able to afford one for at least 9 years (college+debt), thus I might be able to afford a 360 dependent upon the depreciation. Who knows, I just know that I really want to buy a Ferrari at one point in my life
I like the 348 more than the Testarossa. I like the styling more, and I like the sound more. I hope to one day own either a 348 or a 355, although I won't be able to afford one for at least 9 years (college+debt), thus I might be able to afford a 360 dependent upon the depreciation. Who knows, I just know that I really want to buy a Ferrari at one point in my life
First, I understand Jazzos comment about "Ferrari losing its way". We have some Ferrari restorers out this way that will not touch a Ferrari where the engine is not in front of the driver. They had a spastic term for the rear engined Ferraris, but it escapes me at the moment. All when I was at a Ferrari shop and expressed my interest in purchasing a Dino 246 GT. The guy practically threw me out of his shop. I became a little more informed and found that many snubbed their noses at these cars and felt that they were not true Ferraris. Now with all said, I absolutely disagree with that sentiment. Did I get it right Jazzo?
With that said, there is nothing like the rear view of a TR going away from you at full song. That my friends, is almost better than sex. That's the WOW factor. And I am curently in the market for a 512tr. Need I say more.
With that said, there is nothing like the rear view of a TR going away from you at full song. That my friends, is almost better than sex. That's the WOW factor. And I am curently in the market for a 512tr. Need I say more.
I think one of the real pleasures of driving a Ferrari is occasionally running the car up through the gears at higher RPMs (for the sounds!). I've only had a chance to drive a TR briefly (not mine), so can't speak completely from first-hand experience. But I'm sure the TR develops it's horsepower at lower RPMs than many or most of the V8s, due to higher low-end torque.
I considered this when deciding what I wanted to buy. My feeling was that around town, on city streets, I'd be able to get more higher-RPM sounds with a V8 before exceeding posted speed limits, than with a V12. Another local member of this list who once owned a TR seemed to agree with this thought. I decided to buy a 348TS, and bought one last month. I'll post pics after I have a chance to do a preventive belt/tensioner/water pump service, and clean the car up a bit more.
Having said this... what's not to like about any V8 or V12 Ferrari? It's all GOOD! ...providing you can afford the maintenance
Rick
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
No, I'm afraid you've completely misunderstood me. I was specifically talking about design - not mechanical engineering. The TR and 348 always make me reach for the hairspray and spandex pants. They're great cars, and I would not call them ugly, but they have design "gadgets" that did not appear before them nor have come back after them. It was a design avenue that Ferrari pursued only for 2 models - the 456 came back to the clean lines. And so to me, they are for better or for worse really stuck in the '80ies (although I realise the 348 came out in 1990).
Make no mistake - they are both lovely cars and they ARE real Ferraris. It's just that I feel that the design isn't as pleasing as most other Ferraris and it has dated a lot more than for instance the older 3x8 series. All IMHO of course.
Rick, congrats with your 348ts! Like you said, it's all good.
Onno
Joined
·
24 Posts
I'll go along with that, my dream car, and an itch that had to be scratched was always the 512 TR, and when I bought my second Ferrari recently i thought long and hard, and I plumped for another 348 (Berlinetta this time) down purely to running costs doing 10,000 "weekend" miles a year.
I am however, pretty certain that when funds permit ... and I really hate to admit this ... I may well now go for the 550 over the TR.
It's just a stonkingly (technical term
) beautiful, pure front engined V12 Ferrari.81 - 100 of 161 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
