why 430 over 360

what are the benefits of buying a 430 over a 360? e.g. as far as depreciation, reliability, etc etc

 

This might help - there are probably a few other similar threads worth seeking out

http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=304739

 

Complicated question.

Depreciation: 360 is bottoming out so the 430 will loose more in absolute $ and probably more in % as well. BUT, these cars aren't investments so this is the cost of entry.

Maintenance: 430 is still pretty new so this is still TBD (my opinion). The 360 has belts and 430 has chains so that is less for a 430. The e-diff is a complete unknown as the 430 ages. The 430's carbon brakes are MUCH more expensive than the 360's steel brakes. I would call it a push.

Reliability: Both cars are VERY reliable. They both hate low battery condition so drive it or keep it on a tender or you will see lots of odd gremlins popping up.

430 costs more than a 360 to purchase
Styling is pure preference, I like the 360 better
430 has 100 hp more so definitely faster
430 transmission shifts faster than the 360 and smoother too

 

Good analysis. One comment below.

While the carbo-ceramic brakes are a lot more expensive to replace, they also last a lot longer than steel brakes. It would be interesting to know how it works out on a cost/mile basis.

Also, there are F430's out there with steel brakes. Carbo-ceramics were an option that many purchasers opted to forego.

 

And with the F430 with cc brakes, you can always switch back to steel if you wear the cc's out on the track (same with Stradale, but not Scuderia IIRC). Still, cc brakes should last a lifetime for street driving.

 

Anything pre 430 is seriously junk when compared to modern cars. The build quality skyrocketed at Ferrari when 430 was introduced. Its more reliable, more driver friendly, faster, more advanced..... list goes on and on...

 

it is not like a porsche. steel rotors can not be put on a cc ferrari. they will not fit.

 

I beg to differ as regards pre-430s. My 360 is a well used car (by me and it's previous owners) and continues to be extremely reliable and is holding together very well indeed. It's 11 years old now and compares extremely favourably to any other 11 year old car I see knocking around. I'm sure the 430 was a step forward, in terms of reliability and certainly in terms of maintenance costs, but not a momentous one judging by the issues reported every day here on F-Chat.

I regularly toy with the idea of changing to the 430 but really and truly I cannot justify the considerable additional cost as against the return. Yes, I'd like a little more torque but the power is all one can realistically use 90+% of the time. If I were driving it daily it would be an easier decision to make but like most Ferrari owners I only use it for R&R purposes.

 

I'm not sure I would go THAT far lol.

I've owned both and where I can tell you the F430 is truly a better car on the technical side, ie faster, more torque and a little better transmission, the 360 is still an outstanding car.

I think the 360 is visually a great car and with a tubi or something on it sounds awesome. The interior isnt much of a change, but the transmission is definitely better in the 430 and the 430 is noticeably quicker.

 

No knock against the 360 but the 430 is just a better car. It costs more too.

Like any car, the one following car usually is improved.

The engine is a marvel and the F1 box is terrific. The traction control is really good too. And, it's faster.

Also, I like the interior better.

That, plus no timing belts and less maintenance over time make it a better car.

 

That is not true. Unless the couple service managers i spoke to were wrong, cc brakes on the base 430 and cs can be changed to steel, just not the scud cc brakes.

 

+1. Not true. If anything the CCBs would be bigger than the steel ones you would be replacing.

 

thank you for your correction. I knew it was the case on the scud, but i did not know that of the 430.

 

If you dig around, basically any large/reputable rotor manufacturer either already does, or will be able to make (even a 100% custom steel rotor would not trump the cost of an OEM set of carbons from Ferrari - I can gaurantee you that) a rotor to fit your application. A company like AP Racing, Brembo, or Wilwood make rotors to fit a variety of common thicknesses, diameters, styles (drilled/slotted/wave), and hub bolt patterns to fit most applications.

I have heard that the ZR1's used at Bondurant driving school see an abnormally high number of track miles on their OEM carbon rotors without them needing replacements, but carbon rotors on cars like the GT-R seem to wear out pretty quick. Most GT-R owners switch to an AP Racing, DBA, Stillen, etc. steel rotor to avoid frequent and high replacement costs in track applications. Because of this, most aftermarket manufacturers make parts available to those not wanting to shell out easily over $2,000 a year on brake rotors.

Also to clear up something I read on here a few months ago... carbon rotors don't result in less brake dust. That is something that is mostly based on what kind of pads you have. As carbon is more abrasive than blank steel rotors, they would actually result in more brake dust, all other things equal. Carbon rotors are really only needed in track applications, on the street its more of a 'baller' factor. Most people would not notice the difference in day-to-day driving and, as one user posted earlier, R&R.


VVVV Thanks VVVV

 

^ Nice first post.

 

"Junk" Compared to "modern cars". Ahhh. No.

Agree with FerrariDublin above. I include IMS failure on porsches.. BMW transmissions... Lexus electrical gremlins.. and the "junk" material that was used in 430 headers. Ediff may be an issue in the future. I argue we don't know how the F1 system will faire in the future as well. If the 360 is any indication, given the higher number of F1 cars in the fleet this may be as prevalent as in the 360. As Rifledriver has alluded to in prior posts.. the chains in the 430 engines wear out as well with use. We don't know the replacement costs. Will a belt every 5 years (yes I subscribe to this camp) be less expensive than chain replacement? that will be TBD

 

1+
I will love to see any mechanich even from ferrari to replace a timing chain from the iinspection lid cover behind the seats!
That engine will have to come out the car and that means big bucks!!!

 

Chain replacement is much more extensive than belt replacement. It typically requires the heads to be removed, as well as all timing covers and, typically, the oil pump. Basically you're looking at many more replacement parts and costs associated with accessing them... as opposed to simply removing the external timing/valve covers of a belt-driven engine, chains are lubricated and kept 'inside' the engine. Lucikly chains are much more reliable and resilient, however they do get fatigued after much (ab)use. They wear out and stretch a small amount, but most of you are gentle on your cars... right? Right??

If your engine is out for service anyways then you might as well. Preventative maintenance... better safe than sorry.

 

It's twice the car for twice the money.

 

Welcome FChat. I hope my engine isn't out every 7-10 yrs. That would be a disaster. There is not much reason to remove the engine in a 360 unless you have a catastrophic problem. As pointed out timing chain replacement on a 430 may require that but so far it is TBD.

I had the variators replaced on my 360 Spider. To get them off the cams we had to remove the cams and even that didn't require engine removal. Yes, the top had to be removed but the engine stayed in place.

 

Oh really, guess you haven't read the thread the poor guy posted about his ownership costs and realiability with a 430. LOL

 

Twice the car? LOL I got to drive a 430 Spider the other day, was not impressed. Does it have a little bit more torque, yeah, but the sound of the stock exhaust is horrible, even when the valves opened up.

Put a Challenge Stradale TCU on a 360, do exhaust and sport cats and light tune and the difference would be around 40 hp.

Are the seats nicer in a 430, yes. Is the dash set up a little cooler, yes. Is the stereo any better, no. Is it twice the car, regadless of cost, not even close.

Why do you think out of all the Ferrari's for sale on Dupont Registry, guess which model has the most currently for sale?

I am guessing you are a 430 owner.

 

The topic of this thread is "why 430 over 360" and perhaps more directed to 430 owners. You "drove" a 430 spider the other day? I am guessing you don't own any of these cars and try to contribute your opinions based on...air?

 

All I have to say is that I drove both cars before buying. 430 first, 360 second. Immediately after driving the 360 I knew the 430 was the car to buy. Driving the 430 first was probably a mistake. It set the bar pretty high and the transmission difference was noticeable. I would never knock the 360 down in any category. But, the 430 is the better car in almost every category. The warranty also helped aid in the final decision.

 

I own a 2001 360 Spider. I have already posted pics of my cars in the Scuderia Market dropping thread. A local guy in my town is flipping cars every two months. He sells them at a higher end used car dealer. I drove his car, was not the least bit impressed, nor were the two owner's of the dealership. They would not pay double for a car that is not even close to being double the car, nor would I. Now a Scuderia, maybe, but not a standard 430 or 430 Spider.

I could care less what the topic of the thread is. The author is trying to get feedback to rationalize which car he should choose. I have driven both cars, and own 1. I think my feedback is certainly relevant, if you don't think so, oh well.