Thank you. I didn’t feel that way with the Countach but the 512BB seemed more usable at lower speeds. It just feels smaller. I have a Euro-spec 308GT4 that I was going to trade but they really are very different cars. I need to accept that not every car is a 356, GTV etc. and that it can still be fun and drivable.
BB for grocery store? I hope before the grocery store you do a large drive, otherwise the engine not even get temperature. or is the grocery store 50 miles away from your home?
well....i thought the bb got pretty scary around that upper limit. very light in the front end as the front spoiler does nto keep enough air from going under the car.
ross, you are right with the air going under the car. but my BB is a koenig with other front spoiler and also an other engine hood and different wheels and suspension and this car is like a train on rails. I never have the feeling that the steering is going light when going 260 or 270 km/h, still great contact to the street.
The Countach is, despite being an old design, a better sporting platform; it feels tighter, steers quicker and has better turn in. That is the combination of low profile Pirelli P7s, the absence of rubber in the suspension, a small fat steering wheel and a really stiff chassis. The BB has tall Michelins, a large skinny steering wheel, an engine stacked on the gearbox and rubber in the suspension. The Countach would be a better car, but for the fact that you cannot see out of it and is geared too tall (and it will cook you on a summer day). The BB has a torquey engine, comfortable seats and is easy to drive. Were I to want to drive fast on back roads, I expect I would take the flat, sharp LP400S. Were I to want to go distance, or be taking less than smooth roads, I would probably take the BB (but I have a TR as well, which is far better than either as a highway car).
I liked the sitting on the front axle feeling of the Countach. As long as you were going forward visibility was great. Anything else (side, backwards) was a problem. I found myself (with the limited seat time I got) to be sitting in the middle of the Boxer. Completely agree on steering wheel in Countach, and I like the sitting on the floor/legs straight out in the Countach as well. The transmission in the Countach requires double-clutching, whereas the Boxer was much smoother when warm. I don’t like the spring recoil of the Boxer clutch pedal. The Boxer seems much friendlier and usable. But I keep trying to relate these cars to 160” Alfas, which is unrealistic.
I've had an R5 turbo 2 and a Lp 5000 and still have the boxer. To me the contach was great in the 80-120 mph zone. its ride was good and the steering very direct, in thta sense the steering had the same sort of directness the renault has(at lower speeds.) Reality is you have poor vision except relatively straight ahead in a countach. If you have 80-120 mph backroads a ct is great. the boxer is a different animal, all around vsion is great, more of a fishbowl cpompared to the Ct. Stock Bb tires are crap, the brakes are not as strong as the Ct. I did try a koning 512 that had 215 fronts and the smaller tires transformed the front end into a lightness like a lotus. the ferrari mtor is simply better than the ct even if a little less powerful, its smooth fluid and sounds great with minimal secondary vibrations. At speed ie above 120 and up to 150-160 the Bb is far more stable than the ct, but feels softer sprung and dampened. A Bb is a less raw car than a Ct and mroe refined. This beinf relative becaise compared to nayhtign modern a Bb is really raw. Its also small by the srandards of today. A BBI will work just fine in modern traffic and still move on the open road, its a slow in fast out car because you can really use the mtor and rear weight commign out abend and lifting off going in is deadly. Its more aircooled porche in the way it handles but not as twitchy. In fact imagine a classic 911 with 12 cylinders and vetter staility and youre close ona boxer. The ferrai gearbox as with the motor is head and shoulders above the Ct. the overall ferrari experience is more useable but less dramatic. the Ct porbably has more performance but is less developed if that makes sense. Its like comparing a 70s camaro to a 928, the camaro might notionaly be faster but is a very different experience. Neither of these cars is going to be much fun going 80 on the highway, but the Bb will be less stressful because you can see all around. Theyre really great fun above 80 on big sweepers. On smaller tighter roads as Turbo joe says you really have to work a boxer hard for speed, but thats part of the fun, and thyere great fun if you know the road well. On unknown roads slow in fast out cause there is little margin for error anywhere near the limit, in that regard a Ct is more beningn. in the end the Ct is a dramtic concept car that happens to be road legal, but with may of the practical drawbacks a concept car has like vsion or refinement. the Ferrari is well enginered and more refined expecialy NVH, but its handling is less than a Ct while its high speed stability superior. A Bb can be significatly upgraded for the road by putting 17 inch wheels and modern rubber on. In period the lambo went to modern rubber with the p7, the ferrari still had a gneration earlier tire specs, thats an easy fix. I dont think either car is anywhere near the backroad burner an R5 Tubo is, few if any cars are, a lotus elise comes closest, dosent mean theyre not fun on smaller roads, just that thyere a bit big ponderous and old tech. Sweeping mountain roads or fast stretched out two lanes are ideal, 80-120, but abbi will happily burble along in traffic.. The question is what roads you have and what the car is for. Im glad i got to own a countach as it was the poster car from my childhood, but he experince was not so superlative that I miss it as a drive. Would love to have one again cause its just so iconic, but probbaly wouldnt use it much. If you like the idea of a ferrai daytona that can mix with traffic and go round corners on a mountain, thats the boxer. On ferrari club events, on road even when we get on it, the moderns are goign no faster, there is a sanity limit to how fast you can go on roads in USA between the cross streets nitiwits and ocasional traffic, its just more fun in a boxer than a pista, cause its more fun to drive a slower car fast than a faster car slower. That rings us to the question of a mdern ferrari. Cool as an F8 is, you cant use its performnce on road in usa more than you can that of a boxer, and the F8 at 505 is comfy but just a car, by the same token its not really a car for the track. When i think of modern ferraris and their potential road perfomance it reminds e of the old add, not that you would but you could, they entertain by what they could do, its just where can you do it oter than expremly breifly. I guess germany some parts of the mniddle east, south africa. Thats why moderns have great ac and comfort, cause cool as they are, thyere for driving about like other cars, their perfomance is mostly in theory and vestigal. Theres also the 355 good and backroads, fast and not over fast for no reason.
Bb is fine imo up to 165 its pretty planted feeling by which time a Ct is weaving about and wanting to fly. In reality these cars are great in the 80-140/50 range. You can also really alter a BB road manners by opening the windows, seems better at speed with them open. Id also look at the rake, and then you can get into toe and camber, lots to adjust, but if youre runnign TRx's youre starting with crap and poor factory alignment specs to try make bubblegum tires not kill the driver. Get some 17 in wheels, 225 fronts and 275 rears, put some camber in the rear and front, more int he rear. Significant toe in for rear and little toe in front, the car will feel transformed.
you can do 275 rears on a boxer with the group 4 17” wheel set up? I thought they were 8.5” rears. Can those take 275’s? Curious because I am trying to figure out the right tire combo for that set up. I can’t even find a 275/45 17 thats right for a boxer.
Countach and BB both have pros and cons. Remember the Countach becomes easier to drive with the more time you spend driving the car. The Countach cannot be mastered after spending 15 minutes with the car.
100% agree I have in the front 225/50-15 and in the rear 345/35-15 with pirelli asimmetrico and this is a very great solution
I have maybe 10,000 km in various Countach and it is very sensitive to setup; each arm which makes up the suspension linkage has rose joints which wear out over time. If you replace a few joints but don’t check the overall length of the rod it is possible to mess up the handling. I have driven and been a passenger in a few and they have been very stable up to quite ludicrous speeds. I have never had the BB anywhere close to flat out (prison in Canada has limited appeal) but have been (legally) close to Vmax in the TR (which seemed less planted than a Countach, but it was going faster and the instability could just be my car). All somewhat academic, but fun to consider.
Good day Ramano, Indeed, I use my BB for all sorts of errands. Basically any excuse to take it for a drive. As fort the grocery store... firstly, the Boxer's space constraints limits how many groceries one can buy. As for the distance... my grocery store is only 3 km away, but I tend to do a few laps around the City before I get there and so my drive time is usually about 45 minutes Cheers, Sam
great sam then the groceries taste much better after a nice driving I did this one time and some customers in the grocery shop angry me why I use such a car for getting groceries - terrible people I only can say. and this has been already about 15 years ago. today it is getting more worse everywhere here in germany but when a wife take the kids to the kindergarden with a porsche cayenne for 1 km nobody cares about - strange world
Ive got Carobu wheels But Dave white has I think the gr4 maybe they’ve only got 255 rears I thought I get were 275. Mine has 275 the fit fine. The trick is not to go too wide in front. Good points. All these cars are now classics, many may drive very far off from factory fresh. Years ago iread an article about 308 suspensions, the guru said that they degreade so slowly over time the dirver does not notice it so easily, but then when redone the difference is marked. Worn bits and setup can be huge factors, so maybe its not the model so much as particular cars. A freind has a BBi and a Tr. His coment was that he could not follow me into and around bends in the TR because it was bigger longer and softer than the Bb. He can follow me in hsi BB and the tr is redone. TR is a pwerful highway car, BBs with the right rubber point really well but a Ct is more taut. .
i have that set up as well, and yes it does work better than stock, and works better than my daytona wheels with (non-metric) bubble tires. but, here in houston, the roads are just so bad that i run only the daytona wheels with bubble tires since i need the extra cushioning. btw, the 512tr is like a vault all the way to vmax. extremely poised car all the way.
Interersting data compro between the 15s and 17's, thank you. I have wondered about that. Thought maybe an Avon semi would provide all the grip/precison in a 15 and still have the look/cushioning. By Bubblegum tires I was specificaly refering to the Trx which has a very flexy sidewall which when lateraly loaded flexes in extremis. That not only blunts steering response/feel but causes treachery at the limit because once adhesion is lost the tread is being snapped back into position under the wheels and that makes things far less possible to catch/correct. Perhaps in period these tires seemed an improvement over what came before in terms of ultimate grip, but they lacked in so many other ways because the sidewall didnt match the grip, prob worked on a 6 series BMw which is what they were designed for. Avons which work on track in 15s might be the best all around option, classic size in a modern tire, they wouldnt last too many miles. Read your coments before that the 512TR is the pick of the flat 12 bunch. Have never driven one, but it makes sense, the car has a far punchier motor everywhere, lighter internals more Hp. By the time of that car Ferrari had + 20 years to sort the platform, handling and aero as far as possible given the layout. The Tr series was always designed to be more liveable/useable than the boxers. Radiators moved to the sides for a cooler cabin and ac that worked, bigger cockpit etc. Add to that the Tr motor/handling. The 512M is maybe another perfomance upogrdae again, but it looks like someone tried to make a kit car, theres no cohesion to that design at all, its like someone threw some diparate elements at it, phoned it in is an uderstatement. Hard to say which was a bigger mess of somethingn that was art, the 512M or the 25 anniv countach. Probably the countach because the original and evcenb lp 5000 seemed such pure shapes to begin with. First ferrari I ever drove was a tesstarossa. As a 20 yo kid driving a slightly w 2nd gen camaro the rossa felt like a revelation except for the power. The steering precision was something I had never experince before, it sounded great, but the power while linear didnt have the hit I'd imagined a 5.5 sec 0-60 car would have. The boxer while slower feels more punchy on throttle application than i remember the rossa, its also heaver seeming at the wheel but more compact and pointy. The boxer got a number of critques in period, lacking the practicality inherrant in the daytona, being hot cramped and more tricky to drive while being on paper no faster in etrms of accel and a notionaly lower to speed. A more contemporary crituque said the BBs didnt know what it wnated to be, falling between two stools of Gt and sports, trying to be lux Gt which took away from the possible fast/hard edge. The choice of TRx tires is an example of that. Theese days one is not lookign to crsh continents witha boxer so its lack of relative copnfort is not such an issue. A good option then imo is to give the car more eprfomance cability, and getting rid of the marginal Gt tires is somehting most of us here seem to do. Theres is probably much that could be done to imprve alla spects of ride and handling with some springs, Ohlins, and bushings. Newman has figured out how to make high lift cams that work well with the injection, and higher comp psitons with good rings. the rear diff can be made bullet proof and sanden ACs work great in 308s so should ina BBi. Besides shocks wheels and ac such a boxer would appear totaly stock.
I am probably going 235/50 F and 245/50 R with the Group 4's. I might do 225 in front but getting the profile choices will be tricky.
I would recomend if you can 225 fronts and wider in rear. DaveW ion this site has those wheels. If boxer bites its from the rear so wider there is better. Narrower tires up front make the steering lighter and more lithe. Ruvber choices are an issue, but even relatively modest modern rubber id infinetely superior.
Just checked Tire rack, there are plently of choices where you can go 275 40 17 rear 25.7 diameter and 225 45 17 fronts 25 in diameter. Or if your rear wheel wont take a 275 go for a 255? When I drove Newmans Koning with 215 15 fronts its was a revelation how sweetly it steered compared to a stock BBi 240s or my car which now has 245s 45 in front and is simply heavy feeling untill well up to speed.. My next set will be as above. My rears are 275 40s a 25.7 diameter works fine. A Maclaren F1 had 235 fronts so 225s on an older slower boxer wont be letting the car down. The 275 rear fits well inside the wheel wells and the more planted the rear the better imo. Maybe the .7 diameter difference is an issue but thats 1/3 of an inch ride height difference up front shouldnt be an issue and if you have 255 40 rears no difference. I wouldnt go for 50 series aspect ratios on a 17 in wheel and limit tire choices, 45 is more than plently.
Just checked Tire rack, there are plently of choices where you can go 275 40 17 rear 25.7 diameter and 225 45 17 fronts 25 in diameter. Or if your rear wheel wont take a 275 go for a 255? When I drove Newmans Koning with 215 15 fronts its was a revelation how sweetly it steered compared to a stock BBi 240s or my car which now has 245s 45 in front and is simply heavy feeling untill well up to speed.. My next set will be as above. My rears are 275 40s a 25.7 diameter works fine. A Maclaren F1 had 235 fronts so 225s on an older slower boxer wont be letting the car down. The 275 rear fits well inside the wheel wells and the more planted the rear the better imo. Maybe the .7 diameter difference is an issue but thats 1/3 of an inch ride height difference up front shouldnt be an issue and if you have 255 40 rears no difference. I wouldnt fixate on for 50 series aspect ratios on a 17 in wheel and limit tire choices, 40 and 45 already giuve good diameter and still plenty of profile compred to modern cars. you could even go 225 50 fronts and 275 40 rears. the fronts would be .2 in taller and ride height probbaly exactly the same with a 2 psi pressure difference between front and rear. ..2 diamter difference is .1 in ride height assuming same pressures. There are two ultra performance summer tires in these sizes, sumitomo and one other, its on tire rack.
Or split the difference with these. https://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireSearchResults.jsp?zip-code=10583&frontWidth=235/&frontRatio=45&frontDiameter=17&rearWidth=275/&rearRatio=40&rearDiameter=17
Those are good tire choices but I am concerned about overall diameter. I would like to keep as close to the original 26.4 as possible. I take you at your word to not fixate on the 50 aspect ratio so I’ll do some investigation.
Yeah i guess I'm at 25.7 which chages overall ride height by less than half an inch. Never really noticed. Prob helps accel a bit too. Hard to tell but Im not really lower than the Tr, maybe the boxer at back sits a little higher. LMk what you decide and how it turns out, interesting to see how they go. Image Unavailable, Please Login
