Mechanical Improvements during TR (84-91) Production

I am in the market for a TR and I have read of the lower numbers of "Flying Mirror" TRs made and why some consider those a better investment except for the mechanical improvements done to TRs over the years. Considering that I see a disproportionate number of "Flying Mirror" TRs on the market at this time (10 to 12 as of yesterday) as compared to other TRs (87-91) which I didn't count (but I will venture to say about 60 to 70 but I know some were repeats), I was wandering:
a. First, why are the "Flying Mirror" TRs been sold in such high numbers?
b. What are the mechanical improvements on 87-91 TRs that make then a better buy strictly from that point of view?

BTW, I am interested in learning about the mechanical aspects only. Readily obvious things like the 5 lugs vs the 1, and obviously the mirrors, I know. But what else is there to seriously consider? Thanks!

P.S. BTW, I did quite a bit of searching but I didn't find a clear distinction between the years or any thread that specifically addressed this information.

 

One of the big preferences is that early model TR's have manual seat belts vs. the mouse style (mechanical shoulder belt) system. These mouse belts are a PITA.. But lucky for me my previous owner never had the recall done so I got all my belts, ecu's etc. replaced for free.. Earlier models also have a cheaper clutch (I don't mean cheap in quality). They made some changes and a new clutch design was implemented.. About a $1,000 difference in cost.. I am sure others will chime in on some mechanical changes but I don't know of any major ones.. Mostly cosmetic.

R

 

Far too many product improvements to list. I was factory trained on them and have worked on them ever since. During the production run they never stopped changing and improving them. The newest is the best.

 

Thanks for your replies gentlemen!

Rifledriver, if you were to mention the top 5 (or top 10 if you feel inclined) mechanical improvements that will sway your decision towards a newer TR given all other factors (such as condition, mileage, color. etc.) the same, if you would be so kind, which would those be? BTW, I appreciate your guy's inputs immensely!

 

I have very minimal knowledge when it comes to these cars, but I constantly hear from people how the 512TR chassis is so much stiffer, yet the cars look nearly identical. Of the mechanical improvements, of which are as previously pointed ou substantial, I would think this one would be one of the more noteworthy.

 

I have owned 2 later TR's before buying a flying mirror car, and I have to admit the lack of the seatbelt mouse is a huge plus for me. Those were a real pain. I also find the earlier car (flying mirror) to be simpler, and possibly easier to maintain (as with the cluth)? As far as production numbers, there is 1 flying mirror for every 7 TR's out there, which makes it a little more rare and desirable as far as "ollectible"

 

Some basics:
The 512TR has a solid rear frame hence the stiffness as opposed to the earlier TR's with the drop out rear subframe assy.

On early TR's the entire engine-trans, frame and suspension drops outs for the 30k major.
In the 512 the engine comes out the top.

TR fuel injection is Bosch CIS with 380/390 HP, the 512 went to electronic port injection (Motronic) with 428 HP.

The 512TR had suspension, wheel and tire upgrades. 16" PITAs on the TR to 18" modern on the 512.

The 512 had a totally redesigned interior and got rid of the hideous brown leather!

Although he doesn't like the looks of them, I believe it was Brian Crall that said the 512TR is 100% more car for 40% more money versus the "regular" TR.

I would love to have one, in addition to a 550.................and an ISO Grifo................and a Ghibli............................and a ....................

 

The OP's question was not directed at 512's. Just TR's. The 512 was a different car and Ferrari lamented not doing a total body redesign even prior to the car being shown publicly. It was a major reason the car did not sell anywhere near expectations. We just could not convince the majority of TR owners ther was enough reason to trade in their TR for a 512. It was considered a commercial failure.

 

Just sticking to the major items on the TR only. There are many more minor ones.

1.TRX tires.

What can I say? Garbage comes to mind.

2. Knock off wheels. The classic knock off nut was changed to a bolt at the behest of the US government and was a mistake. You do not know roadside fun until you have had to go in shifts with the available bodies to get a wheel off with the wrench and hammer. The wheels are well known to get loose when the incorrect installation procedure is used and to tighten themselves on cars that are driven hard. The change to 5 bolt wheels was a good one.

3. Oil pump chain without master link.

4. Early alternators had a V belt. Stupid, stupid design.

5. Rubber isolated cam extensions for mounting the ignition rotor. Most have been taken out but I still see them from time to time. Also installed in early 3,2 motors. They were responsible for earning the cars the nickname "Liberian tanker" because they leaked so much oil.

6. Dual mirrors. I like them. Hate driving a car without them.

7. Different gear ratios in later cars. Arguments can go either way. I like the late ratios.

8. Improved, stronger gears in late transmissions.

9. Syncronizing blocks in early cars. An obscure bunch of small parts deep in the trans. When one breaks suddenly either you cannot get out of gear or are deprived the use of a pair of gears. I have changed quite a few.

10. Stronger, redesigned control arms. Came with 5 bolt wheels.


Build quality got better and better as time went on too.

They are all good cars but as with most of their products problems were found and addressed as time went by.

 

I realize that. I got off track answering lvferraripilot.

(I would be curious to see what different body designs, if any, Ferrari was considering for the 512TR in lieu of what they came up with, a subject for a different thread of course................)

 

Thank you guys for your replies. I am glad that the support to each other here at FChat has not changed.
RifleDriver, excellent list! Thanks so much for putting it together. Now, me and perhaps others will be more clear as to what we gain, or give up, when selecting a TR from difference years.
My old TR was a 1990 Black/Tan and it was really reliable and fun to drive. I have considered other F cars, but no other design attracts me as the TR does. I guess you can never know enough about this amazing machines.

 

Rifledriver, these two items remind me of an issue that is discussed a lot in this forum, the dreaded transmission failure. If one were to be proactive and replace the parts that could cause this failure, do you, or anybody else, know a ball park figure of what that will cost (parts alone)?
I am pretty handy with a wrench and I did the major service on my previous TR, Is this something that the DIY can handle without the need for any special tools?

Thanks!

 

Our own "Newman" has re-engineered the differential carrier, a new machined piece......

He made a batch up and sold them, find him and ask if any are left!!!

Prior to it breaking, I think it's a fairly straight forward update...

WIILIAMH has also built some high power capable TR transmissions for his Hubble Racing TR

 

Thanks BigTex, I will look around for their postings.