SPORTS CAR MARKET BOXER REVIEW

As you said, I love hearing the different opinions. Perhaps it is my frame of reference with my other cars.

No question the Boxer gives excellent feel and feedback. Not that I spend much time there, but close to the limit, my Boxer has that "fast" setup with an oversteer tendency. That is where deft and practiced inputs deliver the most rewarding sensation, or when you get it wrong can really get your heart rate going. Contrasting my extraordinarily well balanced 928, I can manhandle and dive in with relative impunity, and it is so neutral and benign that I never feel like it will "bite." But it doesn't close to delivering the exhillaration that the Boxer provides.

I personally like the heft of the wheel at low speeds, knowing what is to come as the speed picks up. My wife finds it to be just too much work.

I have not found the clutch to be heavy, and like the rest of the inputs it is incredibly unambiguous with a direct feel.

After I made my earlier post this morning mentioning the F40, I picked up Forza this evening to see the 458/F40 comparison. The F40 owner said something to the effect it took an F40 to deliver a better driving experience than his Boxer, thought that was ironic.

 

Maybe people might go for a rebuild car because they can not find an original one,or do not know how to evaluate one.
On a BB the depth of the original paint in appearance and the looks of original interior is not comparable to redone cars but yet some will spend the same or more money to get the restored ones.
The big question is how many are out there that are indeed original ??
A production car that is not like a Boxer is much easier to restore than a race bred car that was build by hand.
An original car is the only one with true low use in order to be that way since higher use requires repairs that take away originality.
It is funny how people look at cars with claims of extremely low miles and records of work performed that only happens on cars with high miles.
Original cars are not hard to maintain because are newer in condition and never need any serious repairs because BBs are very dependable cars....if original.....most can not understand that
When BBs reach their dollar value potential, issues with BBs will be gone because they will be in the hands of people that know how to maintain one.
I believe there is no better car than a serious Ferrari that is original!
Regardless if restored or not when a BB is really proper is too much fun to have....I still admire mine after over twenty years of ownership.

Mario

 

Well stated, both!

It has been quite a number of years since I pushed a Boxer hard on the track but the memory remains. I am fortunate to experience the F-40's on a regular basis, both on the street and track. "Better"... thats a tough one and it makes me want to get the Boxer all serviced just to rekindle the memories and feel the comparison again myself.

Boxerman's statement turns that smolder into a raging inferno! Anything that is Red, sticks to the road in a turn, and can be steered by the angle of ones right ankle... how can that be bad in anyway?!

 

The boxer is the only car out of 50+ cars Ive owned that still excites me every time I see it or think about it. The excitement of ownership hasn't faded in the 8 years Ive owned it, cant say that for any other car Ive had. I would love one of each version (and a lowbody countach). Anyone have a countach project for sale?

 

Pinto's, Mustang II's and F150's dont count as cars! Re phrase your statement so David doesnt think you want one of those small displacement Sissy carb cars, that would be problematic!

 

There are advantages to moderate value appreciation within the Boxer Series. If Boxers did have huge ramp up in value, I would be less inclined to use mine for the reason I bought it in the first place which is drive it to events, shows, and most important, enjoy it just as it was indented. With only 7k kilometers when I bought my BBi in 2004, I now have 22k kilometers on the odo. The Boxer has value to me in a different way since it fufills a purpose of enjoyment.

I've had numerous discussions with my wife when she has asked "What do I do with your Boxer if anything happens to you?" My response has been: "Bury me in it. I'll enjoy it as well in the afterlife. You keep the house. It's been nothing more than a high tax burden, and decline in value."


Dave

 

Are you referring to the house, or the Boxer, or both?!

 

The house!

 

Dave but you have a Boxer that sounds sooooo good! Hard not to put miles on it...

 

The latest issue of Octane has an article on a painstaking recreation of the ferrari sharknose, which was their first mid engined F1 car. The description of the driving experience seems apt for the boxer, which I have paraphrased below.

The car is very reactive, and if you modify something-even lightly-it affects other components

The boxer is a delight to drive, if not very easy:You have to be very careful in opening the throttle in fast corners, where reactions can be very quick. Every second it reminds you that it was built to be piloted by the greatest driver

 

You guys are forgetting one important point. BB prices in this country have also been affected by the Grey Market syndrome. I watched most BB's get butchered to clear EPA/DOT requirements. I owned mine from new for 22 years and was lucky to "pass it" with a minimum of modifications. The bad quality of the work done by fly-by-night outfits in the 80's and 90's not to mention the atrocious body alterations and roof chops have greatly contributed to the car's legacy, at leat in this country. I think BB's are better prized (and priced) in Europe.

 

As the owner of a never federalized, recently refreshed '78 BB, I note that there may one minor reason why it may have been slightly overlooked. I will be careful how I say this, but it is more of an appearance car than an experience car. I love the sound it makes, I love looking at it and enjoy driving it. But I also have a Countach and a Testarossa; both are, frankly, better sports cars.

The TR is a well finished product with great styling and impressive, easy to use power. it handles and brakes pretty well too, given its size. I can also take it anywhere, with short overhangs, good a/c and a reasonably light clutch. I love my TR; rarity would would make it worth a lot more.

The CT feels small, exotic, agile and quite fast. Driving it is always full of drama, something which is great if you are ready for it, but can be an annoyance if you are tired. The sound of the 4.0 at full chat is astounding.

The different feel of the CT may have something to do with the lower CofG, solid bushings in the suspension as well as the P7s. The stacked BB powerplant, coupled with the balloon XWX tires makes it a cruiser. I have tried to drive it quickly; with my limited skills the car's limits seem near.

Still, I love looking at it.

 

Wow, the first truthfull post on f chat. I also love the bb and the love affair started when I was in grade 6 (1976).

 

Hence you change the wheels and tires for something modern. Then you have a car midway between the drama of the countach and the civility of the TR, in what is by modern standards a light small and narrow car.

From my experience the Boxer when running properly is more respomnsive to throttle inputs than a Tr and def more than a crabed Ct. The handling is very responsive if you can play with the dynamics of throttle and steering and how they interplay. The CT is far more straghtforward here and the TR really more benign and filtered.

As toperformance I can say that at BBI is quicker than a 355 but slightly slower than a 360
and with modern rubber will certainly keep up with any hard charging 360 on the street. Compared to a 355 or 360 a BBI will drivel out of corners faster due to its great torque, and a pad change yeilds brakes that can lock the wheels when running ps2's

But yes a BB is an aquired taste, and like a aircooled 911 the handling is something different which can be used to exploit the weaknesses of other cars, all of which may be why it is currently overlooked, and in time may be why it becomes prized.

That all being said the ultimate to me would be a BB with a 512M motor modern wheels tires and shocks, but then it would hardly be original or of great value.

 

Agree with Boxerman ! I lived with an 88 CT bought new for 4 years during my BB ownership.
By no mean do I consider the CT a better car. As for drama, how about the CT landing me on the 11 oclock news standing behind a smoking red CT on the San Diego freeway. 3 fires and a faulty climate control system drove me nuts. I took it to the track once and swore never to try that again. The BB with good tires was easier and friendlier to own and drive. Its biggest shortcoming were the brakes but both these cars have no business being on the track.

 

Also - isn't the Boxer the last car out of Maranello made with hand beaten body panels?

 

Yes it is and with 17 inch rims and proper springs and shock settings will out handle TRs on a race track and much more stable at very high speeds than the later cars of similar value.

One thing for sure BBs will never be less money that today.

Mario

 

Let me guess, a emissions burdened, crash protected FI Countach QV? For comparison you want a proper, simple, lightweight 2V 4.0 carbed LP400 or 400S with 45mm DCOEs and without federalization or emissions equipment. Yes, the low rpm torque of the BB is better (even better than the TR), but the 8,000 rpm top end rush of the 4.0 CT is something else. In 7 years it has never left me stranded and its 32 year old brakes even saved my life once on a very foggy day.

I have tracked my TR (once I even had a factory Ferrari driver do it shockingly well with me as a passenger at a Corse Clienti track day). The TR (while not a track car) is better on track than the BB will ever be, even with low profile tires (and possibly better than the CT as well, but it might be close).

I am not critical of any of the three, I love my BB and am a fan of all of them, but they are each better at different things. The TR is the best value of the bunch, hands down; however, there is a reason why a good CT is worth more than a sorted BB.

 

Okay. I'm going to throw my hat into the ring. As a new owner of a BBi myself I concur with John MH. Just for the record I would say the best of all worlds in terms of balance, power, handling, driving experience etc....when it comes to Boxers, CT's, Testarossa's would be the 92-94 512TR. Brilliant styling, great car to drive nuff said. I think at the end of the day the BB just has not hit the right chord with the market yet, but it will. At one time or another all these special cars will have their time in the spotlight, when is anyones guess. In the interim as dave Bendi says, just enjoy your BB as it was intended. If and when the BB hits truly collectible status people will step up to buy regardless of miles etc... Can you imagine someone wanting a 100 percent low mileage, original 250GTO? Point is the GTO is a special car that people will buy regardless. No point in staing the Boxer is faster etc... than the Dino, and on those basis should be worth more. For some reason people love the Dino, my wife included as it's her favorite Ferrari! Why? She likes how it looks....... Personally, I buy what I like and I drive them. If I'm lucky enough to have purchased a car that goes up in value great, if not that's great too....... At the end of the day, we're all lucky to own and drive any Ferrari....... Boxer included. Okay, that's the end of my rant. Oh, one more thing. Rock is right, John MH told the truth... LOL! Okay, that's it....... Peace everyone.....

 

I dunno, I had a Lp 5000 2v, full euro car as it was not in the US. Compared to the boxer it was crude, gearbox motor etc. The steering was very direct feeling with great feedback. So if you could get over the crude gearchange, and rough edges the CT drove great till about 140ish by which time the front end was getting really light, above an indicated 160 the ct needed countersteering to go straight and above 170 indicated it would accelerate at the same rate as oil and water swept across the dial to the red. Also other than straght ahead you could not reall see out of it. For pedestrains it had the looks and drama.

Now the boxer feels more planted the faster you go. the steering does not have that CT go cart feel, and a stock boxer feels heavy below 60 or so, Put modern rubber and better alignment and the boxer steering comes alive, not quite lotus like but not as far off as you would think.Pushed reall hard in a corner stock suspension at 10/10ths allows too much body lean, but its not nearlty as bad as that contemporary favorite the M3 or a Tr.

A boxer motor should feel like a turbine, revs being more a matter of sound than feel, very different to a CT. By analogy a CT is like a gen 3 camaro while a boxer is like a 928 in compasrison. One is rude and crde the other refined.

As to the testarossa, the suspension is pretty much the same except a TR is heavier and longer with more modern rubber. Seems I preach every three months but the single greatest improvement anyone can make to a boxer is to run modern rubber, it totaly transforms the car in every way.

Consider that the 512 BBLM of nick mason has lapped the track significantly faster than his f40, and you begin to understand the potential locked in a boxer.

In the end ferrari did not fit modern rubber to the boxer sticking with the crappy trx's for too long. The Tr series is just a development of the boxer. they moved the radiators back to avoid cabin heat, put in modern Ac 4 valve heads which ofsets the greater weight and lengthened the car for the US cliental, turning the boxer into more of a GTwith in my opinion seriously challenged looks..

Lastly a boxer is not a comfrot queen or particularily easy to drive,more comfortable than act if not easier but defl not TR or 550 easy. Like a Ducati 916 or Bimota the driver must conform to it, but for those who do it is truly sublime.

As to form and function The CT is like modern art to stick on a wall of a condo, wheras the boxer is a sublime sculpture of a gorgeaous woman laying on her side which you admire in your Villa

The Tr is more big boobed vegas stripper.



Each is interesting in a different way, one never gets old.

 

Boxerman

I love your descriptions and point of view,right on the point,true and quite entertaining!

The BB is a race car with a real race intended chassis balance and power plant.
The street version was majorly tuned down for the street.
The engine with out Lucas injection of the race cars,different cams and most important soft high profile tires with soft springs and an alignment for safe GT sports car touring type was the for purpose for fun in comfort and safety in anyones hands.
Enzo back then did not want mid engine cars on the street with power for many reasons including safety.
So the mid engine cars of that era were under powered and set up to be safe.
When one unlocks the potential of the BBs original design by removing the handicaps of tires ,springs and a severe under steer set up you get a totally different car.....and the point is driving fun!!
This is what most people do not know about these cars ,how fun to drive not just looks ,last hand made Ferrari ,race history etc
I have owned and driven lots of cars in my life and I will say it again,nothing drives like a properly set BB with modern rubber on the street.
I also find the BB easy to drive in regards to visibility front and rear and stable all the way to the top speed of true 175 which is what they can do if proper in stock form because they become alive with aerodynamics at high speeds like others do not.
The 150 comes in very fast with the BB in euro trim and the cornering ability with modern tires and suspension is way too high for most ,and that is why they were modified for the street for safety,where one that does not know could end up going too fast and get in trouble easy in a mid engine car....
The Trs they are too wide and so much heavier so can not do the same,but they are stable and safe on high speed open straight roads.
Want nibble with the BB ?
Reduce the huge amount of rear toe in and increase front camber and see how more lively they become with 265 per corner front spring rate and 375 -400 rear with the stock sway bars and hard sway bar and a arm bushings.
No one can argue the fact in stock form the are not the best handlers but they still give the fun factor if in top shape.....but again tweaked smartly and safely they are another car with the the stock fun characteristics only amplified.
The BBs can do what race modified 308s can in handling ,only better because of a a race chassis with potential and engine power the dinos and 308 do not have.
BBs are not what most people think they are, because they do not know their potential.....it is locked in their racing heritage and they do not relate to street cars except badly since the factory set them up to be very conservative in street performance for safety.

Mario

 

Some statements just don't add up, & this is "1" of them....."Consider that the 512 BBLM of nick mason has lapped the track significantly faster than his f40, and you begin to understand the potential locked in a boxer".

The F40 weighs 700 LESS than a 512BBLM & has 100 MORE horsepower....better lateral grip & superior braking...so how is it "slower"....something smellys funny & it isn't the fish!!!....Mark

 

I have an 82 5000s 2v and an 80 400s. The earlier car is better.

The BB was never made as a race car, there is no detuning of a race design involved, it is a GT car. So was the CT and the TR, so no shame in that. They were all made to get you from Parma to Modena on the autostrada. In a hurry.

My BB will load up slightly at idle, the BBi is better than the BB at that for certain. The CT will idle like a Swiss watch all day. Shifting the CT (without a linkage) is better than either the BB or the TR. Steering is better. I have never had any front end issues at any speed with mine, it sticks like a magnet. Only issue is 1970s aerodynamics. The TR is better in this regard, the BB is not as stable at speed as either of the other two.

All three run like silk when you rev them, they ought to, they have 12 cylinders. The CT has a powerband however, the overlap in the cams makes it come alive above 4000 rpm.

I will suspend my disbelief about the F40 vs BBLM track time, as I am not certain what the spec of the BBLM was. I have never seen or driven a BBLM, but I bet it is a bit less civilized than any of the three (or even the F40).

 

Ok I am traveling at the moment, next week i will scan and paste the article, same driver same day same track, the BBlm significantly faster.

 

Well I have had a 350gt and a CT neither had smooth as silk motors compared to a boxer.
I think one point people miss here is there is a vast difference between a good running boxer and a great running one.

As to chassis design, its true Enzo did not believe mortals could handle a high power mid engine car. the reason was early mid engine racers were designed to paidly change direction, were twitchy by modern standards and did required a sensitivity to throttle and steering input at the limit. Fot the street Mario is correct these factors were tuned out,s stock BB alignment specs are strange for this reason.

Neither a Countach nor Tr were ver raced. I know one person who seriously tracked a Ct it was a disaster, not least because of poor packaging serviceability. The Tr was just too heavy and lacking in pointability.But we can ask William H on this forum as he put major effort into a track Tr.

Boxers were raced and sucessfully despite lack of factory support. Their weakness was gearbox and lack of power compared to factory developed porches, their power was only 440ish not too far above a stock car. Put modern riubber on a stock car, realign and you will be totaly amazed what is there. Really go the extra step in tuning and the power will also impress.

Yes in speed a Ct can match a boxer, but its chassis gives up the ghost sooner and you cant see out of it for fast driving.

The Boxer was a can am car for the street detuned towards Gt, retune it and you have an awesome animal. As someone here said, it tkes a F40 to exceed the experience, none of the moderns have that rawness, and i can tell you for a fact on the street at vigorous club events, none of the moderns have leggs on a boxer, or the intensity of experience. True to make a boxer go you really have to work it and yourself.