1991 Testarossa - which is a better car? Both of these cars are available in Houston. Which would be more fun to own? Thank you.
My dream as a child was always a Testarossa. When I had the money and 15 years later, I went and looked at one and in the show room they also had a 348 there. For me the Testarossa is the better car with better history, at one time it was the fastest car in the world. But for me it is just to big. It's a monster of a car. Remember that's not a v 12. Its a straight. ... that's one long engine block. I like small cars and the 348 looks a bit more modern for me. But still a great great car. Maybe I add it to my collection one day. No choice is wrong. Only you can make a wrong choice for you
....if you want to do some work on your car yourself....do not even think 512........it is hopeless......acc to a friend of mine..... However, the 348 is like any other car....fun to deal with.....engine out this winter for me. Four years and 800 kms since last time......ha ha..... Rgds, //B//
Drive them both where you think you would normally drive them and then choose. If you are only freeway and cruising, the TR is an option. If you want a sports car, the 348 is it. Drive the TR on a narrow public street at slow speed and you wouldn't ask this question. Try to park it in your narrow/conventional width garage and again you wouldn't ask this question. As much a deal as they are, I could not find myself living with the slammed pick-up ride for very long. If you ahve a large garage and a fat butt and only drive at speed for periods of time, go for the 12.
The TR feels a bit heavier and visibility around the car is not too good (from the driver's seat). However a 512TR would be a nice choice, right below an F355
Way off IMO....both have the same electronics....512tr motor is pulled from the top...348 drops out the bottom. Same skill will be needed to service both. But, the regular TR has mechanical injection and does not have all the check engine lights that the newer cars are plagued with. It has the old school reliability. 348 and every TR have the same terribly designed fuse panels. The big plus the TR has is the added torque....the big minus is the possibility of replacing the differential carrier. If these points don't bother you, then drive the TR.....I think you will will be pleased.
A properly driven TR should destroy a 348.....better, stronger,faster......but I agree w the parking. The biggest issue is that the door is so thick. It opens up a foot before there is even an inch of space to crawl out. And if you have a fat butt, then good luck fitting in either car. Actually, if you have a fat butt, I think the 348 spider would be the easiest to get in.
I cross shopped for both, and ended up going with the 348, as I found with my height (6'3") and preferred seating position it was more comfortable to drive versus the TR. Taking the top off is an added bonus.
.......should have been 8000 kms......but then I drive the AM and the bike as well....so the mileage is definately there all the same..... //B//
Agree with the size comments, but as for performance, nope. You need to drive both cars on a twisty road like the Malibu canyons and you will quickly see which car is the easiest to drive, the better performer and fastest. I love the value of the TR's but know I personally I could never live with one as the sports car the 348 represents. Now if I wanted to join the club run to Monterey, the TR would definitely be my choice for comfort at speed and, well, speed (!), right up until the time I hit the twisties on the back roads to Carmel Valley.
Don't kid yourself. The TR will do just fine on twisties. You WILL work harder, no doubt. But it is rewarding to do so. Re the size of the TR - about the same as the 360. The odd bit is that the azz-end is wider than the front by several inches and you always have to keep that in mind parking, etc. As others have said, if both are available at the same place, drive both and then decide. Either way - ENJOY!
Hah! That is the key issue - work. I do not discount your statement one bit and would emphasize it. It is a freakishly wide car as well so it seems that you have no room to work with on tight corners. This is mostly an illusion. Now, in the garage or public parking, heh, those doors are extremely wide. Not only do you have the 11" wide door sills, but the doors are long and wide so you need quite a lot of room to access. I felt the seats were wider than my 348's and that there is much more interior space. And the boot is way larger. I found backing up to be problematic as well. Not my kind of car, nor what I was looking for in a Ferrari, but, DAMN, you cannot discount the value for money equation on a decent 1988 or later model. Curtis, you do realize this is the 348/355 section so you are going to be subject to section bias!
Hmmm...not sure "destroy" would be the right word. On a fast track I suspect the TR would be very hard to beat, but the tighter the track the more it favours a 348. See below Fiorano times Ferrari Testarossa 1'36.00 1984 Ferrari 348TB 1'37.00 1989
Yeah, bias expected. But I do have to stick up for the "twisty" capabilities of the TR. Work, yes. Rewarding once complete, youbetcha! I agree the doors are huge and getting in and out requires lots of room beside the car. I once got trapped at a local C&C as cars on both sides of me were too close - or maybe I am just too wide.
