A QV is a fundamentally better car. The body is better quality and the engine is of a better quality. That is without argument. The performance difference is just not that significant below 80-90 mph. And how often are you going to be above 100 and appreciating the difference? I would lean towards the QV but I would rather have a solid 81 model than a QV that needs work. Bottom line: buy the best example and enjoy your new Ferrari
Why do you say that the build quality is better on the QV? You know way more than me about these cars....just asking
I think the biggest difference that separates the two is the none sodium filled valves of the QV. Then of course there’s the Nikasil lining cylinders of the QV and the rust proofing body (84/85) Among others.
This ^ Plus the (for lack of a better word) "bad" rings in the 80-82 cars. And remember I am a champion of the 80-82 models. I love them. But Ferrari did up a few quality control areas on the QV that the 2vi just didn't get.
As I recall the 84-84 QV's also received the upgraded water pump & belt pulleys. 3 belts vs. 2 belts. The 84-85 QV's (US versions) have an upgraded emissions system compared to earlier versions. Most cars benefit from continuous development and refinements during long production runs. Later models from all manufactures usually are improvements over early versions.
Well Paul, this is a subject that has been discussed here at length in the past. To sum it up: According to factory sources, it was started in October or November 1983 on the 12-cylinder cars, then in December 83-January 84 on the 308s. There is no precise chassis numbers given for the first cars with this rust protection, which is called Zincrox. Zincrox is defined as "multi-layered electro-galvanisation": it is electrolytic-applied multi-layer coating, comprising: - a layer of zinc (Zn) on the steel surface, of a thickness of between 18 to 80 grs per m², - then a layer of chrome (Cr), on top of the zinc layer, of about 0,5 grs per m², - and finally a layer of chrome oxide (CrOx) on top of the zinc layer, of 0,04 grs per m² Only the inside of the body parts is treated this way, the outside of the steel receiving no special treatment, but the primer for the paint (pink primer for the red cars, gray for all other colors). Described in detail in factory publication 306/84 for the 288 GTO; this text was also reproduced in “Cavallino 023”. What’s left of it after thirty years is for the experts in electro-galvanisation to say… Rgds
Oh, I don't know that much; I have a rather good memory, and usually am able to find information that I have seen somewhere: the information about Zincrox comes from a factory publication, the 288 GTO presentation to the press, brochure 306/84: it was a novelty at the time that Ferrari was very proud of, so they published a special sheet explaining the process. We discussed this in detail, on this very forum, a number of years ago. Rgds
Don’t sell yourself short my friend, I’ve been reading your posts for a long time now. PS: plus it’s nice to talk to you about Ferrari and not Immigration
I have an '80 308 GTSi. The difference in performance with the QV's is not significant, but the desirability is. If you want more performance - significantly more performance - go with a 355 or 360. I'd never sell my 360, but I will eventually sell the 308. It's a hoot to drive and people love seeing it, but it doesn't excite me as a performer.
Oh, I won't; I read an interesting article in April, explaining that time spent on forums discussing such matters is time lost, as 99,99% of posters are not interested in knowing or understanding what it is actually happening, only in being conforted in their beliefs. As a cartesian, I usually abides to logic; time spend up uselessly is not worth the effort. Rgds
Best just get a 488, then ... or any 3x8 variant that's in the best condition for your budget. Because every other difference is marginal at best when comparing to modern cars.
Of course: during the seventies and eighties, the struggle for horsepower has not even started... 1975: a carbed 308 in Euro version, dry sump, was 230 hp; 1981: a two valve injected (euro, no cat) 214; 1983: a QV (euro, no cat), 240; 1985: a 328 (euro, no cat), 270. So we went from 230 to 270 in ten years, a gain of 40 HP, or about 16% Then from 1985 to 1995: in 1995, a 355 was 380hp, which is 110 more than the 328 of ten years before, or about 40% And in 2005, a 430 was 490 hp, again 110 more than a 355, or about 28% In 2015, I don't even know the figure for a 488, maybe about 600? (all these figures should be slightly mitigated by the actual weight of the cars, of course: it's the power-to-weight ratio that counts)) But I wouldn't buy a 488, as I don't like the styling; plus the car is much to big and too heavy for my liking. And furthermore, with the new speed limit here from July 1st onward at 50 mph, the poor thing would just feel sick... Thanks to a good friend, I have had the opportunity to drive a 550 lately, a car that I like a lot for its look; I enjoyed it very much, the V12 is really "something else" (And the fact that the one I drove had a full Tubi exhaust line did help...). But when I took back the wheel of my 328 GTB, I felt I would miss its small size, its nimbleness, etc...(you know that the standard "new Mini" as launched in 2001 has a wheelbase actually longer than a 3x8...) That been said, considering Euro versions (= non-cat) and standard comparison (= GTS vs GTS, or GTB vs GTB) I would definitively buy a QV over a two-valve injected, condition being equal. But that's just me. Rgds
Bruno, the 488 GTB has 670 Hp and the 488 Pista has 720... This said, I think that the power of a 308 (all versions) are enough and proportionate to the brakes, suspensions, tires and so on. A 308 is not an used car: it's a 30+ (or 40+) years old vintage car and therefore it must have vintage performances ciao Edit: yes, suppose to be a 488 Pista owner (720 Hp) and drive a 308 QV. I don't think that the very first thing you will think would be "Man, this car is really faster than the 2Vi version!" You would probably think "Man, this car has almost 500 Hp less than mine and you can feel it…" Vintage cars give other (great) sensations than pure performances
Well, I agree of course on your conclusion. As for the modern cars: I have said time and again that I woke up one day surprised to find myself disconnected of Ferrari matters, this for the generation that followed the 550 / 355. First and foremost, I need a visual emotion, even if I do enjoy the mechanical matters, but it only comes after the visual emotion. In their days, the 360/430 when new didn't give me any visual emotion whatsoever (perhaps a slight one in the spider version). The 458 was slightly better, the 488 I don't like. I don't even double back anymore when I see a new Ferrari. So I have to say that I don't even know the new cars variants, nor do I know their characteristics, power, etc...or their price, for the matter. I would rather have a 246 Dino than any variant of the 488, believe me...some people say a vintage one, and a new one is a good combination, but I have zero interest in the new ones, really. But that's just me... "One man's meat is another's poison", as Commander Cody was singing in the good old days. Rgds
My sentiments are identical to yours. I had two epiphanies regarding new cars which have galvanized my negative opinion of modern sportscars. The first epiphany was when I wasn't even thinking about Ferraris and was a staunch antique BMW guy. I drove the then-new Z4. I felt that incredibly fine tuned competency. I went fast but it was so competent it still felt slow. It was unflappable in corners. It was so easy to drive. It didn't engage me. It made me appreciate my 1987 E30 all the more. The second ephiphany came when I test drove the then-new California T. Yeah, wow, what a car. Zzzz. I was having trouble learning how to operate the paddle shifters, but because of that I finally understood why manual shifting was obsolete. In automatic shift mode the car always was in the right gear. The shifts were so smooth it didn't matter anymore if the car decided to shift in the mid-corner of nasty bend with the car at the limit of traction. The car would stay stable. It was just too easy. That is not to say I don't like new cars. We just bought an 2018 Acura RDX SUV. What a dream! The technology is awesome and makes major mileage so much easier (I write this at Lake Tahoe, 150 miles from home). But it is not an engaging sportscar. Rather, I should say that driving it feels the same as driving a modern sportscar. Long live the antique sportscar. (... or some other grandiose statement like that.)
I feel like you do. New cars usually don't get me excited. I would add to your condition equal statement... body and interior color. If not equal in color specs then curb appeal to my eye would trump QV benefits. For the record, my nirvana 308 would be an azzurro over tan euro GTSiQV if anyone wants to swap! Really, the only wrong one to pick is one that hasn't been loved in its past and too far gone to economically resurrect.
It’s not the time but rather the mileage. I think the nikasil lining should last up to over 100k miles but I’m 100% sure.
I know of BMW motorcycles with nikasil lined cylinders with well over 100K miles on them. There are probably a few with over 200K.
