Are regularly driven Ferraris really more reliable?

I drive my Testarossa a lot, its almost a daily driver. In fact, I've put over 1500 miles on it this month alone. I've heard it mentioned many times here that regularly driven Ferraris are more reliable and less problematic than ones driven only 1-3 times a month. I also frequently read that a high mileage Ferrari is usually a safer buy than a low mileage car. Is this actually true? I know if you let a car sit from months metal will corrode, rubber will get brittle and fluids will gum up etc but I am having a hard time understanding how, or why, driving everyday will be better for the car than 1-2 times a week.

I hope it is true due to my driving habits, I am not worried about resell value at all. My concern is having the car last as long as possible.

 

1-3 times a month is better than daily. = simply less wear inc the seat bolster and shiny steering wheel issue .

Depends on which modal regarding the amount of electrotwackery, ECU , sensors etc . The greater the less reliable.

Cut off being pre 94 before OB2 check engine lights were born .

Specifically your Testarossa the market driver on value ( like it or not ) is actually the mileage.

Garage queens can are are recommissioned and the 512 ,Testarossa , 348 , Mondial T , 355 have scheduled engine out maintenance anyhow . So other work is easily done simultaneously to bring it up to date if there’s been any deferred maintenance.
Fresh water pump , coolant , rad flush etc etc as well as the belts .

So you are right higher milers have more worn bits ….alternator bearings , steering rack bushes , wheel bearings etc .

 

Driving daily vs driving 1-2 times a week will not make any meaningful difference in reliability.

But there is an argument to be made that both of those will lead to less issues than driving a car 5 times in 2 months and then letting it sit for 10 months:

Almost all modern cars are/were subjected to some kind of durability testing. Considerable amounts of engineering are spent to accelerate these test programs (to save money and time to market). Any failure mode that is caused or exacerbated by long standstill intervals will most likely not be found by such a test program.

Edit: vehicles generally have a defined "end of life", for passenger cars typically 250 000 km. Doesn't mean that the car is designed to fail at that point, but weight and cost targets also have to be met, so if a fraction of the population fails at 250k km, it's not an issue.

For the warranty phase typically an acceptable rate of failures (ppm range or lower) is defined and parts and subsystems are engineered to that requirement. Test programs are tailored to identify issues that exceed these limits. Lots of maths, lots of statistics, not always in favor of the individual customer. Will get more extreme, since the OEMs collect more and more usage data.

Sorry for the wall of text, perhaps its at least interesting for someone.

 

Modern Ferraris (anything after F430) are meant to be driven; they are not Faberge eggs.

 

Same for any previous ones from 1947 on.

 

I've heard the same. And more specifically, the "best" driving patterns for a healthy car is if you go more than a few miles so that the fluids and block are up to temperatures. Daily for a mile or two cold is not as good. My service manager likens it to stretching and warm up before lifting weights.

I've daily driven my Testarossa for several stints of 2-4 months since buying it two years ago. My arms are used to the parking-lot-speed weight of the steering, but I'll admit that's the one thing that makes me groan about the idea of driving this daily all the time. I still haven't replaced the mediocre speakers either.

 

Does this topic get different answers if reliabilty per mile driven or reliabilty per year of ownership?

Perhaps the most reliable cars are never driven? Or are undriven cars considered as art and not as transport?

Professional mechanics may have large enough database to parse reliabilty, the rest of us likely bring anecdotal answers. I drive my fancy cars at least a few thousand miles a year, so I don't have experience with less than 2,500 miles per year.

 

Professional mechanics will generally not have accurate information on usage and only partial information on reliability. The manufacturers have the fullest picture (reliability connected with usage for modern cars) and use this information to fine-tune their development and validation programs (as hinted above). To what extend and how exactly varies from brand to brand. Can't go into details though (for obvious reasons).

 

I consider the manufacturer dealer service departments and the manufacturer service and data support to be professional mechanics with the best data overall, your comments are excellent way to emphasize that body of workers in the engineering teams at the manufacturer and dealer service levels will have the most comprehensive reliability data.

 

I explain it like this to my clients looking to buy a very low milage car and drive it daily. If you like jogging every day and your friend has just awakened from a coma, he is not the one you go jogging with. You can go visit and get to know him again, you can go to rehab with him and help him get back on his feet. Once he has been rehabbed and everything works again, you can start running, short runs.

OR, pick a friend that has been running every week and is ready to go jogging.

I also remind my clients to exercise the car when they drive it. If the same person drives the car then the seat never gets adjusted. Move the seat through a full range of adjustments, turn every knob and switch, run the heat, run the AC, change the radio station and band. Find a back road and activate the ABS a couple times, best done one a dirty road so it comes on easily.

Exercise everything. Then it will work when you need it.

 

Professional mechanics, repair men, any sort of person who deals with failures regularly will have a very skewed view on reliability. All they know is how frequently they have to repair things, they don't know how many were sold, how often they are used, how well they are treated, etc.

 

A friend of mine, who was a US Coast Guard captain in charge of an active patrol cutter used to tell me how they would periodically "play with every toy in the toy box" on the ship - guns, helicopter, patrol launches etc. -- for that very reason -- to ensure that things actually will work as required when they are needed.

 

With exception of very, very minuscule part of a tiniest fraction of all hundreds of millions of cars ever made in past 125+ years, they all are/were meant to be driven.

 

Here is what my carbs, fuel tank and sending unit looked like after 40 years of the car sitting in a basement.
You tell me....
Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

... and like our own bodies, on regular basis. Same with maintenance.
I've said this ^^ for decades to anyone who cares about their cars.

In past 4 decades I've dealt with countless consequences of low mileage (read poorly exercised/maintained) collection/museum "quality"(?) vintage cars and could fill books with the horrifying stories I've encountered with them. Perhaps someday I will.

Just in last couple of years I've worked on two such examples, one V12 Ferrari the owner bought new 53 years ago and currently sorting out quite unusual mechanical/technical problems in a 65 y.o. car that's been a part of a private collection for 51 years, while in that time has seen far less than adequately scheduled exercise/use & maintenance.
Yet both examples could easily be considered having a concours/show winning(?) appearance.