Dino versus Boxer Pricing?

Ok so to answer the origional question. A Boxer is a whole lot more car than a dino, but has yet to full come into its own as the market and taste is still maturing. Just as a 250 swb is more car than a lusso as desireable as a lusso may be.

By traditional standards a Boxer should be worth far more than a dino. In reality its just recently that boxer is priced int he same orbit as Dino, boxers are just coming to be reckognised.

Dinos are desireable because are eminantly useable, anyone can drive them, have that very classic 60s look. In that sense a Dino is a bargain 275 GTB.

Boxers are a dififficult proposition for the Collector poseur crowd. They are not so easily useable, if you are fat duffer in your 60s they may not be driveable at all. Even if you can control a boxer, you need a good place to excercise vigorously one for entertainment. Modern traffic is not that place. At a recent car show, most collectors seemed to be of that 60s crumdegon looking for something to do with their life ilk. These issues and relative maintanace costs have untill now held boxers back.

However as the boxer emerges furtehr from the shadow of just being an older 12 cyl car it indexes up the pantheon of ferraris. Boxers are rightly just strating to be seen as the last of the real mohecans, they are becocming prized as something really really special that just does not exist anymore. A car built for singularity of purpose, a car whose styling is not compromised by legislation or even useability. A pure machine of purity of purpose. In that sense a boxer is a bargain 288, or 90% of the 288 experience for 1/10th the price. Or a road going can am car.

Remember when a miura was half a daytona in value or less, now they are twice. Miuras are less driveable than boxers and more maintanace intensive. Miuras did not change, perception changed, and use changed.

When something becomes truly a classic, its very difficulties, its purity of purpose may be attributes. Very few today would use a boxer for a road trip, its useability drawbacks are less relevant and its attributes move to the fore. As such Boxers are now reindexing into art collector status, they are moving up in the pantheon of ferrari greats..

Wind the clock forwards 20 years and a boxer will be worth more than a dino, for the moderate collector(ie thise with 500k to 2 mill to spend) the boxer will be the next rung up on the ladder from a Dino. BTW the real big time collectors, those than can drive and actualy have taste(as opposed to buying off of a checklist), that crowd has all added a boxer or two, they started about 5 years ago before the followers caught on.

Each car value cycle(usualy 10 years) the boxer will index up higher, whereas Dinos have already indexed to their point on the pantheon..

So Dinos may march up with all ferraris, but boxers can jump as they continue to reindex up the pantheon, as will daytonas. Is a 275 is a 3 mill car, then daytona will become 1.5 to 2 mill and Boxers 750 to 1 mill, in that same period dinos will be 500k cars. Some peopel here have also pointed to restorations, yes at 500k lots of boxers will be restored fully, making them yet more desireable to "collectors again. Plus unlike so many older ferraris there are number of well kept factory origional boxers available, the market these days prefers factory original cars or all makes.

Are Boxers a more difficult proposition than a Dino, for sure, but in some ways they can be more rewqarding to drive too.. As a crisp fall sunday drive assuming you have the roads, a boxer is pretty hard to beat for pretty much any road car. Fast or faster than anyone is really going to go on road, yet full of that classic feedback that moderns almost totaly lack.

This last weekend, woke up it was 60 degrees pre fall weather. Perfect driving conditions and quiet roads. Choices to drive on the Ct backroads, GT40 too extreme(more for the track), Lotus too small and rough(even though its pretty much the best car extant), M3 too bland, Boxer just right, perfect blend of power, handling, comfort and occasion. You just gotta have the right roads and mindset, when you do there is no other car that will play and hardwire to your brain the way a boxer will, in other circumstances they can be a real PTA. And PTA's they can be, thats why mine other than monthly excercsising for fitness stayed put from mid june to now. If there is going to be heat and traffic, its really not pleasant. Thing is when you buy a 500K+ collector car, traffic use is probably a minimal criteria and it seems a for a 5mill classic traffic useability is irrelvant, so time and pricing works to boxers favor.

Like all great art, or fine wine it needs to be appreciated. So yes the market and the car is more limited than the dino, but as true conniseurs emerge of those that follow them, boxers will climb higher up the pantheon.

Think about it this way, and early 70s can am car for the road, a car that "feels" to be track derived in its controlls and responses yet really is a "compliant" street car, the last of the classic ferraris in terms of driving experience, pure shape, clickty clack shifter epic motor. Want to go fast in a boxer, grab it by the scuff of its neck and wring it out, the experience is sublime and you emerge with a cleared mind. Want to putz along, the car can do it, but it feels heavy and ponderous.

BTW I hear that if you get a dino into its stride on a mountain road it too is sublime, a flowing experince liek water over rocks, seems most these days value its useability in other conditions. Such is the poor state of roads and road conditions that the sublime road driving art and experience for such is rarer and harder to find.

Its why moderns for all their abilities are pretty bland and crap to drive, they are built to be confortable/useable in traffic and really fast for one lap as such they loose the pure joy of drivign and control that older cars have in spades..

Yes i think in time boxers will be valued higher than Dinos. I also think all ferraris up to 355's and Trs are going to be collectable and special in the way that the cars that followed can never be, as such over time they are all going to appreciate, but at different rates to different levels according to tastes and criteria of future times.

 

"A car built for singularity of purpose" Just curious, how would you define that purpose?

 

Performance priority, shape and some comfort.
A road car with some luxury(ie not a street legal track car), but priority on ; best handling as possible (mid engined with available tech understanding for era) best speed possible within package ie max possible hp, beautiful shape almost regardless of practicality(supercar), motor that fits this mandate(period F1 evocative 12 layout) all acomplished within reason(ie price) for that era.

In other words make a car as fast and as good handling as reasonably possible for the era, comfortable enough to drive on street but not really prioritizing or compromsing too far for comfort, make shape as beautiful and uncompromised as possible its not german but italian drama and art, go for race car on street feel(not Gt).

Now a dino has a motor that is sonourous, but not for max hp or speed, its setup for comfort within layout. The whole setup is for useability and fine handling in a light packagage, resonable easy to get in and out of , light steering etc.

If a Dino is for the era ultimate performance level 7 and corrospondiongly comfort useability level 8, then a boxer aimed to provide performance level 10, consequently comfort is probably not more than a 6.5 and useability the same.

Now as to styling the Dino was derivative of the shapes that came before, it played it safe.
Even a daytona broke new ground styling wise compared to a dino. The Boxer styling is not derivative of what came before. However what makes the boxer and miura classics is unlike moderns which seek to break new styling ground the boxer and miura were not compromised by legislation or even more than a nod to practicality. They were therefore free to be achingly beautiful in the classic italian sense, as opposed to those that came after which seek to attract through shock and being outlandish.

In that sense a Boxer and Miura are both breaking new ground in layout and design while still being classicaly beautiful. A Dino played it safe by being just classicaly beutiful trough derivation.

By way of anology, imagine if jaguar had continued to evolve the 120-150 styling, thats the dino, instead of breaking new ground with the very different but no less appealing etype.

All jaguars untill the legislation xjs looked to be feeline shapes.The Italians went more for the beauty of the female shape.

Great italian design as in the Dino boxer or miura, well you can see a beautiful woman laying on her side. Look at a Boxer or Miura head on and you also see pure rippling of power and agression of a race machine.

So yes as a cruiser a boxer is a more expesive to run and harder to drive proposition than a dino. Do you want to go first class comfort in a 757 or pay first class prices for buisness class seats to go concorde.

 

"In other words make a car as fast and as good handling as reasonably possible for the era, comfortable enough to drive on street but not really prioritizing or compromsing too far for comfort, make shape as beautiful and uncompromised as possible its not german but italian drama and art, go for race car on street feel(not Gt)." <<< Well, to me this doesn't sound like "singularity of purpose" but a compromise of many and possibly conflicting objectives/purposes. I hate to say it but in this sense both the boxer and the dino are not all that differnt from modern cars. Ferrari did have singularity of purpose when it was more of a race shop/team that only sold road cars to fund the racing effort. During that period road cars borrowed a lot of their mechanicals from the racing effort and thus shared its "singilarity of purpose". This is why the earlier cars are extra special. It all changed when ferrari focused exclusively on F1 and the road cars were just that, road cars with no real connection to what made Ferrari special - competition.

Having said that, i do love both the dino and the boxer. The dino is my emotional favorite but I think the boxer has more potential to appreciate.

 

This discussion has deteriorated from speculating about the 365 Boxer becoming the next Ferrari darling to listening to people try to justify why the Boxer is a better car than a Dino. Now I&#8217;ve learned that a Dino&#8217;s design is simply a derivative of other designs.

This is not the first discussion of other cars vs. the Dino and why isn&#8217;t the other car more appreciated. Perhaps these discussions are better held in chat-rooms for Boxers or 308s. Why come here and whine?

I own a Dino because I find it beautiful. A classic design wrapped around a well handling, comfortable car. I'm not alone in my opinion - they&#8217;ve been cited by so many articles as the quintessential vintage car - classic, swoopy, sensual in design. Personally, I find both the Boxer and Daytona uninspired by comparison. Would I like more grunt &#8211; sure. Would I give up the Dino to get it &#8211; no way&#8230;

 

Maybe I am bringing the thread back on topic. It seemed to morph into a discussion of why one car should be worth more than another, not an expectation of future values. As for the original topic, I really can't add anything intelligent about where the market will be.

My attitude has always been, if you can, own and drive what you enjoy. If what you like matches the market, you may do well over time. If they don't match, well you still have something that makes you happy

 

I agree with your final paragraph entirely.


Hopefully I pointed out "my" personal many reasons why "ultimatly" a boxer will be worth more than a dino. The attributes I believe a boxer has are coming to be more and more understood and appreciated as the market matures. Boxers are also 10 years newer than Dinos, so their time to market appreciation/maturity has a time lag as well.

Ultimatly project into the future far enough, none of these cars will be regularily driven if driven at all. Values may then come down to rarity spec and percieved beauty.

As to the near future, Dinos have stalled in value after a significant price rise, boxers prices subsequently rose, so may have a ways to go. Traditionaly boxers sold at 50% of Daytona values, so around 350k is where a boxer should be now. In time they may well reach parity with daytonas.

I can rememebr periods when Dinos were used cars at 13k and when they were 125k in the first car boom and no one understood it them, other than we all know Dinos are great and have universal appeal. In those same periods Boxers were new or near new cars and worth more. Subsequently boxers fell as just used cars while dinos as Calssics climbed, now boxers are hitting classic status and where they settle, or how many times they will climb, where on the panteon they will ultimatley sit, no one can yet say. In this snese the Dino market seems more matured.

If one takes restoration costs into acount be it a dino or boxer none of these cars can really worth less than 350k.

Dinos were reckognised a decade or more ago, Boxers are just getting "market" reckognition now.
If we are talkign big prices then these are (boxers and dinos)cars as art, each aficianado has reasons why theirs is very or more valuable and talks it up. Each point has validity. I think Boxers have a lot more reckognition and therefore value to go.

If we are talking to drive, then each has its attributes, one is an easier and a more pleasant proposition than the other, and one may be more thrilling and harder than the other.

No right answer, For years the market spoke in favor of the dino, now it seems to be beginning to like boxers, lets see how far that goes and what legs it has, I think each cycle the boxer indexes up further...

They are both so different you either choose one over the other pretty easily or maybe can afford both. I cant and chose one very much over the other, two reasons, firstly performance secondly styling. I am guessing for a Dino one would choose its styling as a timelss classic most beautiful etc as one sees it, and how pleasant they are to drive.

You should see the Boxer vs Ct debate, or Boxer vs Tr debate.

in any event, as "I" belive the boxers many attribites are only comming to be reckognised now, and as Dinos appear to have had their rise, assuming the overall car market does not stall out, boxers will rise and appreciate further whereas dinos appear to have found their plateu, at least in this cyle.. Each boom bust cycle of the classic car market(apporx 10 years) Boxers will I believ index further up the chain. The same applies imo to Ghiblis and we have seen it with CTs too. Indexing up the chain is what miuras did when they went from being half a daytona to double..

 

Singularity of purpose means they set out to build a "supercar" a supercar being a unique breed of irrelevant street car with all the compromise in terms useability vs drama and ultimate possible road performance that implies. Boxers were designed when ferrari still did other types of racing. A boxer is as close to a road going early 70s can am car as you can get both in terms of general "experience" and also control reactions/feel. A road car DNA dead end, but a glorious and unique one at that.

But then I would pick an aventador over any of Ferrais current regular production offerings, unless of course one could have a Zonda. Most it seems would take a F12 over an aventador becase of paper spec, to me a F12 is just a fast comfortable Gt, so what do I know..

 

I have read the various replies and find them all very interesting and wondered how the age of the investor influences their perception. I'm 50 and lucky enough to own a Dino a BB and a Testarossa. They were purchased over the past 10 years in the same order, Dino then BB then Testarossa. At 50 years old my memories of supercars are from the 70's and 80's hence the collection, my ability to buy them comes at an age when I, like most people can afford to spend a little on myself given the fact that I have paid for the house and kids etc. So it makes some sense that the BB will overtake the Dino in value as both the ability to own and desire to own, shifts from one generation to another. Value in monetary terms is only half the story and as explained by many, the other half is the fun and enjoyment of ownership. The ownership value comes after you've spent your money, so by then its too late to complain about how much it cost, better to sit comfortable in the knowledge that it was a good investment! If the market collapsed which one car of these three would I feel had let me down, the answer is none. I have all three cars equally pegged they are all Ferrari's. I believe that in the long term people will shift from the Dino to the BB then the Testarossa but these will be different generations.
For what its worth I had an XK120 which I restored over a 12 month period to near concours condition. The result was a fantastic looking car which drove as good as an XK120 could drive but unfortunately it didn't light my fire. It was purchased as an investment and not because I loved the car. The value to me was therefore much lower than the cars I love and therefore don't want to sell. My point being that passion has value, for me and obviously many others, their passion is driven from boyhood dreams. The XK120 was 65 years old, the values had stagnated and the desire to own one diminished with an ever aging population. On the other hand the BB is coming into its own, the Dino is already there and the Testarossa will/is following. I think it has everything to do with the boyhood dream and the ability to afford ownership.
A Dino in the UK is probably £300k the BB about the same and the Testarossa £130k if all three went up for sale I wonder which one would sell first? The rarest (BB) the oldest (Dino) or the cheapest (Testarossa).