I was not aware of these facts and I stand corrected. My understanding was that 308 body parts were stamped out on big machines and therefore were all exactly the same and little or no hand fitting took place. Just so I understand it, if Fioravanti drew the 308 GTB, how does Pininfarina fit into the picture? My apologies Jim
Please don't apology, no need to...you should have been with my buddies at the 40th anniversary of the 308 on the "Le Vigeant" track in France: Leonardo Fioravanti was the guest of honor, and he authographed his new autobiography, and some cars, too...and no, I was not there myself... I will post a more elaborate answer as soon as I can use a proper computer, and not this tablet... Rgds
For me, this is the interesting part of the (always changing) human psychology -- where a V6 Dino has gone from being "not really a Ferrari" to now being a rare, and even more desirable, sub-species of the genus Ferrari. Who among the automotive wise could have foreseen it? None predicted it
I always felt, and this coming from someone who has owned one, that the whole "a Dino is a Ferrari" thing was nothing more than trying to make the car more prestigious if not pompous than it is. Dino's are what they are. Leave it at that. It's an interesting period of Auto history with a bitter sweet story attached. Take off your Ferrari badges and your silly shield stickers. It's like sticking a Porsche logo on a Karman Ghia. When I first saw the 360 Modena I said "my god they brought the Dino back". It just goes to show you how much influence this little car has had on the company. 2 seat mid engined Ferrari's copied the Dino. Not the other way around. Remember: a Dino is not a Ferrari. It's better.
If by "308" we consider the GTB/GTS, the 308 was certainly not "mass produced", because the total of all 308 produced is "about 13136" if we include the" italian market cousins" (208 GTB:GTS and 208 "Turbos"). This in ten years, which is about 1300 cars per year on average, whereas the Dino were about 650 cars a year on average I believe. It means that, on yearly average, the production of the 308 was double that of the Dino 206/246, which is certainly "something", but hardly a "massive difference"; and an average of 1300 cars a year is not by any standard "mass production". And the 308 was very largely still hand made: anyone who has sanded an early 308 steel body can attest of that, as very often some of the body panels are still made of different steel parts welded together and sanded, joints between panels are made of lead, hammered by hand, filler is used in large quantities before primer, and laid by hand, to compensate for irregularities in panels, etc...all those details that proves that it was not "mass production" by any means, and mostly hand build. So the "308 GTB/GTS" was certainly not "mass produced", but still largely assembled by hand; even if build in a yearly average that was double the "Dino", it was built on the same principles, with the same methods (and chassis still came from an outside provider: Vaccari & Bosi, bodies also, etc): production methods were almost identical, even if with some evolution. True, there were more 308 produced than "Dino", so the 308 is perhaps less "exclusive", but this for a reason: the 308 is the car that saved Ferrari from closing shop... ...furthermore, did "mass production" at Ferrari really occured, even today with 7.000 cars a year? Some automation came at the beginning of the nineties; even production of the 328 was not yet "mass production", and not yet automated. Drawing a line between the 246 and the "308 GTB/GTS" is also debatable considering that when the 308 GTB was at prototype stage, the first protoypes were all badged "Dino" and not Ferrari; and of course there is photographic proof of that. It was Fiat that insisted that the "308 GTB" was to be badged "Ferrari" only, this because of the disappointing sales of the "Dino" 308GT4 in the US. And the 308 GTB was indeed very much decided by Enzo Ferrari, and by him alone: it was him, and no-one else, who took his phone and called Leonardo Fioravanti to commission him to draw " a two-seat successor to the 246" that, at first, was not supposed to exist, when the sales of the GT4 proved disappointing. "and I want you to build it as quickly as you could, even if you have to use fiberglass for speeding up the production". So, wheteher we like it or not, the "308 GTB/GTS" was, in the minds of those who conceived it, a "Dino"...it may be not as exclusive as the "206/246" but it is a direct cousin,whether we like it or not; and beware, in a year or two, the "glass 308" values may well catch with the one of the 246... The production of Ferrari models always was a process of slow evolution: bits more modern here, more capacity of the engine there, but hardly any jump or leaps by innovation: the cylinders of the V8 are the same as the "Daytona", for instance, only eight instead ot twelve,which explain the rather odd 2926 cm3 capacity of the V8 (something close to 3.000 would have been more logical); so liners, etc...could be reused and were already available. This is one of the characteristics of Ferrari's line of models: a "308 GTB" is nothing more than a seventies itteration of the 246: the shape has been modernised; chassis and suspension are the same; engine is beefed up to eigth cylinders and that's all. A 308 is just a souped-up Dino: the two cars are very clearly related. One can prefer one from the other, but they are directly related, and built with the same methods; agreed, not the same numbers. But without the 308, there would be no "Ferrari" anymore today. My point is: certainly, there never was any clear line traced between the two at the time. You may consider that the two cars are different, that one is more pretty, more likeable, more valuable, more an icon than the other. But technically they are very closely related, and produced by the same methods. Rgds[/QUOTE] Spot on description Nerofor. Those of us that has overhauled both models can verify that there is very little differences between the 246 and the 308 model. It is basically the same two cars except from the 2 extra cylinders added to the 308. Though it's quite clear that build quality improves over time. Many of the small brackets etc on my early 246 looks like they are produced in hand by a amateur, whereby on the later 246 and the 308 all these small parts and brackets are much more professionally made. Anyone that have seen all these details do not worry about whether the Dino is a Ferrari or not....It is clearly a car that's planned and build by Ferrari using multiple sub suppliers (as on all their other cars) and named Dino for many reasons. The 246 is as much a Ferrari build car as every other one of the cars from the Ferrari factory and on top of this it has a very interesting history that adds this extra excitement to the car. Best regards Peter
I think de Cadenet in Ferrari: Victory by Design did a nice job discussing the Dino, the early Dino powered F1, sports racers and how the road cars came about. "Never miss an opportunity to drive one of these ..."
Interesting thread. I'm new to this debate but was Dino an independent company and bank its own revenue and expenses? Or did Ferrari have to shell out development costs? Plus who were the decision makers in the Dino company?
There was no Dino company. As I understand it Ferrari wanted to produce a less expensive car without devaluing the Ferrari name so he called them Dinos. He was also not sure a mid-engine road car would work so he hedged his bets. Like Toyota produces Lexus and Toyota automobiles or GM produces Cadillacs and Buicks except that AFAIK there never were even plants or buildings with Dino on them. They came out of the same factories with different names on them-- that's it.
Than wouldn't that make it a Ferrari with a different badge? I don't see how the car could not be considered a Ferrari in that case.
They are Ferrari's to me. When I see one, I don't see it as a Dino brand but as a Dino model from Ferrari. It seems to represent what true Ferrari DNA should be more than some Ferrari models.
There is no Corvette company. There almost no Chevy branding on a C7. Companies do things like this for a reason, almost always marketing reasons. The car was branded a Dino and not a Ferrari for a reason. It was Enzo's reason or at least he agreed with it. That's good enough for me. They coukd have called it a Ferrari and didn't Therefore, not a Ferrari out of the respect to the decision of Enzo. Isn't that good enough?
it isn't a ferrari technically but it has the essence and in my mind doesn't make it any less special....ferrari or not it remains one of the beautiful cars ever made
To my mind, implicit in any statement that a Dino "is not a Ferrari" is the notion that a Dino is somehow inferior to a "real" Ferrari, and all Dino owners/lovers must be made to acknowledge that fact. Technically, a Dino is not a Ferrari, because it was never marketed as such. Those who are envious of Dino owners seize on this nugget to downplay the significance of the Dino. Just as a LaSalle was not technically a Cadillac, a Dino is not technically a Ferrari. However, we can't ignore the fact that the Dino was named after Enzo Ferrari's first-born son, and that it set the future course of Ferrari's most popular product line, the non-V-12, mid-engine Ferrari. The debate will continue as long as people wish to poke a stick in the eye of the Dino aficionado. I mean no disrespect to those, such as Bob, The Mayor, who appreciate the Dino's significance, and merely prefer the technical definition of a Ferrari. I read over forty years ago that, according to Enzo himself, a Ferrari could only have twelve cylinders. We all know how that was resolved, during the Old Man's reign at the helm of Ferrari, albeit after FIAT had purchased 45% of the company. The whole discussion is starting to remind me of the old chestnut, "Who is buried in Grant's tomb?". We all love Dinos, or we wouldn't be reading this forum. Fred
This is probably the one Ferrari topic that suffers most from benign misinformation and innocent misunderstanding. I drove my Dino to the local cruise night once and got into an interesting conversation with one of the spectators. This fellow said, "It's amazing that people have heaped so much attention on these cars and call them Ferraris when they never even saw the inside of the Ferrari factory." At first I thought he was joking, but I soon understood he was serious. "Actually, they were built by the same people, in the same building, right alongside the Daytonas", I said. "Oh no they weren't. They were built in the Fiat factory!!" he fired back. When I asked him where he got that idea he said, "Wayne Carini said so on his show. You need to learn more about your car, pal!" he said with a sarcastic laugh. I told him either he misunderstood what Carini said or Wayne simply misspoke. The guy just rolled his eyes and walked away. Then the other night I happened to see the "Chasing Classic Cars" episode that featured a Dino. Sure enough, Carini did in fact say that Dinos did not get initial respect because they were built in the Fiat factory. So there you go. All the casual enthusiasts or uninitiated viewers who saw that show came away with the wrong idea, and will spread incorrect "history". I have thought of carrying a couple Dino reference books with me in case I see that guy, or someone like him, again.
I was once filling my tank at my local gas station when a young guy came up and sneered, "That's not a Ferrari!" While his remark was totally gratuitous, I asked him to come closer to the car, opened the driver's door and pointed to the U.S. federally-mandated build tag that says "Manufactured by Ferrari." I then asked him: "Is that good enough for you?" Fred
I showed that guy at the cruise night the build plate too. He said, "There was an agreement between Ferrari and Fiat, but the cars were built in the Fiat factory." He just wouldn't give up. Perhaps being shown a photo of the cars alongside the Daytonas at Scaglietti or of the guys building the Dino engines at Maranello would convince him. Maybe not.
Whether it 'is' or 'is not' a Ferrari is something that the Dino will be questioned on likely forever. That said I did ruffle more than a few feathers when I posed the question some time back in the 308 section that suddenly many 308 GT4 owners are referring to their cars as 'Dinos': http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/308-328/447562-gt4-owners-suddenly-calling-their-cars-dinos.html
Italian car show in LA circa 1985. I drive my 246 Dino GT in to the show (I had preregistered). The guy at the entrance wearing a Ferrari hat says: "You can drive this down to the end of the lot with the rest of the Fiats". So I did, right next to Fiat 124 coupes and X 1/9's True story. To say that the Dino is a Ferrari because Pininfarina made the bodies is a non starter. They made bodies for Fiats as well. It was just another job. The knock against the Dino was it's V6 which was made by Fiat where the 12 cylinder engines were made by Ferrari. That's the real distinction. Basically the same V6 appeared in the other Fiat Dino's so that did hurt it's status. Even today the Fiat Dino Coupe gets no respect. Only in the past few years has the Fiat Dino spider gotten some. Many of the tried and true Ferrari enthusiasts saw it as the beginning of the end. Those rare, 12 Cylinder cars were being made by "Fiat" now... and the Dino was it's first abomination of that merger. In the 80s, until Enzo's death, the 308 was the "it" car thanks to Tom Selleck. Dino's where just "old". They had a bump, fell back, and now are on the rise again. Perhaps the styling has come back into fashion because everything in the 80's and early 90's was "folded paper". Back then the Dino looked --- old fashioned-- believe it or not.
Pininfarina made no Dino bodies. It designed the Dino, hence the badge reading "disegno di Pininfarina" ("design of Pininfarina"). As for the engines, while the block was cast by FIAT, the camshaft was ground by Ferrari, and the engines were assembled by Ferrari (as were at least the later FIAT Dino engines). Regarding the Dino as looking "old-fashioned," that opinion was prevalent in some circles after announcement of the 308 GTB/GTS. I've always admired the 308's lines, and to this day believe that the two cars don't look well together. Yet, my 246 GT looks very contemporary alongside both my F430 Spider and my 458 Spider. It's funny how the origami designs of the '70s (including the Lotus Esprit) clash with the Dino's curves. The granddaddy of them all, the magnificent 330 P4, to my mind is the high-water mark of sports car design, and it too still looks contemporary in every way. Fred
