It is a nice thought, but TIRES are not judged and date stamps are NEVER considered. These tires are a safety issue, they are not safe at this point. If you wish to have a pristine set of tires and rims that is fine, but saving them because of the date stamp is not necassary. Chris
Ok, I have seen this stated but NEVER documented, please provide a list of the modifications and improvements of the F40 during each production year. I would be very interested in the specific differences for 1990, 1991, 1992. (I can tell you the build quality issue is a myth, the bulid quality is suspect on every car and every year.... 1992's were the pinnacle? lol if I put a 1990, 1991 and 1992 side by side and covered the build plate you could not tell one from the other...) By 1992 F40's were slow moving cars, the bubble had burst and Ferrari had lost interest in the F40, so no development was going on in 1992.
Rick, thanks for your comments, I have several friends with F40's and I have ridden and been around more than most people and while I do not consider myself an expert, I have yet to see documentation of any sigificant differences in the 1990, 1991 and 1992 model years...
This question has come up before. I believe it was Sean Harris from Harris Imports in Utah who detailed all the differences. I also remember he said the 92 was the best year.
As Joe Friday would say.... just the facts. (Sean Harris is a credible person.......) Sometimes, opinions are portrayed as facts.....
Chris, Speak with someone who is an expert on the car. There is no black and white fact on anything like this, but those who KNOW the cars, know well enough. Think of it like this: i ask you to create something in a certain way. over the course of three years, you are sure to improve the way you do it and the process by which it is made, as well as incorporate further improvements based on what you have seen works and doesn't. This is exactly what happened with the team that made the F40. Same team from start to finish, for the whole run. Ask them, they will tell you. The fact that is is hand-built only increases said chance of things happening in the manner I am describing. This is what happened. It's not one big thing or another, it's a million little things. --Dan
Sorry, but you offer no instances of a known improvement... suspension is the same, the engine is the same, electronics are the same.... build quality? As you mention, the same people used the same process on all cars... It would be safe to assume that a 1992 is better, but as far as I know it is simply an opinion. This is not like a 348 that had suspension mods or 355's with different valve guides.... I must be an F40 expert, because no one has ever shown me 1 item that is significantly different between a 1990, 1991 and 1992 that would cause one car to be different or better than the other. If its a million little things it should be easy to describe 10 areas of significant difference between a 1990 and 1992... I am just saying some people want a last production year car.... I looked for my F40 for a few years and found the cars were basically identical.... they all have questionable fit and finish, the factory paint was weak... ..but they sure are fun! (PS the cars were built over a 5 year period, not 3.... I would assume that a '88 is better than a '87 so maybe a '89 is better than '88 maybe these Italians are slow learners... lol)
Chris I stand corrected. Here are two quotes from Sean Harris on the 92 F40 back in Nov 2003. He just gives an opinion with no facts to back it up. 'The F40 just sold for $345,000. It was a great car in top condition. We completed a full service as part of the sale The F40 is my all time favorite Ferrari and the '92 Model year is definitely the one to have. Worth the extra money in my opinion.' 'None of the US spec cars came from the factory with the adjustable suspension. I guess to try and answer the question on why a '92 is better - on paper US spec F40s are the same '90 -'92, but as with most all production Ferraris the factory became better at building the car as time went along and so the last year is usually the best year of any normal production Ferrari. As such, the '92 brings a bit of a premium because of that. If anyone else has more input, please jump in.'
Jeff, I would agree that it is a reasonable assumption that as the cars were built through the years that perhaps they were put together better.... I certainly would pay more for a '92 than I would a '87. My posistion is that it is just a feeling or an opinion that makes the cars more valuable as opposed to anything definitive such as different engine for example... I just question when a person cannot document the significant differences they claim there car has.... if there really is a "million" improvements from my '91 to a '92 I would like to know what they are (Sorry Dan, just messing with you!) So since a '92 is newer than say a '90 it should have a slight edge in value, but I do not think the difference in pricing is significant, it all goes back to condition, records and documentation... oh, and bragging rights! Chris
Chris: no Z8 but they are wonderful cars. Lee has one. I will go about finding specific examples of differences for you. One thing that comes to mind: when comparing a 90 and 92 car side by side, we noticed that the CF seemed to be formed (in essence, the way the weave is oriented and then the amount and manner in which it was "bent" to form the panel) in a different manner for the rear decklid. Comparing said 92 to another 92, they were the same. --Dan
I'm sure you are correct in saying that from a specification POV there is no difference between any year of US model F40's. However... I have looked at literally 20 F40's over the past several years, with a view to purchasing one and while they all seem identical to look at, the single biggest difference that is clear even to a complete neophyte in this matter, is that the CF work is much better in the later cars. A particular place to look, where the 90's are bad and the later years are markedly better is in anywhere that required the CF to be joined - at a bend, or to to the chassis. The 90's look almost kit car like with sloppy welds and joins where the later cars and much more precise. Another "invisible area" of improvement is in the engine management where it continued to be improved almost with every car. Also later model years of the same car are always more valuable given similar mileage and use. Finally, I wanted a 92, not a 90. You can have all the 90's you want, I won't be bidding against you.
In your very humble opinion, of course. I enter a lot of my cars in all kinds of concourses and shows, and when the judging is tight EVERYTHING is up for scrutiny. I once lost 1st place at a Jag event because my XKE wood steering wheel had been clearcoated with an epoxy resin to strengthen and preserve it. It was invisible to the naked eye, but one of the judges brought out a cloth measuring tape and determined that the circumference of the wood was too large by a few millimeters. So I will keep the original wheels and tires and I will use them in display competitions. Besides, it's cool to have them...
Exactly as I feel, Alex. As I've said before, material quality improvements were made over time. --Dan
Yes, well humble or not.... lol I think it is neat to have them, I think it is great to show the car with them, but I will do everything I can to encourage you not to drive on them at speed... We do not have to agree on everything here, but I have a huge amount of respect for you, and certainly this is not something new... I view tires as I do belts, and 5 year old tires are not as safe as I would like to see my friends riding around on in a car that can exceed 200mph... I would keep them, show them, take them off and drive the car with something fresh! Again, congrats! If you are going to be at Monterey we have 4 F40's going on a cruise on hiway 1, join us!
Another "invisible area" of improvement is in the engine management where it continued to be improved almost with every car. Also later model years of the same car are always more valuable given similar mileage and use. Finally, I wanted a 92, not a 90. You can have all the 90's you want, I won't be bidding against you. You won't have to bid against me, I have had my F40 for 3 years..... mine is a more humble '91... lol
I have a second set of wheels and brand new Pirellis for driving. I have a bunch of old cars and I know just how quickly traction disappears when on old, brittle rubber. Thanks for your concern. I'm sure there are those (especially the ones who relished the "chrashed Enzo" threads) who wouldn't care if I took a chance on the old rubber! Monterey is not an option for me for several years, as my kids start school during the Monterey week.
My kids start that week too, so I usually go to Monterey without Dana, but I made her go this year.... I am sitting here laughing because I have the original tires and wheels with my F40 to..... I forgot because I have them in storage since I have to run 18's... I guess we are alike! Chris
Alex, Surely dad can be away for "business" for a bit, no? After all, you owe me a look-see on my car! --Dan
Phoenix becomes very nice after the end of September and I am hosting the FCA gathering at my place for the Brazil Grand Prix on October 24. You are hereby cordially invited. We have some great drives in the desert - come on down!
