Objectively | Page 2 | FerrariChat
Buy

Objectively

Discussion in 'Ferrari Discussion (not model specific)' started by boxerman, Mar 15, 2013.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Page 2 of 2
  1. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    19,910
    FL
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #26 boxerman, Mar 21, 2013
    Shehan is someone who is apparently a dealer of major or significant ferraris. For his own reasons he has excluded the boxer labeling it as a post enzo car. My point is these cars should be judged for what they objectively and subjectively are.

    Fact is to this date Boxers have not hit the high desirability spot for speculators that the earlier cars have. In my book that is a good thing as thye are still attainable.

    The 348 is lower down the so called desireabilty rung when looking at value. Yet a Dino is way up. In that sense so far Sheehan is right, except of course a Dino is a Fiat era car, so somewhere the vortues of these cars are reckognised by the market. Some of course are unloved like a 400I, and the newer ones are just cars, produced in heavy numbers.

    I dont think the boxer is the last collectable ferrari at all, it may just be the next collectable ferrari though. And I would argue once it gets intot he stream of conciousness its prices may eclipse those of the Daytona, just as the miura did.
     
  2. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    19,910
    FL
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #27 boxerman, Mar 21, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  3. Cobraownr

    Cobraownr Formula Junior
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 6, 2008
    947
    Edgewater, MD
    Full Name:
    Donald Silawsky
    #28 Cobraownr, Mar 21, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  4. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    19,910
    FL
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #29 boxerman, Mar 21, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  5. PV Dirk

    PV Dirk F1 Veteran

    Jul 26, 2009
    5,401
    Ahwatukee, AZ
    #30 PV Dirk, Mar 21, 2013
    This is just my opinion and some of my knowledge may be wrong but this is as I understand it. The boxer was the end of the line for old school Ferrari. I understand this is the last hand hammered body. In my mind this was the end of the truly hand built, one at a time cars. Mass production certainly took a larger role after this car. This was the last production model of Ferrari as the boutique auto maker in my mind. Like a band before they made it big. If you saw the beetles or U2, the Stones or any big group before they had their break it was different. The early cars are different. They bring a bit more nostalgia, a bit more mist to the eye. And I say that as an owner of a newer car.

    The boxer, specifically the carb car, I feel takes a bit more committment for someone who drives it regularly. My 87 Mondial will never foul it's plugs, but a carb boxer might. I can lug my Mondial all over town and let it idle for hours on end. It's a modern car with few compromises. A carb boxer is a car that wants to be driven the way it wants to be driven and in our modern world that sets it apart.

    I may be misty eyed and have a romanticised version of what Boxer ownership may be, but the fellow I knew who owned a boxer, the one pictured, he rebuilt his own carbs. When it wouldn't start, he didn't have it towed, he started wrenching on it. His was in very nice unrestored condition. It is a car that made an impression on me

    And to the OPs question. I don't think these cars are about being impartial or objective. They are all about the passion they instill in those who see them or have the opportunity to interact with them.
     
  6. Nosevi

    Nosevi Formula 3

    Jul 8, 2011
    1,990
    Lincoln
    Full Name:
    Pete
    #31 Nosevi, Mar 22, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
    I'm just going to preface this by saying that the Boxer is one of my all time favourite Ferraris, and I'm a Ferrari nut, love them. Truly a great car. And this is in the nature of friendly debate, hope it comes across as such.

    Anyway, clearly Sheehan is trying to draw a line in the sand, possibly for his own purposes I don't know. But in a way, you're doing a little of the same, though I'm not saying it's for your own reasons. The Boxer was, and is, a truly great car, but it's not the last and it's not vastly different from the other cars of that era. This in no way lessens it as a classic in my eyes.

    Part of my reasoning is that you seem to operating under some fairly big assumptions. The previous poster talks about looking at it through misty eyes, and there's nothing wrong with that, but you mustn't 'distort' things with it, even if that’s not intentional. An example would be an idea that Boxers were lovingly hammered out over weeks while other cars were flung together (exaggeration but you know what I mean :) ). The Boxer was built for about 11 years, 2323 cars were produced, though clearly few of them made it to the States. The 400/412 was made alongside it and built for 13 years, 2384 cars were built in the same way and taking about the same time. Adding the 365 GT4 2+2 into the 400/412 numbers doesn’t help as it was built for 3 years and only 521 cars were ever built. Chassis wise the Boxer is not so different to a Testarossa and was built on the same line, but I’m guessing you know that. Of course the coachwork wasn’t actually built by Ferrari at all, it was built by Scaglietti in the same factory that produced coachwork for the likes of the 308. This was originally in glass fibre but switched back to steel as it was found that the time taken to do the glass bodywork on a 308 was far longer than working in steel as they had done on the Boxer and actually didn’t save that much weight (only about 12kg actually).

    Another aspect would be that the Boxer didn’t make it to the States because Enzo didn’t want to neuter his masterpiece. This isn’t true, it was a purely financial decision. Given the expected sales of the Boxer it was thought that the development cost with producing a Federalised version was too high. Remember they didn’t “neuter” all Ferraris and ruin the lines with big rubber bumpers , just the ones they sent your way (not totally having a go at rubber 308s but that bumper doesn’t look good). A view that all cars were subject to this and that is why the Boxer couldn’t be sold over the pond is slightly US-centric. As production numbers rose it became financially viable to do this with later models and make more than one variant.

    Also there are numerous stories of Enzo ‘interfering’ with his engineers right up until his death, drove them mad actually. He was allegedly forever pitching up and saying he had changed his mind about one aspect or another of a car in development. Also the idea that there was a shadowy Fiat executive in the office down the hall calling the shots as far as the road cars went is just not true and was not the way Fiat did things. As it happens Scaglietti was sold to Fiat by Sergio Scaglietti at the same time as Ferrari sold them a 50% share but like Ferrari they kept Sergio on running the company and with basically complete day to day control. Italians are hugely family orientated (this is from the experience of having worked there a lot) and these were ‘family owned companies’. Selling to a big firm had far less impact than it would have had in either the UK or the States.

    Like I said, the Boxer is one of my all time favourite Ferraris but it is no more Enzo’s last than the Daytona was (think that what you said Sheehan said). Neither was it in any way Fiat’s first. Enzo said what he wanted and the genius that was Leonardo Fioravanti created the Berlinetta Boxer. In much the same way as he did with the 348 as it happens, this was their final ‘collaberation’. Times had changed, technology had moved on, but the basic formula, and the way in which these great men saw motor cars, remained the same to this point. You could argue that things changed with the 355 when Fiat had truly taken control and as LdM set out to make his cars more accessible (talking to drive and live with, not financially) but obviously the 355 was just an ‘improvement’ on the 348. So was it the 360 which was the first all new car? Ferrari has been changing as a company, and it's cars changing with it, since the days of knocking out individual cars to race on the F1 track and still be sold to go on the road. The Boxer was, to me, one of many high points in that journey. It may well be collectible, or rather more collectible, one day for that reason, but not because it was Enzo’s last masterpiece (or Leonardo Fioravanti's for that matter) – everyone knows that was the 348 :D
     
  7. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    19,910
    FL
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #32 boxerman, Mar 22, 2013
    Whether or not its Enzo's last is I think not the point. I use that example because that is something Sheehan uses to draw his line in the sand, in his case saying cars after 69 were FIAT cars. As some of you point out the FIAT pourchase was not the seminal event as the car production and design processes did not change. We can also see that the Dino which was a poor couusin to many a ferrari is now a $300-500k car and apparently collectable.


    What we all agree on is that the boxer is a car that belongs to an earlier era of lets say less compromised cars to legislation and cars more focused on how they drove than comfort or conveniance. As far as the 12cyl cars go it is the last of that line, and as those prior cars are stratospheric in price the boxers collectability time will come soon. Thats all I am saying, it has the attributes of the prior cars, and its time is therefore comming..

    The TR has a similar chassis but lenghtened and is significantly heavier and wider, it is a different drive. The TR is how you would develop the boxer if you wanted to meet Federal regulations, have good AC and fit a more portly less sporting biased clientale. The trend continued with the 550.

    The TR is in my mind an transitional car, thye took some old School pieces and added a bunch of stuff to make the car late 80's/90's compliant and comfortable, changing the focus and experience. Plus its really not a beauty, arresting maybe, evocative certainly but not a beauty.

    My only purpose of this thread, starting witht he first picture is to point out that the boxer has all the attributes of the greats from the piror generations, cars which Sheehan and the market thinks to be collectable. In other words objectively its just as desirable, just not wrapped in the hype yet.
    The market pricing to date does not agree with me.There was also a time when people traded daytonas on late 70's vettes, and Dinos were rusty 13k cars.

    Nevertheless Boxers have not followed a linear trend. That may have to do with the greater volume of Boxers out there, the comitment they take to drive and that it probably has not been "discovered" yet. Once the supply of the older prior cars is driven above $500k as is the case, then there needs to be something else to slot in and the boxer in every objective and subjective sense fitts that position. All thats missing is some classic car magazines suddenly eulogising the Boxer.

    Currently thgough the Dino is the next thing. I think the reasons are certainly to do with its looks and ease of use. Its a grat starter collector ferrari, useable and does not require any significant skill or comitent to drive.

    As to the later cars TR 348 Mondial. They belong to an 80's styling genre. If you look at most of the prior cars, including the boxer their shape can be said to be that of a beautiful woman laying on her side in profile. The 80's cars went for a very different asthetic and it has yet to really resonate.

    I persoanly feel that the day of the Tr will come. It will work fo an Asian collector because it has good AC. Its design is unmistakable and very different, so it has the hey look at me shock value that newer car owners tend to like. It will also be seen elsewhere in retorspective like a 57 caddy, and in black the lines actualy work in way.

    The newer cars are great, 360/430 but they are just cars. They will always have a value like 80's porche 911's have a value, but will never really go somewhere, except maybe stradale or scud because they are somehow rarer and better, just like some lighweight 911's. We can see the same trendline with 308's with the rarer and better glass bodied cars fetching a seriously different price and the others being just vauable used cars. The 328 is somewhat different, but then some regard it as the best of the breed and it has more go.

    I think 308's without the US bumpers are a great car too, having everthing that makes a ferrari a ferrari. Problem is there were over 20 000 made and most are slugs. Of course the drysump Eurospec cars are a different breed to a US 308GTSi, and prices and collectability reflect this.

    Lastly value for all these things comes from use and ability to use. Historic rallies have cutoff dates, which means many cars from the 70's on are excluded, that drives prices of earlier cars.

    As to Enzo being involved, that was not necessarily always a good thing, his insistence on Michelin trx tires saddled a whole generation of cars to obsolete tyre tech, easily rectifyable now of course.
     
  8. Nosevi

    Nosevi Formula 3

    Jul 8, 2011
    1,990
    Lincoln
    Full Name:
    Pete
    #33 Nosevi, Mar 22, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Ok. Like I say just a friendly debate.

    I don't agree with Sheehan in that I think you probably can notice a difference when Fiat took over, but that certainly wasn't prior to the introduction of the Boxer. And I do think the Boxer belongs to a slightly earlier era in some respects. I also like the way that many of the reasons for that are similar to the 'problems' others quote with the 348. To me that gives the cars a 'character' that others lack, to others they are flaws. I don't think it's a coincidence as they were both designed by the same chap. The 348 is no Boxer, but I think the spirit, and the raw feel, live through, at least in Leonardo Fioravanti's cars, till this model - whether it lives beyond it is a debate for another time.

    Enjoyed chatting, just leave you with one thought re design and aesthetics. Of course you have to keep the sills black which many simply don't see, but there is a little more than a family resemblance tracking through the Boxer, 328 to the 348. Many loose this a little when they 'colour code' the sills. Sorry no wheels in the pic but the original 5 pointed star wheels retain that aspect as well, as does the 'pin-stripe' which is back on now. Beauty, though is in the eye of the beholder. All the best.

    Nos
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  9. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    19,910
    FL
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #34 boxerman, Mar 22, 2013
    Love the pics, I think the cheeze grater look just never caught on, many find the 355 look more appealing. That is part of the issue with the 348, the car that came after was based on the same platform but many see it as stylitcaly better, and it is technicaly faster. There are also more than enough 355's produced that it would take a while to absorb that supply before moving on to the 348.

    I could tell you that for serious driving a 348 is better because it does not have ps and the motor is clearly more durable. In fact i think the biggest issue with the 355 is that they are relatively mechanicaly fragile, so the cost of running one is somewhat ruinous.

    Based on the 3 pics abouve I would say that in a photo the 308 looks best. The boxer looks more subdued. In the flesh though there are all types ofsubtle lines that show the boxer to have avery complex shape, and its size gives it a presence no 308 can match.

    Had ferrari built the 308 with a 348 transaxle and motor we would have had the best of all worlds. It should have been doable, after all the mondial started with a 308 setup and the last ones the 3.4T were the 348 setup, but by then ferrari was going for cars with a more useable civilsed setup, and dynamicaly the 348 is streets ahead of the 308..

    The 348 also suffers because the first year of production had weird dynamics and this tranished the car in some eyes.

    In any event the market speaks and a 328 is worth way more than 348 and boxers while having moved a bit still dont eaily break $150k. That boxers have moved up of late indicates that supply and demmand are in a good balance.

    328's like dinos and 348s are realively easy to use, so they always have a wider audience, and after the dino a 328 is seen as quite beautiful. Untill the boxer is reckognised for what it is(a early 70's can am/lemans car for the road),one of the last racing inspired old school big 12's, the values will languish.

    True also that when the great 308/328's have dried up there will be pull for 348's, but that is along way off, and its styling will have to be appreciated.

    the good part though is current values make the 348 eminently affordable, they are relatively speaking robust and easy to maintain. So without all the hype you have a great ferrari to drive that is at least affordable to buy, boxers were once like that too, and testarossas still are.

    i always remind myself, that most of us here dont own these cars for the hype, but rather for the drive. The true enthusiast is the one owning the great but affrdable ferraris, because these cars are all for driving and have relatively less pose value.

    Enjoy and drive the wheels off,
     
  10. Nosevi

    Nosevi Formula 3

    Jul 8, 2011
    1,990
    Lincoln
    Full Name:
    Pete
    #35 Nosevi, Mar 22, 2013
    Thanks. For me with my little 348 it's all about the drive. You're right, they are very accessable, would almost say cheap, in today's market although in the UK they are slowly rising and here there's now a significant overlap with the 355 in prices. This has been helped by some pretty positive press over the last year or so. I found that the slightly older V8s (wasn't looking for a V12) didn't have quite the rough edged feel and the newer ones appealed a lot less as they just seemed to be more of a filtered experience.

    When I bought mine she was towards the top end of the market, getting her up to scratch I've spent approaching that again. I have no expectation of recouping that money, largely because I have no intention of selling her. Market value stopped being important to me on the day I bought my car.

    In a way, the story of the 348 is not so different to the Boxer, just on a minature scale. Misconceptions have hurt both to a degree, fuelled in part by individuals with a vested interest (Sheehan, LdM). Their immediate siblings are more sought after but this is often due to a misunderstanding about what the car offers. I would, and did, choose a 348 over the V8s either newer or older (as a child of the 80s the cheese graters were just another bonus!). Equally if the choice for me was between a Daytona and a Boxer the former would not stand a chance. The market sees it differently but that doesn't make my preferences invalid. And these things change and there was a time when you would be making a choice over a 246 GT or a 308GT4. How times have changed!

    I actually think both our cars will 'see their time', even if the 348 'seeing it's time' will mean it's simply seen for what it is; the last Ferrari built with a certain vision - it's all down to the driver. If this has no impact on value it matters not a jot to me :)

    All the best, and truly stunning car in the pics, hang onto her!
     
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page