Testerossa or 348?????

Both have to have engine out belt service so the maintenance will be similar on both cars.

I have a TR and I personallly never considered a 348. I just feel it's too "short" a car. I'm 6'5" so there are a lot of neat cars (348, Gallardo, 355) that I would look like a tool getting out of. Guess I'll have to stick to the long stuff like Diablos and TRs

Again, pick which one u like. Both will have their fair share of little electrical quirks and other odd stuff. Just make sure you get one with a recent belt change and a newer clutch. I also prefer higher mileage cars (mine has 36k) if you plan on driving the car a lot.

 

The hard choice for me would be TR or 348 spyder....

No other 348 would do it for me.

TR's have more road "presence"

 

If there had been a factory targa/spyder option for the Testarossa, I'd have probably gone that route. Driving is one of the only places that I see the Sun, however, so being able to remove the top was important to me.

The *one* consistent complaint about the Testarossa is that you can't remove its top.

But for your *first* Ferrari, you'd probably be wise to go for the 348 TS as a way to dip your toe into the tifosi water. After you drive and own your *first* Ferrari, you'll have all sorts of ideas about what you really want and like. It's an entirely different perspective.

Then you'll know precisely what to get for your upgrade.

 

Shhhh... That's the real secret for Ferrari's, that the more you drive them, the better they become. You're supposed to keep that under your hat and instead tell people to go buy a garage queen that hasn't seen lubrication in years from antifreeze on the waterpump, or that has had the belts locked in the same bends around the pulleys, or that has no internal oil film on engine parts left, or that has dry rot inside the tires, electrolysis, and rust!

 

Well the thing with that time period, is that these were Enzo's Ferraris... The cars were just abit different from today's, just because of the styling, and reactions given to them. Everyone in the world (figurative), will know a testarossa when they see one, but they wont know a 550 or 575... Everyone will recognize the 355 (maybe not know the name) and know its a Ferrari, not only by sound, but by image. So If you truely want the 'wow', teh Testarossa is the best option. The 348 actually had abit of reliability issues, so im told from a previous owner. The testarossa has a clutch you wont forget, as its rather a challenege, but once you master the car, it shouldn't give you much problems. Maintaining is always going to be expensive for this car, but that comes with the experience you get, owning it. If you are leaning towards a 348, I would check out an early 355, first... But as far as this comparism/selection, I'd go for the testarossa, which will appreciate better than the 348.

But as some of the others said..if you are jumping in the Ferrari ownership with this being your first, then I would actually go for a 355 Berlinetta than a 348, unless you get a 348 spider. The 355 will be easier to sell, and is better value.

 

1.)Anyone that would KNOW a Testarossa was a Ferrari would KNOW that a 348 is a Ferrari too.

2.) The 348 is as unmistakeably Ferrari as the 355.

3.) All Ferrari's are expensive to maintain and to suggest that a 348 would be MORE expensive to maintain then a 12 cylinder Testarossa is ridiculous.

4.) Early 355's have problems with manifolds CRACKING which is much more costly then the sum of average 348 problems put together.

5.) As for appreciation, a Testarossa is going to cost at least 20-30K more then a similar 348...So how much more appreciation is needed to offset the initial increase in cost?

These cars are two TOTALLY different cars in different price brackets... To me, the Testarossa looks a lot more dated then a 348. The TR is a 12 though, and many swear by the Ferrari 12 cylinder. My advice to you....drive both cars and make the desicion based on how you feel about your experiences and based on your pocketbook. All the other intangibles such as maintainence costs and depreciation are minimal. Are you buying the car for investment reasons or to drive a Ferrari. If its for investment purposes then I wouldn't buy either. Picking a Ferrari is about how you feel when you drive it and how that Ferrari makes you feel when you look at it. My set of pennies.

 

Oh I didn't suggest that the Testarossa was any cheaper, ofcourse not.. Just that, if he wants the 'wow' as he stated..a later Testarossa may be a better experience than the 348... Otherwise, a '94 348 spider is one of the best options in this case, unless an early 355 is looked at.. Early as in '96-'97..possibly a GTS model, which are really fun.


But mobleguy is right: drive both, see what makes you feel good; distinguish that first, then think about your wallet... As far as investment, any car less than 100 grand, less than 15 yrs old probably wont be much of an investment, *but possibly* but that surely does depend. These two are not cars for investment.

 

I am at the same crossroads as you. 348 v Testarossa I currently own a 308gt4 and I am looking to change to one of these 2 in the next 12 months before the other half takes all my money in a futher extension of the house. 348 is argueable more practical in the UK due to size. But tr has alot more wow factor on the road, performance won't be a great difference day to day tr more torque though. Tr should be easier to maintain due to lesser electronics ei not as advances ecu's , but remember they have more pot's to worry about. Insurance is about the same £350 through Aon (I am 36) 2nd car. I would probally go for a Tr as I think that they will be the better car as it will touch the senses better offer a better chance of a return on investment and if like me grew up with Miami Vice and a poster on my wall of the Testarossa. Drive both and make your own mind up but good luck.

 

When entering the Ferrari ownership market I looked at 348 versus several I had always seen the TR as the ultimate Ferrari looking car it was the car I lusted after I bought a 1990 TR imaculate and I love to drive it its my baby I dont doubt I would have felt the samr about a 348 but the TR does it for me its a classic Ferrari.

 

I think I would go for a TR. Although I hear parts are extremely expensive, instead of just expensive.

 

My feeling is that for most people, the wow factor is going to be equivalant between the two. You have people on both sides of the fence that love both cars and the average person on the street wouldn't know the difference. I can't even count how many times people ask me if my car is a TR. I think the WOW factor goes up when you get into some of the newer cars like the 550's, 360's, or F430s...of course the super cars like the F40 or F50 or the Enzo, or some of the vintage stuff. I think your average person has the same WOW whether its a TR, Boxer, 355 or 348, 328, 308, 288GTO or Mondial...i think the 400i carries the least WOW out of any Ferrari. Would I own one, your damn right I would!

 

The 348 is a little Testarossa. The styling of the 348 came from the Testarossa. Indeed, the two are very similar: they're exotically timeless and 80s.

The 348 is a more practical car. It's small, agile, and probably not too much to handle as far as driving is concerned.

But the Testarossa is the "Papa" Ferrari. It's king. As such, it has gobs of horsepower and torque; and as such, it has gobs of size. The Testarossa is large and quite a challenge to drive from what I've heard. No, I haven't driven it, but I know it's big. I'm sure most Testarossa drivers love it and will say that it's not at all difficult to drive -- and that may be true. But it is big.

But then again, it's the last rear-engine 12-cylinder Ferrari ever made. The Testarossa is probably as "Ferrari" as you can get. The two words are practically synonymous: Testarossa and Ferrari.

The maintenance costs of the two are practically identical. Don't let anyone tell you that the Testarossa is much worse or the other way around. Basically the same.

I would say, though, that a 512TR ('92-94) might be a much more user-friendly Testarossa than the original Testarossa car ('85-'91).

These comments are coming from someone who looks forward to a 512TR as his next Ferrari! (Note: the 348 will be kept forever. )

 

I beg to differ... When I drive to monte carlo for example, more recognize the Testarossa, than even the 360. (simply because everyone and their cousin's friend, have a 360.) But tourist there, even female ones, take note of the exotics which pull through, and the Testarossa still holds it's flamboyence more than any car of its time, apart from the F40... You mentioned the 288gto, and you could be right, as it simply looks like a 308 QV with a new tail. But the testarossa was one of a kind, and the 348 having similar traits, doesn't have the same flamboyent lines. Its purely an 80s car, and the countach will certain stil get more of a 'wow' than the diablo ... same issue with testarossa and 550 ..

 

Actually if you can find one...get a SPECIALE.... lovely 348...
Those will do well as far as investment and they're a pleasure to drive...Although im not sure how they differ from the normal 348 apart from no rear grille...

 

Different crowds are awed by different things. If your goal is to "wow" a flock of college girls, then a Ferrari convertible is going to go a long way towards an initial impression. If you are trying to impress dragstrip gearheads or make the old golfers gulp twice when driving up to the country club in their boring Mercedes, then the Testarossa is one way to go.

If the car is for *yourself*, rather than for making impressions on others, then you need to first know yourself. Do you enjoy driving with the top down, for instance, or do you prefer an insulated cockpit?

I know people who would *never* drive with the top down. Well, no reason to get a TS or Spider if you wouldn't *actually* use it.

Likewise, when dealing with 348's and Testarossa's, you'd better be the type of driver who enjoys total racer-like road-feedback and control, because these cars (well, my 348 certainly doesn't) don't have power steering.

They are a hoot, though. Every Mercedes, Porsche, Cadillac, and Maserati owner feels second class the moment any charismatic Ferrari (of any age) drives up. I should know. I've watched their jaws drop.

 

Only among a select few. F40's, 50's, and Enzo's will impress the tiny population elite-enough to know such cars, but even then only to the degree that you drive them (well) and obtained them through your own efforts.

The 550's, 360's, and 430's are only going to have an additional Wow factor among those of us who've been driving the older models. The Public at large is going to respond similiarly to a 348, Testarossa, 360, etc.

 

Like you, I began my search for my first Ferrari with the 348 and Testarossa. Having driven both, may I suggest what was suggested to me when I was trying to make my decision on my first Ferrari, buy a nice 308 or 328. Getting your feet wet in one of these makes all the sense in the world. Cost of the car and maintenance (by Ferrari standards) are reasonable. The series are easy to drive, beautifully styled, and extremely enjoyable. Move up from there. The difference in handling, ride, etc between the 3-x-8 (incl the 348) and the TR I felt was dramatic. Different animals entirely. The 8-cyl's were tight, responsive drivers, the 12-cyl, a roaring beast suitable for the long hauls. All beautiful to look at.

In the end I took the advice of more sage owners and got a beautiful 328 and have loved every minute I've owned it. The problem is now that I want a 12-cyl model, I'm going to have to save for a little while longer as there's no way I'm trading in the 328! Remember the only one you should be looking to impress in all this is yourself. Good luck in your search!

 

I have owned both a TR and a 348, as well as an F40, 308QV and a Mondialt cab...all at the same time. The TR and 348 are very different. I don't get buying a car to impress the neighbors or a group of people I don't know. I guess this just shows the poseur factor of alot of Ferrari owners now, but whatever. Both attract a fair amount of attention. I think that the 348's design is ageing better.

The 348 is quick, nimble and a great handling sports car. The TR is big, heavy and very old tech. I have driven both at the track and can tell you in order to get some decent lap times out of a TR, you had better be good!! It is a handfull. However, on a long trip as a GT, the TR is great, has cobs of torque coming out of the corners. The TR seats are very comfortable on a long trip, whereas the 348 will leave my right leg numb after 2.5 hours behind the wheel.

Servicing either, other than doing it yourself (I've done my own majors on both) is going to be about the same...the TR will be a bit more. Both were pretty bullit proof and very relaible......probably because I drove them! If you do your own work, they are both possible to tackle the job yourself.

Now the big question....................which one is still around? The 348 is still with me after 15 years. I sold the TR after having it for 10. The 348 is the better sports car...it is quite quick....you can set the car up to really handle...and with not much work you can surprise alot of the newer stuff.

Ciao............Dino
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

in january i purchased my first ferrari, a 94 348 speciale, i am biased but i feel i made the best decision in purchasing this model. never regreted it. when i drove it home , i stopped by the gas station, the attendant said, wow, new ferrari huh?! i said yup...he said how much, i said -
"lets say i got a good deal", he said ,"what- about 100, 150 ? "i smiled and drove off...

my point is- the car still looks modern , stylish , nimble,and unmistakibly ferrari with the door strakes.
try to get a speciale, it is 1 notch up on the collectability/resale factor...

- but im not knocking the other either . both bold statements !

 

12 cylinder or 8 cylinder? That tis the question.

 

So funny! Same thing happened to me about a week after I got mine. It was at Arby's though. Guy said, what year is that, a 2004? I was like "nah, a little older then that"...Guy says "how much that cost you, like 200 grand?" Once again I responded..."Nah, like 25,000 british pounds"...I think the rest of the night the guy was trying to find out how much a british pound was worth.

 

Ah, screw it. Buy both.

 

Now obviously I am biased but this picture is why I like the Testarossa better.
If you notice the side strakes on the 348 do not extend past the door as the Testarossa's do. I think that leaves a "shortened" look.


I will say though that the 348s interior is pretty badass. And both make glorious mechanical noises.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I too would say drive them and find out. I just bought a '94 348 S.S. and it is everything I ever wanted in a sports car. Quick, fast, easy, and unmistakably FERARRI! I previously had a '95 993 Carrera Cab., and I sold it because it just didn't do what I wanted a sports car to do. Too soft in the accelaration, too much "wagging the dog" in tight turns, and the convertible top was driving me crazy with its rubber cables and moisture leakage in the winter. The 348, covered all bases. And, with the targa top, I can go convertible or hard top. I'd say if you want all traffic to move out of your way, go Testarrosa. If you want the traffic to wonder what just flew by them as you're weaving in an out, go 348! Good luck!