TR v. 512TR

As been discussed many times the 512tr is better blah blah blah. Its only natural the the evolution car will be faster, better built and the likes. Comparison is like the 308/to 328. 348/to 355, and the 360/to 430. At the end of the day its what you really wish to have. Personally I love my 86TR becauseof the single fly mirror, and the love the 1 bolt. As for whats better, mine has had all the upgrades done throughout the yrs so it has no issues(recalls that is).Would I upgrade to the 512...No....why...fo rthe extra money its not much different...alittle quicker, and alittle better handling, not worth the upgrade in money. Would rather buy a second fcar for the difference.

my .2cents.

 

Mine is an '89 and I would not pay the extra $$ for a 512 either. It is just not worth the difference in price for the modest performance difference.

 

I agree entirely with this post.

I call it bang for the buck and a strong,clean early Tr is a bargain IMHO.

 

The 512TR is my dream car...I currently have an 87 TR and love it to death. But I must agree with the others in that the performance increase of the 512TR over the TR is hard to experience except on a track or risky high-spirited road driving. My TR has a Borla exhaust that is probably 50 pounds lighter and much-much less restricted than the factory exhaust. I'd say my car is pushing around 390 to 400hp...the 512TR is at 421hp.....so not a big improvement.....you might feel it in the seat of your pants though. The 512TR brakes, along with the wheels and tires are a huge improvement. I'd say a 512 in the $75k to $90k is worth buying, but anymore than this and I'd stick with my trusty, good old friend, the TR.

 

I have a 512 and looked long and hard at the TRs on the market when I was buying and could not find one that met my relatively easy criteria with respect to price and condition. I would stronly recommend that if you do buy, choose the car that has the freshest belt/15K/30K service with the highest level of recourse you can afford. On the other hand, if you are able to do your own service and accessory repair/replace etc, then buy the best condition you can afford and do the heavy lifting yourself. Both are fantastic in-your-face cars that have none of the nanny ease that have to be built into the later cars to be competetive with MBs and BMs etc. You know you are driving a sports car not just because your eyes are 24 inches from the pavement.

 

I have a 90 TR and being in the business I have extensive experience driving and working on both, I am factory trained on them. I prefer the looks of the original TR but there is no question as to which is better.

The difference on paper does not give you the whole story. The 512 TR has MUCH better throttle response, better across the board torque and in real world USA vs USA models substantially more HP. They got rid of the tinker toy double disc clutch and put in a real one (same part as on a 550 so no question it will take abuse). The trans is better on the 512, the brakes are a bunch better, the interior quality and build quality are so much better there is no comparison.

If the difference in cost is not a deal breaker (it was for me) go for the 512, it is worth every penny.


P.S. Don't even get me started on the improvements in the suspension and handling.

 

Great thread

Isn't it true also that the 1994 512TR has various improvements over the 1992-1993 512TR?

I'm not talking just anti-lock brakes. Ferrari North America's web site says that "the steering column and rack were revised to provide quicker steering." Is this at all noticeable?

Are there any other improvements of the 1994 car over the 1992-1993 cars?

 

I think the 95 512 is hiddeous, but the previous ones are very nice. TR's single mirror is hot.

 

If you want to know the technical differences between the TR and the 512TR I posted a list of my collected data at http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46314&highlight=512tr

 

I have an 87 TR and recently sat inside a 512 to make a note of the differences. The interior is much more modern, the dials better placed, the seats better moulded. As I didn't drive the car I cannot make comparisons there.

I use my car for long distance driving, for instance have just finished another 700 mile run in a day through the French autoroute system. For this the original TR seats are perfectly fine. The airconditioning is not really up to scratch, though, especially as the louvres don't allow much air to blow to the face. I imagine the 512 is a big improvement.

I changed my clutch to a 512 single disc type when the old clutch began to slip, costly but apparently worth if for longevity.

Cost was a factor in my choice of cars, but for me the decider is looks. I find TR to be a better designed car than the 512 in the important area of the engine deck. I mean, that raised lid above the engine, in contrasting colours, is the 'sine qua non' of the Testarossa, the quintessential period piece. The 512 and M versions have what looks like a collapsed souffle of an engine lid, linked to the flying buttresses as though by afterthought. The only area of slight improvement is the rear roof overhang, where a tiny dimple in the line has been ironed out.

The 512 front bumper and engine grill are more modern and point to future Ferrari developments. But the TR, with its wide, more angular front, echoes the rear slats in its treatment and looks like it means business.

 

I wasnt a big 512M fan but its a lot nicer as a convertible even the taillights which I didnt like on the coupe work much better on a barchetta
I dont really like 512M wheels but the stock ones on my Slutmobile are painted so you cant see the narly details
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I own a 512TR which I am very happy with it.
Is it worth paying extra for it over Testarossa?
IMO, I guess it worths the every cent. More reliable, better performance, better brake and the look is much nicer and meaner!

 

I can't say it any better...and I have owned/driven both. I am in the business as well, and I have one of each forsale, but there is no question in the improvments.

The facts printed on paper don't do justice to the real world differences. I wish you were in NC....we would drive both and you could tell for yourself.

The only thing is...if the 512TR isn't really in the budget...don't consider it. 12 cylinder cars are pricey to keep and so don't spend all your funds on a 512 if it is going to stretch you ( it would me ). Buy a good TR and have some cash for the service and odd things that pop up ( and things will pop up regardless of what some dealers will tell you ).

These cars ill run forever as long as you take care of them. Some folks drive them daily, and they can take it, but be ready to pay the price for the services if you daily it.

Steve

 

You may think I'm biased as I drive a 512TR (it's my dads'), but I remember when my father was originally considering between a Testarossa and a 512TR. When we visited the Ferrari Garage that had them both for sale, the 512TR was parked next to the Testarossa. After sitting in each car and viewing their exteriors, all four of us agreed that visually the 512TR looked modernised and the Testa looked dated. Not only that but the cabin in the Testarossa was a bit cramped compared to the roomier interior of the 512 (definitely more headroom as well as overall space). Also we found the cabin of Testa looked a bit crude compared to the 512. Please remember these are only my views and opinions. However I still think the testarossa is a beautiful car and is still more interesting to look at than say a 360 Modena.

 

I have owned both a 90tr and a 94 512 which I still own. If they didn't look so similar you would not be comparing the cars at all. The 512 is a totally different car than a tr in my opinion. It is roomier, fsater more modern feeling and will go like crazy wilh hardly any encouragement. It feels nimble and the tr feels heavy. I love the tr and it is a good buy for a beautiful car. If cash is not an issue a 512 is the car.

 

the later model is always better as they have all the early faults sorted