Why are TR prices so low?

Your right, im only holding them for the meantime for my kids at a later date

I have been a TR owner for 10 yrs, and if i wanted to replace everything on the car i would simply buy another car that fit the bill......but since you mentioned a fool and money is soon parted, i guess that cant be said for replacing everything on a TR to enjoy later

Wish you well, BTW, my kids say hello !!

PS....if you want a car to drive, buy what you love, if you worry about depreciation, maybe you should not buy a car.....TRs are worth the money, but you need the $$$ to get them going via service...no different than having a mistress on the side....they are both expensive ......kerrywittig has got it right.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

+1 for me. When I was looking in 02, the TR and 328 weren't far apart in price. That major, and the potential for a 10-20K+ tranny rebuild pushed me away.

Besides, the TR cockpit is cramped compared to the 328, at least for the way I'm built.

(Now, if I'd only picked up that 60K Platinum winning Boxer back then, or the 40K Dino, or the ....)

 

This is what I'm trying to say!!! My last major with all the little things cost more like $15,000 (which is commonplace unless you fix the car yourself), and one month later, the transmission broke and the car is still in the garage waiting for a F512M differential and $20,000+ of transmission repairs.

Hey, while we're at it, anyone have a line on a F512M differential???

 

And for the record, the Testarossa is one of my favorite cars in the world. It has its faults, but it is still awesome, and I hope to enjoy my car well into old age

 

15.000 $ for a major service....what did they do for this massive amount of money...?????

 

This thread sure does hit both sides of the coin, the passionate side as well as the logical side. I think that over time, the passionate side will win out over the logical side. That is why we buy Ferraris, passion - certainly NOT logic. The TRs styling is subjective, but I think it looks very good even today. Even the side strakes look great. The only parts of the car that look a bit dated is the rear grill over the tail lights, and the front spoiler. Other than this the car holds up very well. The TR looks absolutely incredible in a parking with other "every day type" cars around it. Engineering-wise, the car is well designed. Remember...many of the Boxer's shortcomings were fixed with the TR.

If it was logic and practicality that determined what we buy, then we'd all be driving boring, boxy minivans. FACT - the TR has a decent sized trunk so you can haul stuff if you need to.

If it was price and values that determined what we buy, then we'd all be driving reasonably priced cars like a Camry. FACT - the TR is a very good value, a lot of car for the money and values have bottomed out - so they can only go up from here.

If it was costs and maintenance that determine what we buy, then we'd all by driving a reliable car like a Honda Civic. FACT - the TR is very reliable when maintained, and maintenance is cheap if you can do the work yourself.

For me, when buying an exotic car, it's mostly emotion and passion that decides. Yes...logical issues do have some bearing on the decision, but the majority of the decision is emotional. If you buy using logic then your only thinking of temporary ownership until something better comes along, and your heart isn't really factor in your decision.

The TR has huge road presence and always makes a big impact. The styling is a beatiful combination of straight lines and curves, very unique. New cars today are either very curvy or very edgy and linear - the TR combines both of these attributes in a beautiful package, and that is why I feel the TR still holds up with todays cars.

Personally I think that TR values are already on the upswing. As in any car market, questionable cars will be cheap - and good cars will cost more. The TR's maintenance is on par with any mid-engined 12-cylinder exotic, it is NOT unreasonable or outrageous. I feel that the "myth" of over-the-top repair costs were created by neglected cars that when sold, the new owner took a big hit to make the car right, and then whined about it to anyone who would listen. If you buy a properly maintained TR there won't be any surprises. The costs for a do-it-yourselfer full service job are less than $2k every 5 years or so.

The Testarossa is a great car and does not deserve the bad rap. I totally agree with KerryWittig's veiwpoints - he gets it. Once the negative perceptions about the TR fade and all of the positive things emerge, I think values will go up, and soon.

 

Laughed all the way to the bank and stopped off at the gentlemens club on the way back.

That is about double the value.

 

Wasn't it about 5-10 years ago that boxers were unpopular because they were just overpriced 308's with 6000$ majors? I seem to recall movies making fun of the build quality, something about "eye-talian junk."

Dino's weren't even real ferrari's.

And most of the 50's and 60's stuff was crap, with folks trying to throw in chevy motors...



At the time, this was the general consensus. Gee, guess what. The general consensus was wrong. On each and every one of these cars. Hows them apples?

What about the countach? Uncomfortable, aircon doesn't work, no visibility, no reliability, unstressed aluminum skin, kit car quality, and as outdated as the atari. Why the hell do people want these? Hell, most owners don't even drive them.

All of the opinions on here are great, and fun to read. But who 5 years ago could have predicted the rise of the dino/boxer? 99% of you shouldn't be raising your hands. The testarossa's time will come. Its just too new to be a collectible yet...

 

thats what i hit in Feb 2008.......full out service, but all hoses were done, plugs, rotors, ball joints, refinished all wheels, new tires, filters, new thermostats, rebuilt water pump, all new belts, new shinny bolts, extensions for the wires, flywheel bolt, the list is 4 pages of parts. My next service in 9 yrs should not be more than just the 2 belts and so odds and ends bringing the price down. $7k at a shop gets you a few belts, as the aging increases on these cars (355,360,boxers) more work need to be done. You cant be driving a 20 -30 yr old car and drive down the street on on orignal stuff....you just wont make it to 6,000rpms.
it is what it is.

Here is the before and after pics..............TRs are not for everyone, niether are....other ferraris
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

well said jeff....by the way jeff's car is the best TR i've ever seen.....your point about best value is very true...MO

 

Since your public profile says very little about who you are I could only make assumptions based on your comments. I'm assuming all your comments are addressed to me, so here goes. You like the car as is and that's great. If you have read my comments completely you would note that I enjoy re-engineering cars which have either conditions I don't like or I feel can be greatly improved on. By the way all cars do. As far as replacing everything on the car, once again I don't remember ever saying that, but when I drive any car at its limit I like to know what condition its in. I never said I cared about depreciation, I said I could care less about depreciation. I don't hold to the religous fervor that some do on authenticity. I'm assuming your addressing someone else about service since I do all my own service.

I've lived and worked my side of this argument on the logical side. Let me clarify that logical doesn't necessary mean non-emotional, for me at least. I bought the car (as I have many others) becaused I liked it. I have loved sports cars since I was a little kid (50 years ago) and I might add in an area of the country which was not condusive to this. I have especially loved Ferraris! But, alas I became an engineer (once again becaused I loved everything mechanical). I've always worked on my cars, first becaused I needed to finacially, and then later because I love knowing the car design. I am not blinded by the light of the name on the car. I know a great deal about the history of Enzo and the cars that bear his name. It just seems silly to me, and it ocne again this is my view point, just to accept things as they are, when I have the capability to make them better. My wife doesn't understand why someone would buy a car and immediately start working on it, but she does know it brings me great pleasure.

Was this a great design? Sure for its time. It still holds up well in many areas, but there are things that I feel I can make more robust, and efficient. Does this mean I feel I have better engineering credentials than those who originally designed the car. No, but I believe they would be eager to note that was then and they would correct certain conditions today. Time marches on and when I review designs I made 25 years ago I see areas for improvement. This is the nature of engineering.

The cosmetics of the TR is an 'each his own' view, but I can say I would never have bought the car if it didn't suit many of my desires. I will say that their seems to be a religous fervor about this that I could care less about. Many have that 60's comment "Love it or leave it".

Hopes this clarifies my position. If not stop and have a drink. By the way nice kids. I bought mine a 2005 Chevy Impala. Funny, he never wanted to know anything about cars.

John

 

I guess were coming at this from 2 different sides. If it turns your crank to play with tme and modify them to something better, great for you. I sounded more to me, that you were referring to the short comings of the car and hence hads to improve to make it better....i guess my perspective is, buy what you love and leave it alone...i personally do not have the patience to buy a car and then change things, its just easier for me to buy what i like to enjoy.....but i guess that what makes the world go round....enjoy the ride and thanks for the explanation !! and show so pics of your car, would like to see what you have done and what advantage you see....its always worth a discussion.

Back on topic, TRs are the best bang for the buck....though i have to agree with others, a 10K-15K service bill if you buy incorreclty could take all the fun out of ownership. This is why its so important to buy the best example upfront, especially if your not a DIY like myself

 

Kind of a non sequitur... how does the Testarossa being better engineered than the Boxer make an early TR better than a late TR? Maybe I missed something.

I don't know what the market value of the single-mirror will be in 10 years, but I'm sceptical that there will be a stampede of buyers seeking that one out rather than buying the 512TR. Among the 328s, the '89 cars tend to sell for a bit more despite ugly wheels. It seems to reflect a bias for 'the later, the better'. In my case, I wouldn't consider a post-'88 328 because aesthetically it seems inferior to me (inside and out). But, I'm not the market and actually was pretty happy to get the early style for less money.

Lol. I suppose we're all idiots to some degree, opening our checkbooks so often. But if you want to know why '80s Ferrari prices aren't higher, just check over your service invoices.

OTOH, I was in Annapolis a few years back for a convention, walking back from lunch with 4-5 friends on a grey day, near the Naval Academy. Traffic is flowing at a nice clip around some kind of traffic circle and a red Testarossa appears among all the usual boring sedans. I admit the TR isn't my favorite Ferrari, and I already had my 328 tucked away in the garage back in San Diego, and I know the kinds of stupid bills these cars can generate... but it really did have a presence like nothing else on the road that day. There are worse things to blow $10K on than keeping a TR on the road.

 

Pretty much my thoughts.
However if you have the ability to do your own Majors, this is probably the Bargain of all Ferraris right now.
The TR is actually the superior car to a Boxer but the Boxer is just "it" for me.

 

I think it is a matter of the style over the engineering. For another example (I already gave T-bird, didn't I) - Corvette.
Who amoung us thinks that the 1968 C3 Shark Corvette was a better or more valuable car than the 1966 Sting Ray? Yet, it was basically the same car underneath the skin with minor mechanical improvements.

Does anybody think that those reproduction later-year Avanti cars were really better looking or more desireable than an original 1963 with the supercharger? I will not argue that the Corvette V8 and running gear made for a better engineered car, but it is somehow not the original real thing.

Back on the Testarossa subject - I really believe that the single mirror is the height of style in this design. Yes, I know that the 512TR and the M cars have engineering improvements, but I hardly think that anyone with working eyesight could say that they are better looking. I am not saying this because I happen to have one; I was absolutely sure that I wanted at least a five-bolt 87 or even a 512TR until I found #447. Now that I have been to a few shows where all the models are lined up together, I have come to appreciate what I have.

Of course, style without the engineering will not get you down the road. But, let's face it - even an early TR is a pretty well engineered car, despite those who would rip out the strakes and turbocharge it to the point of gearbox destruction.

 

Turn it into Turbine Power
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I did see the Boxer coming. But just watch the carbed versions now. Like the song sez.. "Bbbbbaby you just aint seen nothing yet".

The Dino and especially the 288 went up more than I had thought but it was pretty obvious.
If you can swing it the 512M is where its at.

 

I'm not too keen on the M's looks, but they're rare cars. The high-tech headlights in the TR body just always seemed jarring, and the wheels ... . I will need to get my eyes checked - I admit I like the 512TR wheels and interior a bit more than the early cars. But it's not an earthshaking difference, IMO.

The Corvette tangent is interesting. The market clearly loves the '66, and has less love for the 'Shark'. But that's probably because the earlier car is usually seen as classic, while the later one is sort of disco. (Not fair, because the car didn't turn ugly until the safety bumper era, but that's how it goes.) In the Ferrari market, the Boxer/308/328 style seems to get more love than the TR series, even if those three cars have design roots in the '60s.

Again, we're all going to differ a bit on which design we like most. I see your perspective on the single mirror design. From a broader market perspective, prices don't support 'singling' out the single mirror cars as a segment that will see greater price appreciation. (I'm in the same boat with my perspective on concave-wheel 328s; I think the convex-wheeled cars look awful in comparison, but the market doesn't support me, and I don't expect the beautiful 328s ('86-'88') are ever going to surpass the awkward later ones.) If we see a surge in '85-'86 TR prices, I'll be proved wrong. But those are the cheap ones right now.

Life, however, goes on.

 

Indeed on the M - while I would love to have the 445 h.p., I just did not take to this redesign when it came out, and I still have not warmed up to it. (Sorry, Don - I do like some of the interior features).

Probably the deal on 85/86 is that they may do very well percentage wise, because these are the cheap ones now; but as time goes on the best they will probably do is to kind of equalize to the later TR cars, with the M always being the most expensive.

BTW, with the wrecks, parts cars, and "projects" it may not be long before a genuine original flying mirror car is about as rare as an M. The 512TR and M cars are probably pretty well immune from parting out or hotrodding just out of a value perspective.

BTW2 - nobody has mentioned it, but 2 other cars that I think may be on the road for a value inflation are the 208/308 GT4, and the quad valve Mondials (both the spiders and the coupes)

James

 

So here it is. I would like anyone to comment on what is different in the picture showing the Brembo brake install. The other 2 have to do with the axle removal, new cv joints and boots. I found that there isn't a seal on the output flange of the transaxle where the spline is. There one on the outside diameter, but not where the bolt attaches to differential. This is a problem that was appears to have been addressed in the 512tr. The cv joints on a TR doesn't have grease cups between the cv joint and the output flange. You can and this did leak trans oil through the splines into the cv joint breaking down the grease (and distributing it on the floor). Someone attempted a fix prior to me, by applying a bunch of sealant. Unfortunately this doesn't address the real issue and will eventually leak again. I modified the large thick washer which is used with the bolt and made 2 o-ring glands so that it would have a positive seal. These are the kind of problems I like to resolve once and for all.
John
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah...............

And also a suggestion to all posters here on FChat..................The use of the word "robust" is way over the top...........Contributors to a variety of threads throughout the Fchat community are using "robust" entirely too much............Hell it's getting as trendy and tiring as Paris exclaiming, "That's Hot!" There, I have once again injected some nonsense and insight into the TR debate. "Robust" should very honestly only be used to describe portly middle aged men with a beltline somewhere around their chest or some slammin' Ravioli..........

Kerry

 

We could always limit the conversation to dees, daaas, and datsss. Huh. I'm not sure of the spelling. Ok, ok, ok, but really what else does Paris say?

John

 

Not really a non sequitur. I suspect the point was although the early Testarossa is better engineered than the Boxer, the Boxer is demanding higher prices. Thus it would not be inconceivable that eventually the early TR would surpass the later TR in value, despite the superior engineering of the later.

 

Its not a matter of better, its a matter of what was better all round as a package.

The 308 glass is more than the regular 308, even the QV.....and when the 308 came out it was hammered at being a fibreglass car, prices plumetted.

THe boxer, its the carb one that commands more money. I think there are a few issues at play. The sigle mirror one was the lowest production one of the TR line up. Alot of them have been parted, or mirroe and wheels changed to 5 bolts so the actual number to find a nicer one gets hard. Plus the later TRs all came with the mouse belt...i personally passed on every mouse belt one i saw....even the f40 mouse belts are cringged upon .....take the 512, and 512M i would bet almost all of these cars are still around, make the single mirror more rare than the 512, couple the fact the the Orignal TR is more raw in form , no ABS, or any other little guides like the 512, or M may make it the one to have in the group....its that stupid mirror everyone talks about Time will tell, i could be wrong, but its fun to sepc