That's a rare car. You must have the only '72 2.2 911S in the world. :)

For $20k, you can put a 2,2S in your 72T too. I'm calling it a skinny ST.

Porsche 911 2.2S 1970-71 Engine Type 911-02 for sale at Historika

I didn't much care for the GT4's styling until I saw on person, I dig it. :cool:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1387859587.jpg

These are a personal favourite. Parts availability keeps me shy of even looking at BB's for sale.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1387859612.jpg

IMO, if you hate Ferrari's, sell it to some one else and be done with it.

I like the GT4's styling. but then again, I love the wedge cars of the 70's, too

LMAO...that's funny

It looks like a slightly bigger Stratos. How can you not like it?

Very true and agreed!

Must have been barely attached. ;)

Are the parts for 512 BBi's that Tervuren posted really unavailable/astronomical?

I have to say I agree with him...If I came across one & the price was reasonable, I'd have a hard time saying no. What a beautiful car.

Ferrari is looking at that now...

Will have an Alfa SUV, maybe a Maserati Kubang. Will be on a modified Grand Cherokee platform.

Ferrari SUV is also a fair possibility for an SUV.

Boxers have gone up in price, so I don't know if you'd ever find one that was reasonable. Parts are not easy to find for some things, or cheap. Tires are an issue, as they used a couple different wheel types and neither has a good selection of tires available.

Here's the problem with a Boxer... As great as it looks, it drives so-so. Like the Daytona, the looks are better than the driving experience. I pondered this a long time ago and decided to buy a TR instead. The TR appears larger but it is in fact lighter, makes more power, handles better, is more comfortable, has decent A/C, is faster point-to-point, can actually carry luggage and be used on weekend trips and has better visibility. All the little details that make a car enjoyable to drive are much better on the TR.

Yet, the boxer is better looking...

JR

Didn't the 308's and the Boxers ride on 14.5" diameter wheels? Or some metric measurement? I remember reading that most people had switched wheels to later Ferrari 15" wheels, but some still had the old wheels (and tires!)...

I don't care how 'purist' some people are... no one should be driving anywhere, any amount of mileage on tires more than 10 years old.

A Boxer I saw last summer.

http://i909.photobucket.com/albums/a...psf07a13b3.jpg

They had such odd driveline layout. Flat engine, on top of a gear cassette inside the oil sump, driving a differential on the back of the motor. Basically, the most complex, heavy, high CG way to layout the rear of that car. I felt it was always because they started with this big, long flat engine layout and, just to fit it back there, made a ton of compromises to make it work, layout-wise.

People hear flat engine and thing low-CG, but that was not the case here.

Some of the boxers, and other Ferraris of that era, used TRX tires, which required an odd-sized metric rim. Some were a little over 15" in diameter, others were a little over 16".

The boxer and TR motors did sit on top of the gearboxes but most of the big masses were fairly low. You do feel the mass if you start tossing one around but the same can be said of the early V8 cars. The TR was the most developed and the best handling of the bunch. You just had to drive it smoothly and the weight wasn't a problem. It had much better suspension than the earlier cars.

JR

Look at the profile of the tires on that yellow car....70's??? Wow.

If this is indeed a 365 GT4/BB, that would make it a pretty rare and valuable early Boxer.

That is an early example. The tail lights and exhausts give it away.

JR

Another give away on the early boxers is the body line gap in front of the rear wheel. Kind of hard to see in this picture, but I'd guess they have a shorter wheel base.

http://i909.photobucket.com/albums/a...pscde46ca6.jpg

car is on the lift backwards ...just sayin

Actually, the main bodywork difference in that area is the wider rear fenders used to accommodate the 9" wheels used on the rear of the 512 models. There are a zillion little differences in the details of the cars over the production run. Ferraris of that era were nowhere near as standardized as something like a Porsche and now you can find all sorts of Internet threads that try to sort out all of the differences. There's a long-running thread on Ferrarichat.Com that makes for an entire wasted day if you are so inlined..

JR

I wonder if they're still trying to put a clutch in that thing, 4 days later. :)

Hahaha! Maybe the service manual is in Italian.

Michelin TRX tires:

Not just Ferraris.

My SAAB Turbo had them. Friends BMW's and Mercedes also.

And... friends had a Ford Tempo Sport and Ford Thunderbird Turbo that also had them.

They are actually still available, but have to be special ordered.

I had a 1983 BMW 533i with metric wheels, 390 mm IIRCC. Big pain in the balls getting tires. There was a certain Mustang from the same era that had the same size wheels.

TRX rims and tires were one of those great ideas that nobody asked for and nobody thanked anyone for.

lol

Can't possibly be harder to do than a clutch on a 944 turbo. Nothing is.

And I was going to tell you all about the nightmares I had last night until I read through this THREAD!!!!!

So much hate for Ferrari's ...is it over perceived value, real engineering issues, or just jealousy?

Don't stand behind the 'Porsche Excellence" myth. Porsche engine issues are legendary. Yet, everyone seems to conveniently forget them. The only difference that I can see is that parts with a "horse" on them are even more expensive than those from Porsche. However, even much of that can be overcome since many parts are Bosch, Fiat, etc. on the 308, Mondial, Testarossa, etc.

Most of the people on this forum are DIY types...some by choice but many by necessity. Check out the owners of 308's, Mondial's, and such and you will find many of them are current or former Porsche owners and do a lot of DIY on their cars as well.

I've owned several 911's and a few 914's. They have been great cars; however, I wanted to see what else was out there. I bought a Mondial 3.2 (same engine as a 328) and have been very pleased. The build quality is good, the engines are known for reliability, and the sounds are beautiful. I've met several Ferrari owners and in my limited exposure are actually less snobby than most 911 owners I've met.

Of course, owners of older Ferrari's are probably different from the buyers on new Ferrari's...just like a 911SC owner is different from a 991 owner.

All Ferrari's are cool...just like all Porsche's cool. Some are just a little more interesting than others.





http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1388021469.jpg

That's a great looking car, Bill. Merry x-mas. :)

one of my must have dream cars. someday.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1388022958.jpg

Mondials aren't the prettiest in pictures...they look better in person. They do grow on you after a while!:)


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1388023129.jpg

Never understood the negative sentiment towards the Mondial. They are not an ugly car but I guess just not as visually dramatic as the other models. Yours looks like a nice example.

Just like Obamacare.

i was waiting for you to chime in. i love the blue on your mondial

Wrong forum.

+1, that is a beautiful blue.

Hate's probably too strong a word but it's not my thread and I didn't title it.

Jealousy? Nahhh. More of a been there, done that, wasn't all that much fun sort of feeling. I understand the good side of a Ferrari. I also understand what it's like to put up with one for 10 or 20 years and it's just not worth the hassle, for me at least. I enjoyed my Ferraris, more or less, but I got tired of their shortcomings and I got tired of the hassle. It's not just that they are expensive to repair and maintain (they are) but I can do without having to do a worldwide Easter egg hunt every time I need a part that Ferrari doesn't feel like supplying. They don't give a **** about the old cars (unless they can bleed you dry for one) and I'm not a fan of that attitude. Remember the certification process they offered for the old cars? What a joke.

Then there's the underdeveloped "kit car" feel to some of the driving characteristics of the cars. You can drive a Porsche as hard as you want and it will never care but you do the same thing to a Ferrari and you won't like the result. They are fine up to about 8/10ths, on a smooth dry road, but push one hard, or drive it on the typical ****ty roads that most people in the US have now and you won't enjoy the experience. There are just some characteristics that they should have engineered out of the cars during the prototype stage. There are also plenty of things that were underengineered and when you have to fix those things on your dime, it makes you mad. Yeah, Porsche has had their moments, too. It's just that fixing a Porsche and fixing a Ferrari cost different amounts and it ain't the Ferrari that's the bargain.

The newer cars are undoubtably better but I'm not a fan of the styling, or the fact that they are now sized to fit NBA players, or the fact that the prices would buy a decent house in the midwest. The first time I saw a 360 in the flesh, next to an older Ferrari, I figured they'd moved in a direction I didn't want them to go. Personal preference, I suppose. I've had a few cars that appreciated in value to the "more than I paid for my house" sorts of numbers and I sold those, too. I don't want to be driving a car that's worth that sort of money, in amongst the idiots I see out on the roads.

I've owned a lot of cars and I have decided I don't need to own two dozen of the things to be happy. I'll keep an Audi around for daily driving, one 911 for the weekends, a couple cars to fill the wife's garage and call it a day.

Here's hoping you still like your Mondial in 20 years. I'll still be enjoying my 911, I can assure you.

JR

They probably gave up and are too embarrassed to check back in here. :p