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