In Defense of Tavarish's Ferrari 360 Post

"Joe F" (joe-f)
08/31/2015 at 14:45 • Filed to: None

Because I am too lazy to post my own stuff, I’ll comment on Tavarish’s stuff (at the bottom of this) which I was inspired to do after reading the comments/replies.

I’m with Tav on this. The big picture message is: take advantage of depreciation if you have both the desire AND the means.

I see a Mars/Venus thing going on a lot of times when I read articles on used exotics. I am sure Venus is a lovely place, but be wary of the emotions of people who can’t look at things objectively. Some parts wear quickly/were not designed as well as they could have been. Some work requires more labor than you’d think to replace (clutch in this car for example). Parts have a comparatively high cost. There are some quirks to the driving experience (F1 gear box for example if you go that direction).

This is a machine though. So I say to men and women alike, “Put your Mars hat on people!” Educate yourself and you will learn what the maintenance costs and common issues are so that you can determine if you can afford the car. Pretty simple really. Some parts are shared with other Euro cars and can be had for cheaper if you lift your mouse finger and hit the forums/enthusiast sites. The aftermarket can improve parts longevity or address some quirks; for example: Ferrari has an updated F1 flash which some critics of the F1 box have not applied to their early model year 360s and even better, Formula Dynamics (to which I have no affiliation) makes a great update for the F1 gearbox for longer clutch life and improved shifting experience. It’s still not the current dual clutch experience but if you use your head you can improve the car and manage costs to some extent.

It’s a fairly reliable car for Ferrari. It has 400hp, good handling, good looks, a high redline, and 5 valves per cylinder.

Personally, I went F355 over 360 but I can share that while the torque and hp is low compared to modern cars; it’s adequate for a lot of fun on curvy roads because you can use the whole power band and enjoy that high RPM range.

As far as attention - from my 355 and 456 experience; people who comment (which is not that common) are polite and genuinely interested. Most attention is from males but some from females. If you are approachable, make eye contact, smile, say hello, and don’t look like an insecure dork; females will converse with you. It’s no different from how you carry yourself when you are NOT standing next to your car. Men ask about horsepower, year of manufacture, and cost most often. Women tend to ask about the color and say something about the styling like, “why don’t they just make all cars look like this?”. Most people just say “nice car/I love that car”. So make sure you can live with that kind of stress should you go down this road.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

DISCUSSION (7)

ceanderson920 > Joe F
08/31/2015 at 14:53

I just scrolled through the ebay listings, starting at 48k to 105k you can get a 360. If I had the means I would probably buy one.

Joe F > ceanderson920
08/31/2015 at 15:03

you know what I’ve been really tempted by? Pre ‘09 Aston Martin DB9’s. $50k to $65 gets good ones. Now that I’m 42 I am really appreciating the V12 cruising machine.

ceanderson920 > Joe F
08/31/2015 at 15:12

Well you can either get a DB9 or a loaded Suburban/Silverado, I would choose the DB9

Textured Soy Protein > Joe F
08/31/2015 at 15:30

My standard beef with Tavarish posts is he refuses to include any actual numbers like prices, model years. I had a conversation with him about it in the comments once and he basically said that he’s purposely avoiding these numbers, because he’s an expert. What exactly he’s an expert in, he didn’t say.

So I can’t say I’m surprised to see a “LOOK HOW CHEAP* YOU CAN GET A FERRARI 360!” post when the only descriptions of price are:

A link to an ebay auction which he describes as “five figures less than the price of a bone stock, base model BMW M3.” The base price on an M3 is $63,200. Five figures less than that would be $53,200. This ebay auction is for a ‘99 360 F1 with 53k miles, “18k worth of mods,” a starting bid of $60k, an unknown reserve price, and a buy-it-now price of $70k. Maybe he meant to say M6?

Another ebay link, with no numbers whatsoever, that is for an ‘01 360 Spider 6-speed, that sold for $65k. Maybe there was mileage listed in the original auction or something but on the “sold” page there’s no mileage I can see.

“CHEAP*” still is truthful here, because cheap is an entirely relative term. Everyone has their own interpretation of what cheap means. There’s no way to objectively declare “this is a cheap price for a Ferrari 360.”

Joe F > Textured Soy Protein
08/31/2015 at 15:56

That’s cool dude. Have a cream soda, relax and talk cars with me.

I get that words like “ridiculously” have to be taken with a grain of salt. And I have noticed that sometimes he may point out a specific model that is in fact very cheap while maybe the market is a bit above that.

The main message that I am interested in promoting is that depreciation can make things attainable that people otherwise may not even be aware of. To your point - do your homework and make sure you know the costs. I am not sure if it’s fair to ask a journalist to do that for each post they make - and their job is to get us to click on stuff...but for the handful of cars that I would really be interested in, I can hit the forums and DIY sites and figure it out.

So you’ve got a good point - I responded. Here is the big question:

What depreciated car do you like? I am riding the NSX, 355, and 456 train at the moment.

What say you?

Textured Soy Protein > Joe F
08/31/2015 at 16:42

I’m quite relaxed, thanks. Also my point isn’t even that people need to do their homework. I’m not so concerned with the maintenance and upkeep costs that come along with the old, high-mileage, exotic-ish cars he posts. That pretty much goes without saying. If you buy some cheap, formerly-expensive car, you’re probably going to have to throw more money at it.

On the most basic level, I just get irked by the constant repeating of “you can get ____ fancy car* for less than ____ boring brand new car!”

* = old, high-mileage

For example, I can make my very own GET THIS FANCY CAR FOR LESS THAN THIS OTHER CHEAP CAR post, in 3 easy steps:

Find a car that had a high original price but is now somewhat cheap. Why hello there, 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo automatic with 63k miles for $35k .

Think of some other plebian car that people think is cheap and boring, but can cost more than $35k with options. Oh look, a Chevy Equinox LTZ AWD V6 with a few options is $38k+ .

Compare the price of these two cars without actually including any of the numbers I just included.

End result:

OMG YOU CAN GET THIS AWESOME PORSCHE 911 TURBO FOR THOUSANDS LESS THAN A STUPID BORING CHEVY EQUINOX

PushToStart > Textured Soy Protein
08/31/2015 at 17:25

I’m with you. I like the idea behind Tavarish’s articles, and I’m not doubting that he is knowledgeable, but the articles themselves come across as vague and unsupported sometimes.

One of his comments in the 360 piece irked me. Someone commented that they were expecting to see a 360 listed in the 40’s, based off of the title that claimed that 360s were now “ridiculously cheap”. Tavarish responds by saying that the M6 is 112K, and that for that money you could buy the 360 and TT it. To me, that didn’t really make sense because 112K isn’t what I would call “cheap” by any means, so using it as support for his claim (that F360s were cheap) was, in my opinion, unfounded . Sure, maybe the performance-per-dollar of that deal would be good, but cheap? I don’t think so.

I just think his articles need to be a little bit less “sensationalized” and have a little bit better support than just “Oh look what this particular car is listed for and what this other particular car is listed for.” It’s not necessarily entirely indicative of the market as a whole, but rather a small part of it, and that doesn’t appeal to me so much.