Probably going for a Ferrari now

After going thru the restoration of the Vette, I dont think that playing in a Ferrari will be a problem.
Despite the aura of the ''supercar'', it's still a car and all mecanics rules apply just like any other car.

I realy like the 355 but as Karsten said, I would take the shittiest Ferrari anytime.

If you browsed a lot in the 348-355 section of fchat, you probably saw theres a lot of threads where the members did almost any repairs on them.

Hope you go for it.
Life is too short.
 
Yes, I went through those threads. The repairs don't seem too difficult. Only thing that might come in handy is a 2 post lift, but I cannot install that here.
 
I'm not sure about that particular lift (i'm in Europe), but I wouldn't try to put a car on 2 posts that rest on a prefab concrete floor. Should have it checked by engineer, but my guess is the weight is too much concentrated in 1 spot and above all in the middle of the concrete elements. Don't want to end up with the car in the cellar.

I think the car could be jacked up just high enough to get the engine out.
 
Belgian1979vette said:
I was in for another project since my vette is on the road now and I'm getting bored.


Then I came across the V8 Ferrari's and apparently the 348's have dropped in price and are within my reach. Currently looking at a early, 1989 348. Might push the button on that one.
Click to expand...

A Ferrari 348 is a 4.18 liter engine. I't really discouraging to read that higher displacement engines have a C02 penalty. Especially since there's getting to be some data that sunspots (i.e. the Sun's surface temperature) is really the driver for earth temperatures.
european
But with regards to C02 emissions and engine displacement. If I drive my 08 Corvette aggressively, I can dominate almost all other cars...what maybe 98%? ...and never exceed 2000 rpm on the engine. It's a 6.2 liter
engine. It gets an honest 27 mpg highway gasoline burn. (Don't know what that is in liters/km but it's probably an amazing fuel economy for this car's performance.)

I don't know how this would work in your European world...A C6 Corvette that meets stringent California air pollution rules, can meet those rules with a centrifugal supercharger. Below 2000 rpm, the centrifugal supercharger is inert...doesn't do anything at all (a fraction of a psia boost). The car drives and performs pretty much stock with a stock fuel burn. As stated above, a stock C6 can outperform almost any street car and still not exceed the 2000 rpm non-performance rpm range of a centrifugal supercharger. Somewhere beginning at 2500 rpm and definably by 3000 rpm, the centrifugal kicks in. You really go back in the seat and the nose picks up. 580 rwhp at 6500 rpm, which translates to over 600 hp flywheel hp. I don't know if this situation is applicable to your world, but you are not going to get this performance with a 4.2 liter Ferrari...really disappointing that people will attribute more C02 to a big displacement engine. My big displacement engine on the street will run at very low rpms, the Ferrari on the street will run at higher greatly higher rpms. I suspect that the lower displacement Ferrari is not a lesser C02 polluter than my C6
 
Even 30 years ago engines were taxed by displacement..... When I was young and lived over there anything above 2.0 L (120ci??) was considered luxury..... Lol....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top