I have both. Countach. By far.
Wrong answer. You are generalizing owner's profiles with jewelry. Ever been to a few Ferrari fun runs ? Most of the owner's from the local FCA club simply show up for breakfast and have NO interest in driving their cars fast. I heard a few complaints that the local FCA club president was driving his car too fast, in the middle of nowhere.
Great thread. To me it depends on the model. A DD Countach trumps every Boxer in my book. Not even a question. I've owned a 365 BB and driven all three back to back in the same day (see the May 2011 FORZA article on the boxer series). Closest I can get to that dream DD is an early generation Diablo, that's another beast entirely. But, I'd probably choose a nice silver 512BB over, say,...a fuel injected Countach (e.g. 25th anniv, et al).
512BBi Every day of the week, and twice on Sunday. I've driven in a well sorted Lamb Countach, cool, but not my thing. Steering was very quick. For non-F cars, I switch gears to AMG because of astounding track performance, but still prefer the 512 for overall build quality, beauty and feel.
I had both still have the BB. Two very different animals. The build on the Lp 5000 was crude, its was also really really light in the front end above 160. The Ct was realisticaly hard to see out of other than forwards. The shift felt like a ...tractor. In the 80-120mph range the CT steering was telepathic and sublime. The suspesions seemed in generral better resolved, and a Ct wears low profile modern rubber. Comparign the two. Its like comparing a camaro to a mercdes SL, similar eprformance, one is crude and other well engineered. the BB motor is superior to the Ct in response and feel. Frankly the best of allot these cars I ever drove wasd a carbed Koning BB 512. That has the best steering by far, a motor that woudl just gobble up rev's to the redline and was quite simply beutifully rersolved in all controls, plus had that excelledn Bb vsibility. hard to belive it was a 512 platform. It steered as sweetly a light 308 and had a motor that spun like a daytona. The Ct is pure art, the show car legal for the road with all the good and bad(development) that implies. It is and will be more valuable in the future,
I like the fact you gave your opinions with actual time spent behind the wheel. My feeling they both have advantages and disadvantages and accomplish the same mission differently. Some people are just dishing out negative opinions on one of the models after never setting a foot inside either car, or both. Why give your opinion if you have zero time behind the wheel. Would you want my opinion on the advantageous and disadvantageous with the F-15 vs F-14. Let me know, if you want my review of those two airframes. I do have Cessna time and a few others.
In general the mid engined supercars of the 70's/80s lacked much, had edgy handling and even by modern standards great acclerative performance between 30-140mph.. Between the Ct and the Bb. Well a CT its just a thing to look at, there has never been something like it before or since. A BBI is useable over a far wider range of conditions, although by modern standards still compromised. I agree with others that the Ct to get is either a LP 400, simply because its so astheticaly pure, or a DD because well its the ultimate. If you have a 80-120mph canyon road at your doorstep, or good open roads to get to one, then a CT is just a great drive. In general its more immediate at the wheel, and more raw experienmce(not all in good ways). A BB you can actualy see out of it, out the sides the rear etc drive in traffic as a result, and its motor is tractable while being turbine smooth in a way no lambo v12 is.. In the Ct if you were driving down a road and wanted to take a gap in the lane next to you, then you had to acclerate hard into the gap and hope the car next to you didnt close the gap, because you couldnt see. The BBI is also more stable above 150 to the extent thats relevant today, which relaisticaly for most is a moot point. The reality is both these cars are old tech. Theyre both viceral and raw (requiring a skilled driver) by modern standards. A BB you can simply use far more often, and confortably drive in modern more trafficed road conditions, its classic pininfarina styling, all curves. The Ct its art, somthing not seen before or since, its timeless. Personaly for the outre ghandini styling it would rather have a stratos, but a Ct is one of one, and one of the all time greats even if significantly compromised as a drive in the modern world.. Moderns do all things well, require little of the driver, they are whats known as useable, and not necessarily better for it if youre into the drive. A CT and BB hit a certain sweetspot in that like the cars before them you really have to know machines to operate one, and how to drive to get anywhere with them, yet theyre modern enough to have have modern levels of performnce and good dynamics/brakes. Either car requires you to comit and press on to have any speed, neither is easy at 30 mph and both will go fast but you have to be dialed in and pressing on. Either will leave you drained after a good run. Theyre cars you have to grab by the scruff of the neck and wring out. There are faster cars today, but there not going faster on road, and having way less fun than you will in an older car. Personaly I was always a F14 man, but the F15 has stood the test of time. In the era of stealth fighters and drones we wont see more of their kind, much like the Ct and BB.