Which Car: Real life costs vs. joy of ownership over a LONG haul

Okay, real world, meaning daily commute, (none of the cars would be fun sitting in traffic, F1, Egear cars tend to be jerky in those situations, and the Porsche has a heavy clutch), so I'll give you the best advise you are ever going to get, buy none of those. They are all designed to do their best on a track. Buy a used 997S and mod the hell out of it. I have one, granted I spent well over 100k on modes (you do not have to go that far), you can pick a decent one up for around 50K, and if your handy after about 25K (if you're not handy add another 10K in labor) in mods the car will be as good or better than any of the cars you mentioned.

 

I've owned or driven all 3 (not early Gallardos but the SL and LP560-4). I would rank them as GT3 RS, CS, Gallardo; in best to next best order (using "worst" doesn't seem quite right).

I didn't like the Gallardo as much, as it seemed a bit out of touch with the AWD. The CS is a bit twitchier than the Scud and requires staying high in the rev band on track, but has a better exhaust sound. The GT3 RS handles and performs a bit better than the CS and has the stick, which you seem to prefer. The CS is also a bit tiring to drive beyond 1-2 hours, while the GT3 RS is comparatively comfortable. The Porsche will also cost less to maintain. On the other hand, the CS will feel more "special" for a longer time; if you want the maximum differential between this car and daily drivers.

 

None of these cars are DIY and while I can't confirm this I would be surprised if a brake swap as you describe wouldn't require other changes to related electronics.

The parts costs are steep. There was a thread on FChat about $5000 headlamp lenses for the 360, and IIRC a replacement windscreen is over $3000. I don't know what a replacement digital instrument cluster would cost, but you get the idea.

If you want a track car that you can wrench yourself, get a Porsche 356, early 911, or a carb'ed Ferrari 308. Seriously, the era of the 'fun in your garage' car ended in the early 1970s. You can overhaul a 356 engine for the cost of a Ferrari 360 headlamp lens. And Porsche 911s were designed for everyday driving as well as sport/track use.

 

I still think I'd do exactly what I suggested, though my Gallardo has been changed to RWD (among other things), it is still that insanely moded Porsche that sits next to it that is the car (consider I've owned about 250 cars including 4 Ferrari's) that gives me the best thrill of any car I've ever owned or driven. Bullfighter is probably right about the brake swap, though if you are going to track the car, not sure why you would remove them. I do not know your level of experience on a track, but chances are you'll want the brakes, might keep you from doing some serious damage.

 

I would guess that a steel brake conversion on a CS would be (in practical terms) close to undoable, or otherwise just completely unnecessary...the CS uses center-locking hubs, and the normal 360 uses a five lug bolt pattern... I'm sure it could be done, but do you really want to fool with it?

In terms of the three cars you mentioned--emotionally, I would have to say go with the CS, but only because I've ridden in one and was completely ruined as a result. I haven't touched either of the other two. If those three cars are really within your long term budget, then just pick the one that you like.

Otherwise, I'd so do something like what Bullfighter suggested...actually, I'd buy something even cheaper. I'd get an S2000 or an M3 and go to town on the thing. I mean, if you're going to track it often, it's hard to beat a Honda for replacement parts (even replacement aftermarket parts...), and the S2000 has a fantastic chassis from which to build what you have in mind. AND it's a convertible.

Or an Elise, Exige, Caterham, etc. You see where I'm going. But I know--they aren't dream cars.

Such is the price of mystic...

 

I think the problem comes with "dream cars" and "tracking". I just went through this mental agony/resolution with the car I'm restoring now. Unless you're frighteningly rich, you probably need to accept that the categories are somewhat mutually exclusive.

(Obviously if you're Jon Shirley and can campaign your vintage Ferrari 250 TR at Monterey, Coronado, etc., disregard this post...)

Ultimately I decided some time ago that my original idea of having one car for all purposes wasn't going to work in the real world. Racing or even serious casual track use puts cosmetic and mechanical demands on a car that wear it out. Once the garage situation improves, and I have a third bay, I may very well look into a Lotus, or race-prepped Porsche 356 coupe, or similar car that I can afford to thrash, fix, respray, repeat, without losing sleep over it.

 

In terms of "long haul" maintainence I suspect that you would be unhappy with the cost to repair anything other than a full manual gearbox. I would not be surprised if the cost of an F1 gearbox will be 1/2 the risidual cost of the car in 10 years time.

 

That is what I have been thinking about the change over the last few years to everyone going to a paddle shifting manual that uses one or two clutches. It is almost as if they have planned obsolescence with even exotics. Or perhaps a better way to call it is planned worthlessness.

At some point 15-20 years from new there are parts of the car which a) are so expensive to replace it keeps used buyers from taking the plunge and b) encourages the car to be broken for these same expensive parts if anything ever goes wrong with the rest of the car.

Example being: imagine in 2020 you have a 360 Spider (worth $50k at the time) and get into a fender bender. Dirty carfax, paint work, etc means the car might now be worth $40k after you pay to fix it. The F1 transmission and engine is good, worth $20k on the used market. The other parts of the car are worth at least another $25k broken up and sold piecemeal.

So what is an owner to do? Pay thousands to fix and then accept loss of value, or pocket the insurance money and sell off the damaged car to a breaker?

 

Can't argue with anything here.

I think viewing anything built after ~1990 as a "keeper" is bordering on delusional.

 

Agree... when the electrics start going on modern cars, it'll get really expensive very quickly.

I personally think the best option for a driver at reasonable prices is to buy a "high milage" (maybe 20k) 10-15 year old car. drive it to 30-40K miles. sell. repeat.

I would want to be out of the car when the elctronics start to fail...

Now, assuming a ferrari or lambo would be a 3rd car,... with 3rd car to do routine maintenance on... and a 3rd car to insure...

from a purely cost POV, a porsche that would be a DD will win buy a wide margin.

So the real question is,... is the extra cost of ferrari / lambo worth it to you?

 

For long term fun, low maintenance, and next to zero depreciation get a 996 GT2.

 

Or a 328.

 

Gallardo with a 6 speed would be the best daily driver of that bunch... The clutch is not too heavy but it definitely wants to take off as soon as the the clutch engages. Still I wouldn't want to drive any of those to work in traffic.

The F1 Superfast is a decent transmission and the E-Gear in the LP 560 is not bad either but the cars that you would be looking at (as far as automated manuals go) have jerky rough transmissions that will be extremely annoying in traffic...and while parking.

I would opt for a car with a real automatic...or maybe a DCT if you don't frequently stop on hills.