RE: Ferrari California | PH Used Buying Guide

[Hot Hatch Hunter]

I absolutely loved mine which was a 30 with the Handling Speciale pack. Only downer is the rubbish infotainment system but I just always left it switched off; getting one with a carbon trim makes it appear a lot more modern.

The best part was it cost me the equivalent of just £300 a month. No servicing costs as under 7 years old and £20k down on an interest only lease balloon saw me buy one from a Ferrari main dealer, drive the car all summer then sell it when the weather turned to an independent dealer outright for exactly what I paid for it.

A Ferrari for the monthly cost of a Fiesta! Too bad I lose money on all the other cars I buy lol.

[bigpow]

Go drive one before you comment and don’t get bought it by the internet warriors that drive a 320d. Compared to a 911 they have a brilliant character and a sense of occasion (frosty roads are good fun). It’s designed to make you feel everything about you like it’s italian nature of German nature.
I was shocked at the difference between a Cal and a 991.2 both very fast but completely different to drive.

Go drive one and then come back and do a write up.

£70k from to own a Ferrari from a main dealer

Don’t forget it’s quicker to 60 than an F40.

Pow

[PhantomPH]

jon66 said:

On top of this...it's still a Ferrari, depite the naysayers who try to claim it's an abandoned Maserati project, so there's always that "sense of occasion" when you press the red button and drive out the garage.

Not an abandoned Maserati project - and actual Maserati project that was changed towards the end to be a Ferrari. All down to brand target market and marketing opportunities for Ferrari. I don't see it as a bad thing, tho - I'm old enough to still think of Maserati as a quite classy brand so I think I might have quite liked a Trident on that instead of the Lloyds Bank horse. More than happy with either - doesn't stop it being a great car.

[ushabbir]

Very close to buying a California 2011 (27k miles, white, black roof, full Ferrari service history, new tyres less 10k miles ago, slightly different alloys which improve the look in my opinion). Went to see car and condition is absolutely immaculate. MOT due in 2 months but he will have it done.

Car has literally had the transmission gearbox speed sensor replaced (seller says 'all three sensors replaced by Ferrari Sevenoaks so common fault sorted'). He is selling for £66k, refuses to discount any further.

My situation is such that I can buy a T or perhaps finance a Portofino. As much as I love cars, I also think they are a waste of money esp. when that money can be invested somewhere to generate a return.

Q to the experts on here:

- Does the above sound like a sensible buy? Anything dodgy from the info esp. on sensors? Price?
- What warranty should I take?
- Any view on buying this car vs. a T or Portofino?

[TREMAiNE]

ushabbir said:

Q to the experts on here:

- Does the above sound like a sensible buy? Anything dodgy from the info esp. on sensors? Price?
- What warranty should I take?
- Any view on buying this car vs. a T or Portofino?

I'm far from an expert but my dad owned a California, replaced it with a T and has just bought a Portofino (which I have not seen yet).

I found the T a massive step up from original California. The gearbox felt decades newer and the T felt a hell of a lost faster. The Interior was also much more modern but still had that classic Ferrari styling. Had my dad given me the California, I'd have sold it and bought something else. If he had given me the T, I'd have kept it - although, with current values, the older California definitely has more appeal to me than it used to.

One thing I preferred on the older car was the NA engine. It sounded wonderful, much better than the turbocharged T.

It's not an easy question to answer given values are so different. If you can afford a California and could get a T at a bit of a stretch, go with the California. If you can afford them both without much strain on your bank balance, I'd say go for the T. You're not going to get £40k more fun out of it, and you probably will lose more in depreciation short term, but it is the better car.

I'm interested to see how the Portofino compares, although in terms of looks, it's already in third place in my opinion.

[keo]

ushabbir said:

My situation is such that I can buy a T or perhaps finance a Portofino. As much as I love cars, I also think they are a waste of money esp. when that money can be invested somewhere to generate a return.

Buy the car and enjoy it. Sell it once you have had your fun. Get most of your money back. More to life than looking at numbers on a screen imo. But everyone is different.

[ushabbir]

Thanks TREMAiNE
Appreciate views
- You said you would have sold Cali and bought something else? What else would you buy for £60-70k?
- I definitely prefer the noise of the NA over the turbo. Checked both earlier this week and T sounds disappointing vs. NA Cali
- Performance means little to me. I am more after the sound and reliability (hence mentioned gear speed sensor issue)
- Any view on warranty?
- I think the £67k Cali vs. a £95k T is a £28k premium for the T. If T is more reliable, then I don't mind spending £28k more. But my logic is that if I'm spending near £100k mark, then I can consider a McLaren 570S Spider which is newer, faster, possibly looks better / unique on the road. But if I can get a Ferrari for a £67k, then I'm not losing huge amounts on depreciation as you say.

[ushabbir]

Hi both - any response?

[TREMAiNE]

ushabbir said:

Hi both - any response?

Sorry didn't realise you had come back!

For me at that price point, I would be buying a 360 - which I hope to actually do next year, but that is a very different type of car. I don't think anyone would be disappointed with a £70 California purchase.

I do feel that the T is worth the money to me personally - just for the looks and interior alone and whilst the performance isn't that important in the real world, it was night and day between the Cali and the T.

I don't what to put you off the T, though, as for the money it's an absolute bargain.

I actually drove the Portofino this weekend and got to see my dads in the flesh. It's lovely, but I wouldn't personally pay the 60k premium over the T.

[Redshed]

i’ve had my 2011 for over 2 years now.
I had a 2014 Exige V6 and went into the Cali from that.
The gear speed sensor went which is apparently the achilles heel and was fixed under extended warranty.

I get the itch every few years to change my fun car and am actually struggling to find something less than £95k that will be a proper step up.
Ok so the 570s can be bought for £80k but all
I hear from previous owners is that i’ll need another £20k for maintenance.
The California is a superb car, it’s. ferrari. Yes Maserati were meant to get it, yes it’s front engine, yes it’s 4 seats.
The horse badge and reactions from general public identify it as a Ferrari and that’s good enough for me.
It has a real sense of occasion every time I get in it and having added a Larini X pipe and sports cats, it also has the theatrics of something special.
i’d suggest go and sit in one, drive it and see if you connect.
Prices are low at the moment but the cheaper ones are probably worth avoiding. I’d advise mid £60s’ for a decent one.
I take mine on road trips and drive it to the shops or the office on a nice day but don’t track it as it’s a touring car not a track day hero.
I think these cars are under appreciated by the, “expert” community but you are buying and owning something for you.
I looked at a 2013 911 T which is obviously mega as an alternative but I feel I will regret selling mine unless I get something far more expensive and stupid.