Greetings to you all . I've just signed up to perhaps see if i could get some invaluable info, comments, and wisdom from lambo owners. I've been slowly moving up the dream car stage (since 1986) and preparing to acheive my final and ultimate goal - the purchase of my childhood exotic dream car "The Diablo" . I've started with the MR2, 300ZX-TT, ACURA NSX, PORSHE 911 C4S, and hoping to end it with the Diablo. I've been given mixed opinions from various brokers, salepersons, dealers on the reliablity and servicing on the Diablo's. They all seam to think that the comparitive exotic, 360 Modena, is a better choice. Like they own one?!. I'm hoping to gain some reassurances, valuable comments and opinions, that may assist me in spending the $100-120K for my final sports car. I hate to make a bad choice to only hear the wife comment on a bad investment. The first concern is: deciding whether to purchase a 1999-2000 Ferrari 360 Modena or a 91-94 VT Diablo. Hopefully, some converted Ferrari owners may shed some light. My current state of thought is that a later year vehicle (99 Modena) may be more technologically reliable than a 91-94 (Diablo) - atleast spends less time in the maintenance shop. I'd hate to be thumbing it on the highway.

The second concern is: if I decide to purchase a diablo, i'm undecided whether i should purchase a 91-93 or spend the extra doe to get the 94 VT. Is there really a huge difference in justifying to spend the extra $ 20-25K? 91-92? or 94VT? Reason for why I may consider a 94 VT is: the thought or idea that a vehicle in production after couple of years, Lambo may have straighten out any defects or kinks so as to providing a more reliable car; the vehicle's ability to raise the front end for speed bumps and driveway inclines. I live in a city with lots of inclines, especially entering my garage. I used to scrape the front air dams of my NSX when I enter; increase traction and control - for both driver comfort and confidence, and wet weather conditions - in can be a little wet sometimes in Canada - ok, maybe most of the time; and, finally the look of the smaller streamline dash in the 94 as compared to the large 91-93 dash. My perception of the large dash may hinder visibility - is it true?

The third concern: when it comes to necessarily spending the money to purchase a diablo, is it really worth spending the extra 20-25K for the VT? or is a 91-93 just as good?

What is the most should I pay for a 91-92 with low mileage, under 10K. 94VT with under 10K?

Is seams that most sales ads or even comments mention clutch replacement. Clutch wear a real problem for even the best drivers? Most of my clutches in my NSX and Porsche lasted 40-50K miles.

Thanks.

Lamborghini has progressively made more reliable vehicles. That said, if you compared a 2004 Lambo to a 2004 Ferrari, I wouldnt consider reliability as a factor. But 92 vs 2000. Well, I think Ferrari has a big edge on reliability because of the year and manufacture quality.

Also I wouldn't rely on a salesperson or dealer usually because they probably have 0-1 Diablos in stock and ~12 360s?? They would prefer you buy one of their 360s.

Here is my opinion:
If I have to choose a car to drive for the day, the Diablo. This would be an easy question. It is very raw and exciting.

If I had to pick a car to put in my garage so I would smile every time I walk in, the Diablo.

If it was a car that I would drive to work, take it to lunch, maybe a little shopping, weekend getaways, dont mind letting others drive, the 360.

Reliability and drivability will be better in the 360. But the Diablo is simply more exciting. If you know you are not going to be on a lot of miles, Diablo. If you plan to put on a lot of miles and use it daily, the 360 has many reasons.

Also, I prefer VT. Maybe not as fast as an earlier Diablo, but the driving experience is a little more interesting to me.

I've seen quite a few early Diablos with all the necessary updates, Clutch, timing chain tensioners etc. I understand they are pretty bullet proof after that. A good one should cost near $100K. A 94 is obviously more reliable. Although you'll get allot of opinions as to daily driving, In my opinion the Diablo is NOT a good daily driver. Visability is poor, gas mileage is terrible, and if your in traffic allot what a waste. Having said that, the DIablo is the most exciting car you'll ever drive. The cost of reliability is boredom which the 360 will be in comparison.

I'll go out on a limb and say have an extra $5-6K ready just in case, there will be problems, and it helps if your not affraid to get your hands dirty.

This topic has been discussed numerous times in this board and the old board before. Try searching these board and you'll get all the answers you need. Having said that, I've alway believe the more you treat you car as a garage queen, the less reliable it will be. These cars were built to be driven.

__________________
Raymond