Ferrari 308 GTB/GTS: which version to buy
Between the two listed versions of the Ferrari 308 GTB/GTS, the choice is not generation versus generation. Production of this model is one generation (1975–1985), Targa body, two versions, both dated 1982-09-01 to 1985-12-31.
Between the two listed versions of the Ferrari 308 GTB/GTS, the choice is not generation versus generation. Production of this model is one generation (1975–1985), Targa body, two versions, both dated 1982-09-01 to 1985-12-31. The decision is 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole versus 2.9 MT: same 2927 cm³ Gasoline V-shaped 8-cylinder layout, same Central engine placement, same Turbo label in the data, same Manual 5 gearbox, same RWD, same 1465 kg kerb weight, same 205/55 R16 and 205/50 R16 wheels. The differences that can be counted are power, torque, compression, peak-rpm, top speed, and whether 0–100 km/h was measured.
Specs that actually differ
| Version | hp (kW @ rpm) | Nm @ rpm | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole | 240 (176 @ 7000) | 260 @ 5000 | 2927 | Gasoline | 8, V-shaped | Turbo | Manual 5 | RWD |
| 2.9 MT | 255 (187 @ 7700) | 294 @ 5000 | 2927 | Gasoline | 8, V-shaped | Turbo | Manual 5 | RWD |
Fuel grade for both is 98. Valves per cylinder: 4 on both. Bore × stroke: 81 x 71 on both.
What the extra 15 hp buys
2.9 MT makes 255 hp against 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole at 240 hp: +15 hp and +11 kW (187 vs 176). Torque at the same 5000 rpm is 294 Nm versus 260 Nm — +34 Nm, about 13% more twist on the same 2927 cm³.
Power per litre (2927 cm³ = 2.927 L):
- 2.9 MT: 255 ÷ 2.927 ≈ 87.1 hp/L
- 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole: 240 ÷ 2.927 ≈ 82.0 hp/L
That is +5.1 hp/L for 2.9 MT.
Kerb weight is 1465 kg on both, so weight per horsepower is a clean split:
- 2.9 MT: 1465 ÷ 255 ≈ 5.75 kg/hp
- 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole: 1465 ÷ 240 ≈ 6.10 kg/hp
2.9 MT carries about 0.36 kg less per horsepower. Peak power is also taken higher: 7700 rpm versus 7000 rpm on 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole. If the question is “which engine is denser on the same displacement and the same mass,” the arithmetic points to 2.9 MT.
Compression is the opposite direction: 9.2 on 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole versus 8.8 on 2.9 MT. The Quattrovalvole name in the data sits with the higher compression and the lower peak rpm, not with the higher horsepower figure.
Fuel system: Carburetor is listed only for 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole. For 2.9 MT the fuel system is not measured. That is not “no fuel system”; it is a gap in the catalogue. Do not treat the missing label as a reason to assume injection or carburetion on 2.9 MT.
Performance and economy: measured versus not measured
0–100 km/h:
- 2.9 MT: 7.3 s
- 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole: not measured
You cannot rank sprint times between them. Only 2.9 MT has a recorded 7.3 s. Using that number as if it applied to 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole would invent a fact.
Top speed:
- 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole: 255 km/h
- 2.9 MT: 252 km/h
2.9 MT Quattrovalvole is 3 km/h faster in the listed maximum despite 15 hp and 34 Nm less. On this dataset, extra power does not buy extra top speed. If the buying question is “which one is listed faster in a straight line at the top,” it is 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole. If the question is “which one has a measured 0–100,” it is 2.9 MT.
Fuel use: city, highway, and combined are not measured on both versions. Tank capacity is not measured. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. There is no mpg comparison to make from these figures. Anyone choosing on consumption is choosing without a number.
Dimensions, weight, chassis — no version split
Gross weight: not measured (both). Ground clearance: not measured (both). Tank: not measured (both).
Kerb weight 1465 kg is identical. Wheels are the same pair: 205/55 R16 and 205/50 R16. Front and rear suspension: Independent, spring on both. Front and rear brakes: Disc on both (catalogue spelling Disc). Body type for the generation is Targa. Drive is RWD. Gearbox is Manual 5.
There is no “heavier chassis” version and no “larger tank” version in the data. You cannot buy extra mass, extra clearance, or extra fuel volume by switching from 2.9 MT to 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole.
One generation, not a later car
Both versions start 1982-09-01 and stop 1985-12-31. The generation window is 1975-01-01 to 1985-12-31. That means these two sit in the later years of the single generation, not as a second generation. There is no restyling row and no second body type in the data. “Which generation” is not a live question: there is 1 generation, 2 versions.
Which version to choose
Choose 2.9 MT if you want the higher listed output: 255 hp / 187 kW @ 7700 rpm, 294 Nm @ 5000 rpm, 87.1 hp/L, 5.75 kg/hp, and the only measured 0–100 of 7.3 s. You accept 8.8 compression, 252 km/h top speed, and a fuel system that is not measured.
Choose 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole if you want the higher listed top speed (255 km/h), higher compression (9.2), a documented Carburetor, and 240 hp / 176 kW @ 7000 rpm with 260 Nm @ 5000 rpm. You accept 82.0 hp/L, 6.10 kg/hp, and 0–100 not measured.
What extra output does not buy on this sheet: lower weight, different wheels, a different gearbox, a different drive, a different body, a measured fuel tank, or measured mpg. The “premium” in horsepower is 15 hp and 34 Nm on the same 2927 cm³, same 1465 kg, same Turbo / Central / Manual 5 / RWD package. The “premium” in top speed is 3 km/h the other way, on 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole.
If the two names were mixed in a listing, separate them by power: 2.9 MT Quattrovalvole is the 240 hp car; 2.9 MT is the 255 hp car. Same displacement, same years, different peak figures.
Reliability and typical faults are not measured in this dataset. Do not treat silence as a clean bill of health. The catalogue comparison stops at the numbers above.