Targeting directly at the Countach, Testarossa was undoubtedly the greatest arch-rival to Countach. Its 4942 c.c. 48-valve 12 cylinders boxer engine was Ferrari's response to Countach QV's 5167 c.c. 48-valve V12. Although the prancing horse had "only" 390 hp on tap, versus Countach's claimed 455 hp, its drag coefficient of 0.36 was better than Countach's 0.42. Both cars were mid-engined, heavyweight and very wide, also priced at the same level.
Road tests found the Countach was more accelerative - from standstill to 60 mph it was 0.4 sec quicker - due to more power and 400 lbs less weight. Testarossa won back at top speed - 181 mph was easily achieveable by most magazines, and the best record I know was 184 mph. However, how did these two supercars compare in a real face-to-face contest? CAR magazine did such a test in April 1986, which is summarised and reproduced in below.
" The Ferrari Testarossa is a wholly smoother, more modern, more aerodynamic machine than the Lambo. It shows immediately in the drag factors : the Ferrari's is reasonable at 0.36, the Lambo's is an almost unmentionable 0.42 (without the wing, which must make it a lot worse). What strikes you as soon as you see the Countach and Testarossa in company is the greater size of the Maranello car. It is nearly a foot longer at 177in, 2.0in longer in wheelbase at 100.4in, nearly 400 lb heavier, more than 2.0in higher, similar in front track but nearly two inches wider in rear track. It is a big, big car ....
"
The Ferrari gives 16 mpg in places where you will get only 12 mpg for the
Lambo ....
" The Testarossa is such a civilised car. It has a fairly soft ride which we felt was let down at times by extremes of surface roar and bump-thump....you could hope for stiffer damping - and in the corners you are surprisingly aware of the car's body roll. But the pay-off is a level of comfort to your progress that won't be found in other exotic cars ....
" The steering is less direct than the Lambo's but provides a decent turning circle, which combined with the excellent visibility (about the best there is in a mid-engined car), gives the Testarossa a real town capability. The brakes are light to use, too, but overservoed ....
" The gearchange isn't exactly foolproof. It moves fluently about its open gate with the characteristic "ker-snap" of other machines which use the same system .... The clutch matches the rest of the car's efforts ; it is light but a trifle woolly ....
" Inside, the Testarossa is a leather lover's paradise .... the leather bucket seats are comfortable and supportive, and their power adjustment combines well with the tilt-adjust steering column, to give a wide variety of driving positions. The car suits people of far above average height and there is plenty of legroom, too ....
" The Lamborghini is the more spectacular looking car of the two - we have the reactions of the crowds who surrounded it every time it stopped, to go by. Invariably there would be a clump of half a dozen people gathered around the Lambo, discussing its outlandish lines. The Ferrari, in this company, rated hardly a glance ....
" Inside, the dominating thing about the Countach is a lack of headroom and visibility. If you're more than about 5ft 10in, you have to slouch in the seat, bum forward, knees high, head retracted into the shoulders as far as is comfortable .... Shiny black leather was the main trimming material of the car and it just looked cheap, despite its undoubtedly hideous cost.
" This, to be fair, is hardly the point of the Countach's excellence. The point of the Countach is the way it goes when driven at top speed, maximum effort, full noise. At Castle Combe, we found the Lamborghini's conclusive point of superiority.
" Both cars did well. The Countach felt instantly at home, its heavy steering, gearchange and pedals efforts - and its compact driving position - suited the extreme loads of hard driving. But what told most was its superb capability over high speed bumps and its marvellous handling balance. It turned best, it stayed flat under serious provocation, it braked without dive and it steered quickly and with precision. It behaved as many of the people who take pure track cars there would one day like their machinery to behave.
" All around was noise, of course .... the Lamborghini Countach is quicker, better handling, better braked, and nicer to drive .... After that, the Testarossa felt like a Ford Fiesta. Efforts required were light, it made less noise. It offered a nice, upright driving position and seemed almost airy in comparison with the Lamborghini. It rode better, too, but its steering didn't have the bite, it understeered more. Its seats lacked the proper degree of lateral support for maximum effort corners, and its brakes felt a little spongy after very much work. Its areas of clear superiority were its gearchange, not nearly as heavy as the Lambo's and twice as slick, and its engine throttle response. That by a whisker.
" But such a confrontation requires a decision, and it's quite easy to make. The Ferrari is probably the best car of the two, but the Lamborghini is undoubtedly the Greatest."