STS-V depreciation

So I found this video on youtube, and it got me thinking: weren't those things like $80k when they were new? Sure enough, they were about $77k before options. Well now they can be had for 66% off after only 5 years of depreciation.

Could this be the highest depreciation percentage for a five year span of ANY car in the past 20 years?

An example:

2006 STS-V

While it is still an almost $30k car used, somehow I want to look at that as an absolute steal. 470hp (!) supercharged Northstar, RWD, newer 6 speed auto, etc. etc. But then I wonder WHY they're so cheap. Are they ticking time bombs? Or is it the 14 city / 20 highway mileage?

Is there a European alternative that can match performance for price?

Most high end sedans have massive amounts of depreciation as they come off lease and hit the used market.

Most of the AMG lineup can be had for a fraction of the price after a few years on the market:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/cto/2399628763.html

Yeah dude, this ain't even close to the highest depreciation. That's a Merc S-Class, hands down. ALL non-exotic luxury cars become nearly worthless.

The STS-V's big problem was it's little brother, the CTS-V is just a better car.

Take a look at what the 750IL did. Man oh man...

It always amazes me that at the local bone yard along side the Hondas, VWs and Kias, maybe $12K-$15K new are full size MBs, BMWs, 12 cylinder Jags, Lexi (Lexus's) etc. likely $50K-$80K new. Same general years and mileage.

Jay_W wrote: Take a look at what the 750IL did. Man oh man...

Or the 750Li - I paid about 1/2 sticker after 3 years and 45k miles. It's now worth about 1/2 what I paid another 3 years and 50k miles down the road, but it's just about at the bottom of the depreciation cliff. Of course, now is where the maintenance costs kick up too.

one of the worst cases of depreciation I have ever seen is the VW Phaeton. Less than 20K for a 100K car when it was new.

jags are pretty bad. The difference being, I don't want one.

My son bought a Jag S-Type with the v-8 for $17000. in 2009. Nice car.

I'd prefer the AMG but would be scared to death of repair costs on it or (heaven forbid) the V10 M5. If you couldn't afford them then you can't afford them now.

I would not be afraid of the Caddy. Go for it

Cadillacs have always depreciated quickly, just like every other GM. Should make things easier in a few more years to snag up a CTS-V on the cheap.

I had a 1998 Cadillac Eldorado 4 years old that I bought for $8500 with 62k on the clock. It had an original sticker of $47k...

I miss that car, but then I remember how fragile it was, and I don't miss it...

According to KBB.com this STS-V's 5 year depreciation is exactly average (though with 50,000 miles it may have a little lower mileage than other 5 year old cars).

" An average vehicle will only retain about 34 percent of its original value after a five-year ownership period, meaning that a $50,000 new car today will only be worth somewhere close to $17,000 after five years."
From here: KBB Article: Cars that hold their value best

Bob

KBB Article: Cars that hold their value best

According to KBB, nine of 2011's top ten resale value vehicles are trucks/suvs/crossovers. With fuel prices as high as they've been in the past year, is anyone else surprised by this?

Someone here said some of these high end luxury cars aren't meant to be kept, they are meant to be driven 100k miles and thrown away. I couldn't imagine the repair costs on some of the extraneous "luxury" features like a rear truck which opens and lowers itself. The fact that the dealers are pretty much the only place who can repair these fancy cars puts labor at 120$ per hour, plus exorbitant parts prices.

it seems to me that high end luxury cars designed to last only until the warranty expires

Aren't these the ones that had the starter motor UNDER the intake manifold? They said when they designed it that it was a good design because it wouldn't get any dirt inside. Doesn't high heat kill starters too?

I think Phaeton takes the cake for depreciation now that I think about it.

The AMGs and V10 M5s scare me to death on maintenance. But I imagine an E39 M5 with the documented and (somewhat) common engine problems fixed by prior owner would be the ultimate bargain in large-ish fast sedans.

While I'm not shopping for an over-powered luxo-barge right now, I thought it was worth bringing up for the Northstar enthusiasts around here.

I know the CTS-V's LS motor is lighter, less complex, and produces nearly the same output N/A than the STS-V's supercharged Northstar, but there's something about "supercharged RWD Northstar" that the "I like unique stuff even when it's not the best choice" part of my brain really likes.

And lest we forget, THE NOISE!

I believe that SAAB's and Phaetons are the worst depreciating cars.

don't believe I've ever seen a dyno like that

a401cj wrote: don't believe I've ever seen a dyno like that

Its a Dyna-Pak system. its a cheaper alternative, because you don't have to bury it in the concrete.

Maroon92 wrote:

a401cj wrote: don't believe I've ever seen a dyno like that

Its a Dyna-Pak system. its a cheaper alternative, because you don't have to bury it in the concrete.

it's also more accurate as it completely negates wheelspin. They are the favored unit for serious drag racers.