Inspired by this article:
What other cars can you think of are that essentially free to own? Some maintenance costs are assumed, but I'm thinking <2k depreciation in the next 5 years or so. Does the AP1 S2000 fit into this category? What about the C5 Z06?
I'd say a well maintained E36 M3 has bottomed out, and manual trans E46 M3's are getting into that wheelhouse.
Alfa GTV6/Milano, nice ones (Verde's, etc.) are already creeping.
I think C5 Z06's are an amazing bargain, but I think they'll continue to get cheaper as the new Vette's continue to evolve, as the numbers just keep getting better on the replacement models. The baddest C4's still aren't worth much, I think C5's are headed that way... plus the general public always thought the FRC shape wasn't the prettiest.
Lots and lots and lots of interesting sports cars fit the bill if you don't care about raw performance numbers. I doubt my E36 M3 is going to ever drop below the $8K I paid for it. My Miata won't cost much to own. C4's are done. 944s, 951s, aircooled 911s, etc.
I paid $7500 for my s2000. I also saw several c5 non z06 vettes for under $12k while I was looking. The c5Zs are the best value on the market and you can find them for under $20k now. I also suspect they'll drop some more once the C7 has been out for a couple years.
I'm not so sure about the Elise... You could buy and sell any car for the same price after owning it for six months.
Hell, if we're talking sports cars, I think you can own just about anything that the unwashed masses would hesitate to drive in snow.
I've never done this with a car, but it works like magic with bikes, I recently bought a Yamaha XT225 for $1600, thrashed it for about 18 months and sold for $2000. This is despite the fact that it spent a lot of time outdoors and I dropped it three time while I owned it, so it was definitely in worse shape when I sold it.
Back on topic: If I knew what had bottomed out I'd be a car dealer (investor?) or something, I do think that all the interesting 80's/90's J-tin is going to start to appreciate rapidly once the economy fully recovers. I'm thinking: MR2's, Civic and CRX Si's, Preludes, Supras (and maybe celicas) DSM's... etc. A LOT of these cars got butchered during the Fast n Furious fad and most of the rest have rusted into the ground.
Also, NA Miatas are never getting cheaper than they are right now.
I learned two things from this thread.
Doug Demuro is annoying.
A $7500 S2000 is an amazing value.
AP1 S2000s are near that point 2nd Gen MR2 for sure Z32 Early 90s Civic Si
Lots of other early 90s Japanese sports cars
964 911's probably aren't getting cheaper. At least they don't seem to be. Early S200's are also not far from as low as they're going to get. Early Vipers as well.
The problem with the "free" cars is that they're all in the point in their lives where that only works if nothing breaks. A non-depreciating Porche can still be an expensive Porsche to own.
mazdeuce wrote: 964 911's probably aren't getting cheaper. At least they don't seem to be. Early S200's are also not far from as low as they're going to get. Early Vipers as well. The problem with the "free" cars is that they're all in the point in their lives where that only works if nothing breaks. A non-depreciating Porche can still be an expensive Porsche to own.
Exactly, which is a point that is brought up in the article, I believe...
Hence the S2000, and probably the NSX
mazdeuce wrote: The problem with the "free" cars is that they're all in the point in their lives where that only works if nothing breaks.
Word. That's what I am facing with the Corvette right now. I bought it cheap enough that if it was all working, I would have been able to resell with zero loss. But it broke, and now I am facing a gigantic (for me) loss on it. If I can find a buyer for a car that doesn't run. Spending 20k on a decent 964 to have an engine go means adding another however many thousand dollars into it until you can sell it again. Not so good.
Buy 911s now.
Heh, Demuro's a buddy of mine from a previous forum. He is a character, by turns fascinating and infuriating. One thing about him, he's owned some interesting cars, albeit for only a few months each.
Lugnut wrote:mazdeuce wrote: The problem with the "free" cars is that they're all in the point in their lives where that only works if nothing breaks.Word. That's what I am facing with the Corvette right now. I bought it cheap enough that if it was all working, I would have been able to resell with zero loss. But it broke, and now I am facing a gigantic (for me) loss on it. If I can find a buyer for a car that doesn't run. Spending 20k on a decent 964 to have an engine go means adding another however many thousand dollars into it until you can sell it again. Not so good.
I'm in the same boat with my E30. I bought it thinking that if nothing else, I could sell it in a few years for what I paid for it. However, I've ended up spending about as much as I paid for it to keep fixing it and now I'm so far underwater it's depressing... and I'm not done since even at $2013 values obviously haven't finished falling.
Woody wrote: Buy 911s now.
Where were you 15 years ago when the 70's cars were still obtainable? I could have used that advice then.
FD RX-7s seems to be on the bottom or rising. It's getting real hard to find stockish or tastefully modded cars. I kinda want to sell mine but I'm afraid I'll regret it in the future.
20 years ago a long nose 911T could be had for $5000. Not a concours car, but a complete, running, no rust So Cal car.
That same car now is easily $40k.
JamesMcD wrote: FD RX-7s seems to be on the bottom or rising. It's getting real hard to find stockish or tastefully modded cars. I kinda want to sell mine but I'm afraid I'll regret it in the future.
Certain cars never really depreciated all that far. FD RX-7's, Supra TT's, Integra Type-R's never got anywhere near what I'd call "cheap." For that reason it's tough to say whether they are appreciating or not. I'm sure that FD's will start going up in value at some point, but I don;t know if we're there yet or not.
I've used this philosophy in the past with Fox Mustangs, a 951, E36 M3, an old F-150, and a Contour SVT. Sometimes I make a little, sometimes I lose a little, but I've always come within at least 5-10% of breaking even.
I think something needs to be about 10 years old, somewhat rare, and have an enthusiast following for this to work.
Anyhow, a few other candidates: 04-06 GTO, any Mustang with "Cobra" in it's name, 80s Fox Mustangs and F-bodies, early Boxsters, C4s in general.
If you're in this sport for the money you'll leave the bar heartbroken and disillusioned.
If you want to make money on cars you'll concentrate on buying and selling commuting appliances.
If you want to have fun with cars you'll buy them, enjoy them, and sell them once you're done. Hopefully for not much of a loss.
Xceler8x wrote: If you're in this sport for the money you'll leave the bar heartbroken and disillusioned. If you want to make money on cars you'll concentrate on buying and selling commuting appliances. If you want to have fun with cars you'll buy them, enjoy them, and sell them once you're done. Hopefully for not much of a loss.
Very true, but by buying carefully, doing some maintenance/refresh work, and writing up a good FS and and posting it in the right places, you can own a nice enthusiast vehicle for a year or two and pretty much count on breaking even. Nothing wrong with that.
Another: E39 M5.
In Ohio I would be on the book for $2,100 in sales tax on a $30k car. Plus title fees and plates. So in order to drive it for free I would have to sell it for 10% more then I paid for it. And that dosnt count insurance & interest payments
Rusnak_322 wrote: In Ohio I would be on the book for $2,100 in sales tax on a $30k car. Plus title fees and plates. So in order to drive it for free I would have to sell it for 10% more then I paid for it. And that dosnt count insurance & interest payments
By comparison though, if you went and bought a $30K commuter appliance, what would the residual value be 1 year later? 10% lower?
Not that you're going to buy a new CamryCord every year, but the original notion is essentially pitting depreciation vs. residual values, so perhaps the sales tax/fees could be looked at in place of the loss you'd experience over time in the the value of the car itself, and you still may come out ahead. The rule of thumb I've always heard touted is that a new car loses 15%+ it's value in the first year of ownership.
944's and 968's?
Rusnak_322 wrote: In Ohio I would be on the book for $2,100 in sales tax on a $30k car. Plus title fees and plates. So in order to drive it for free I would have to sell it for 10% more then I paid for it. And that dosnt count insurance & interest payments
I wasn't counting insurance payments. I forgot about sales tax. I'm from Oklahoma, so moving to Missouri took me by surprise when it comes to property taxes and sales tax on vehicles.
It's always seemed to me that buying cars as an investment, or even in hope of breaking even, is impossible if you drive them a lot. Even if you sell it for exactly what you bought it for, repairs and maintenance are always going to cause you a loss. The only way to make money off a car is to park it in a dark, climate controlled pod and hope it goes up in value. Or buy a rare, already valuable car in godawful shape, and restore it completely (You really have to be in the stratosphere for that to net much though.)
I always try to sell older cars for more than I bought them for and I usually can. Most often that's because I put a bunch of work and parts into it that increased its value. If you add up all the parts, it's never been a winning proposition even if you disregard oil and gas. SO I just look at purchase price, ignore the rest, and know that I'm being willfully naive.
You'll need to log in to post.
