The price of old motors

Strider590

Evolution8 wrote: »

bit of an exaggeration there on the 911 turbo "looking like it was standing still". More likely the 911 owner wasn't driving like an idiot. I cant be bothered to check but I'd imagine the 911 turbo has a sub 5 second to 60 time.

Such a thing known as "the drop", when you have two similarly powerful cars and one has "the drop", the other can only watch.....

Weird_Nev

By and large, old cars would have been a terrible investment. YEs, the Porsche has gone through the roof. As have F40's, Mclaren F1's and Mk1 Golf Gti's. these were all expensive cars to buy in their day.

But what of the Morris marinas, Vw Polos, Porsche 944's, Toyota MR2's.... all worthless, like any other 20+ year old car.

Just because one low volume iconic sports car is worth a mint, doesn't make the price of old cars amazing.

Joe_Horner

Weird_Nev wrote: »

By and large, old cars would have been a terrible investment. YEs, the Porsche has gone through the roof. As have F40's, Mclaren F1's and Mk1 Golf Gti's. these were all expensive cars to buy in their day.

But what of the Morris marinas, Vw Polos, Porsche 944's, Toyota MR2's.... all worthless, like any other 20+ year old car.

Just because one low volume iconic sports car is worth a mint, doesn't make the price of old cars amazing.

Depends how / when you bought them. 6 or 7 years ago you could pick up a very tidy Marina for about £750, now (I suspect largely thanks to Clarkeson and pianos) they're making closer to a couple of grand. Not a huge amount, I grant you, but a lot better than that 700 quid would have done in the bank! Same with things like the baby Austins. Even our Dafs have added maybe 30% to their price for a decent, on road, example in the past 5 years or so and prices for off-road "projects" have almost doubled!

Ultimately, any car (or anything else for that matter) is "worth" exactly what someone's prepared to pay on the day. For most old cars that's more than it was a few years ago, in many cases it's substantially more (as a percentage) than it was not that long ago.

Whether they'll continue to rise in the long term is debateable. The scrappage scheme seemed to put quite a big "blip" in prices by reducing supply (or at least making people think it was reducing supply!) and by bringing "forgotten" models back into people's consciousness. When the Daily Wail runs a story about some "classic" model being crushed for no good reason, lots of middle aged Daily Wail readers with a bit of money and a space on their driveway suddenly remember that model exists and decide they'd like one

Prothet_of_Doom

There are a small proportion of the population who have far more money than they need, and so can indulge and invest in their interests to an extent that the rest of us can only dream of.

I'm into cars, but unfortunately indulging that interest is a luxury I can't afford. If I had money, I would still struggle to indulge my fantasies. I would have a mental block, and would end up being one of those people who hanker after a perfect Allegro.

mgdavid

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

....... I would still struggle to indulge my fantasies. I would have a mental block, and would end up being one of those people who hanker after a perfect Allegro.

even I - a staunch Rover/MG fan, user and owner - will say 'but they never built a perfect Allegro'.

londonTiger

maintenanceman wrote: »

TBH I don't really care about status and cars. It amazes me how people put so much emphasis on their car. I would rather spend my money on my home than on a car. You see some nice motors parked outside some rubbish places. It makes me chuckle how vain and stupid that is ( putting a cars value as status.. keeping up with the Joneses). Anyway that's not quite my point. Although older classic they are becoming rarer, I don't think they are that rare and command such a high price. I have been in one (365) and apart from pose appeal they are in no way worth that money. I supposes I am just jealous cos I didn't buy one at the time I could have. Although it seems any motor you could have bought for 2/300 quid 10 years ago are going for thousands now, i.e xr3i/ golf GTI etc.

To be honest, if you're spending £90K on a classic, chances are you probably have plenty of money to spare and just investing in a toy more than anything.

Classics aren't day to day runners, classic car insurance have very strict limitations. They need to be stored in a garage and have very limited mileage. If you get one you'll only probably be allowed to run it to keep the carbs and exhaust clean.. and the annual trip to the classic car event :rotfl:

OddballJamie

Evolution8 wrote: »

bit of an exaggeration there on the 911 turbo "looking like it was standing still". More likely the 911 owner wasn't driving like an idiot. I cant be bothered to check but I'd imagine the 911 turbo has a sub 5 second to 60 time.

Anyway some people can't afford to buy a house and choose to invest in a smart motor instead. I personally get more enjoyment from cars than I do houses but don't feel I should be held back by some house value to car value ratio.

I prefer older motors aswell, there are some impressive motors out there today but for driving experience they are dull with no feeling of excitement when behind the wheel.

I can't see this happening either, it may be close but that would be down to the drivers more than anything.

If it was the 2012 911 Turbo which does 0-60 in about 3 seconds, even taking power to weight ratio in to account the Westfield would need to weigh around 400KG to gain an advantage or be geared just for standing starts.

More likely as the Porsche was brand new, the owner didn't want to give it the 'full beans' or wasn't experienced enough with it to get a decent launch.

Dukesy

londonTiger wrote: »

To be honest, if you're spending £90K on a classic, chances are you probably have plenty of money to spare and just investing in a toy more than anything.

Classics aren't day to day runners, classic car insurance have very strict limitations. They need to be stored in a garage and have very limited mileage. If you get one you'll only probably be allowed to run it to keep the carbs and exhaust clean.. and the annual trip to the classic car event :rotfl:

Actually, before I got all parenty and sensible a couple of years ago, I used to use my '34 Austin 7 and my '55 A30 as my daily drivers. They're brill as day to day runners, as they're SO cheap to run

My insurance knew how much I was using them and didn't mind at all, and I was covered for foreign travel et al. Not exactly over limiting...

londonTiger

Post was a bit of an exxageration, but you get the idea.

I'm referring for the super rare classics that have balooned in value like the Jaguar e-type. More for their rarity than anything to be honest. You have to have them locked in a garage and cannot have on street parking. Annual mileage is probably going to be around 3K. I guess if you have money you can up that.

These cars are high value and easy to steal, no alarm or immobiliser, parts probably aren't serialed (sic) and can fetch good money. So nobody is going to cover a 50K classic that's left out onto the street. Which limits where you can go. I wonder if they allow you to visit frieds and stay overnight by parking on the driveway/street.