If it's supposed to be a bona fide investment, you need to factor in inflation over the time period: buy a car for £15K now, sell it for £15K in 3 years and you've lost money.

An F40 new was $400K, as a pure guess maybe £300K-ish. Advertised at £450K now (I think) was about £230K in 1990 according to an inflation calculator.

The moral of this post is cars are not an investment. Invest in property, shares and bonds; enjoy cars.

I think there is a middle ground. It's far easier to justify a fun car that won't lose any money.

Over two years of Caterham ownership my non-consumable costs amounted to one secondhand starter motor. It wasn't an investment as such, but I put £10,000 in and I got £9,975 out - not bad for two years of hooning around.

Given a relatively low income I couldn't justify something that was going to haemorrhage money. As it was I only lost fractionally more than I would have done by putting the money in the bank given the current interest rates.

Obviously there's always a significant risk that you will lose money, so I agree it's best to go on what you want first and foremost. But the potential to get your money back (or even make a little) in the process is a pretty strong incentive.

OK yes, I concede - it is possible for some cars to appreciate in real terms. I incorrectly used an absolute term.

The vast majority of cars will not appreciate in real terms, and those that do are most likely to be in higher price brackets.

This. Go very cheap and bottom end of the market, something that is cheap to own with no fear of anything going bang. If you want to spend a bit more then you can't go wrong with any Golf GTI. Always had very strong residuals.

And it's lose and losing. Sorry I couldn't not respond after the 3rd or 4th time!

Do the calculations then. I've got two cars that people keep banging on about going up in price but I can show you that they've not been an investment, all that's happened is, I've not lost all the money I've spent on maintaining them.

Provided you buy a decent near standard one that's been looked after I don't think you'll lose your purchase price. For 3 years/3000 miles it should be just bits and pieces ( oil, plugs and filters ) and a cambelt change. Don't think you'll make much if anything on it though

mot, Road tax, insurance, a service or two.
Decent rust proofing too if there are sitting in a shed....

I don't see you selling high enough to recover all these costs.

Selling for what you paid for or a little more, yes I think that achievable. Covering all running/ownership costs, no. Not when you are only spending a few £k.
As other have said £10s or £100k is a different market.

Yes, in your particular circumstances you didn't make money.

To quote myself from above (to save having to retype):

That's my point mate. I bought my 'good' late spec E30 for £5k in 2002 but each year have spent upto £2k to keep it tip top but also completing some of the job list we make during long term ownership. The agreed value is £17500 so to the naive person I've made £12,500 on my car but having had it ten years and spent upwards of £20k maintaining it, it's not really an investment.
This will go for any long term 'investment' people are thinking of. You can't just get away with a filter and oil change per year.

Any of them really.

Caterhams are arguably an even safer place to put your money, but it is quite hard to justify the extra outlay. You're looking at £10,000 for a fairly basic Seven or £7,000 for a Westfield that will be very nearly as much fun.

I wouldn't say either have investment potential at the moment - you need something older and/or hitherto undervalued for that - but they should be relatively depreciation proof.

Often the gains come when something transcends from 'an old car that's not quite as fast as its replacement' to borderline classic status. The E30s and 205 GTIs that people were struggling to give away a few years back have both done this quite successfully, and let's not even mention mk2 Escorts...