McLaren F1 for sale....one not-so-careful previous owner
Discussion
lauda said:
Interesting that the article suggests the fact that it's a one owner car might offset the impact on value of its well-publicised crashes. To be honest, I'd rather it had been through more owners and less scenery.
Can not see a problem , its been repaired by Mc so it will be spot on and it has some added fame Like most PH'ers, well, the poor ones that is, like me, we all know that come the lottery win, a super/hyper car will be safely asleep in our fantasy garage. Now, maybe because I'm and engineering bloke, I just love the ethos of this car, which follows my KISS principle on design. Keep it simple stupid. Yes, all the hyper cars are brilliant chunks of technology, and they can be driven around in shopping mode of you want. But this car would be my fantasy garage choice for all the exactly the same reasons that Mr Atkinson puts forward. The purity of the design is top of the list though. Just one thought. I've read that they can be a bit 'exciting' on the limit. So maybe a 'chat' to McLaren to have a bit of development work done in that direction.
Conscript said:
Such a lovely looking car. Atkinson is a hero of my childhood (Blackadder, Mr. Bean), and I love that he's a car enthusiast too. One of those people you'd love to share a pint with 
It's not a definite guarantee of a good buy, and I guess it won't always be applicable to the super car market, but it's certainly one of the most important factors when buying a second hand car.
Sorry, I meant at this level. I agree completely that in conventional terms the premium being offered can be worth paying. It normal terms it has a specific value. Ie the car costs £500 more than market but you are hedging that it will save you more than that over your ownership in maintenance and residuals etc. DonkeyApple said:
I always find the 'one owner' argument mildly amusing as the second owner is expected to pay for something that the act of them buying causes it to cease to exist. To me its one of those little comedy farces of the market place.
Not really. Advertising a car as single owner is a signifier of the potential of how well it's been looked after. I'd rather buy a car off it's first owner, who paid £25K for it and has treated it like a £25K possession, than buy it from the 5th owner, who picked it up for £2K and treated it as nothing more than a £2K car.It's not a definite guarantee of a good buy, and I guess it won't always be applicable to the super car market, but it's certainly one of the most important factors when buying a second hand car.
In the normal market is has a market value.
What I meant was at this level it begins to look crazy when you drill down. The majority of F1s are going to be in remarkably similar condition whether they have one or five names assigned to them as they will have all been stores the same way, maintained the same way and have similar mileages etc.
On top of that, the article was alluding, to me at least, that the single ownership fact was worth a £million plus. So when you think about it, you are paying £9m for the car and then paying on top £1m for something that no longer exists the exact second you buy it. You are buying something that you not only can never own but the act of you buying it causes it to cease to exist.
I can comprehend paying a premium due to who the previous owner was. You can see that this does have a value. But I am referring to the specific premium asked for their only being one previous owner. When you drill down and look at it with clarity you can see that it is one of the craziest things to spend money on in mechanical terms.
Lost soul said:
Can not see a problem , its been repaired by Mc so it will be spot on and it has some added fame
Ok, so let's imagine for a minute that you have an eight figure sum to spend on an F1. Two cars are available for broadly similar money. One has been very heavily crashed, but owned by a famous man with a funny face. The other one hasn't been crashed and was owned by someone you'd befer heard of. Which one would you buy?
And ask yourself the same question if you were spending £10k on a secondhand family saloon. If your answer on the F1 is different to your answer on the family saloon, I'd be interested to understand why.
Not saying there's anything wrong with Atkinson's F1, I'd just rather have the one that hadn't been bent.
NRS said:
You're forgetting the "collectors" side of things though - accidents tend to devalue a car there. And it's likely this will be bought by a collector rather than someone who will use it lots.
Not really, lots of really high value cars started out as race cars and were crashed before being sold on. When there are less than 100 cars out there providing the repairs are now invisible and made using factory parts it is fairly irrelevant. robinessex said:
I think it would be fair to say it wasn't repaired, but re-manufactured.
Agree, its not been to some dodgy body shop somewhere, it has been virtually restored/rebuilt at the factory and is as good (if not better) than new.its also been run in nicely
cannot find it on autotrader though.....
lauda said:
Ok, so let's imagine for a minute that you have an eight figure sum to spend on an F1. Two cars are available for broadly similar money.
One has been very heavily crashed, but owned by a famous man with a funny face. The other one hasn't been crashed and was owned by someone you'd befer heard of. Which one would you buy?
And ask yourself the same question if you were spending £10k on a secondhand family saloon. If your answer on the F1 is different to your answer on the family saloon, I'd be interested to understand why.
Not saying there's anything wrong with Atkinson's F1, I'd just rather have the one that hadn't been bent.
I think the difference is the fact of the (quite recent) near million quid repair job, complete strip, component-by-component assessment and final QC process that enforced the standard of the car when new. Whilst I'm sure other properly serviced F1's are well monitored, I doubt many would have received this level of scrutiny and at nearly 20 years old I think it would increase my confidence in it. Comparison to a normal car doesn't hold because it would never be subjected to such a process.One has been very heavily crashed, but owned by a famous man with a funny face. The other one hasn't been crashed and was owned by someone you'd befer heard of. Which one would you buy?
And ask yourself the same question if you were spending £10k on a secondhand family saloon. If your answer on the F1 is different to your answer on the family saloon, I'd be interested to understand why.
Not saying there's anything wrong with Atkinson's F1, I'd just rather have the one that hadn't been bent.
lauda said:
Lost soul said:
Can not see a problem , its been repaired by Mc so it will be spot on and it has some added fame
Ok, so let's imagine for a minute that you have an eight figure sum to spend on an F1. Two cars are available for broadly similar money. One has been very heavily crashed, but owned by a famous man with a funny face. The other one hasn't been crashed and was owned by someone you'd befer heard of. Which one would you buy?
Also I would say you buy on condition
SHutchinson said:
I like his attitude. It's become so valuable that it's more like a museum piece than something to use and enjoy. I doubt he needs the money and tearing about the country roads can't be as exhilirating as his many track outings in some often quite exotic metal.
If you don't need the money and still enjoy it not sure why you'd sell it, surely the value is irrelevant? (it's insured after all ;-). For me it'll probably be the ultimate car ever, no chance I'd sell unless I really, really had to.danp said:
SHutchinson said:
I like his attitude. It's become so valuable that it's more like a museum piece than something to use and enjoy. I doubt he needs the money and tearing about the country roads can't be as exhilirating as his many track outings in some often quite exotic metal.
If you don't need the money and still enjoy it not sure why you'd sell it, surely the value is irrelevant? (it's insured after all ;-). For me it'll probably be the ultimate car ever, no chance I'd sell unless I really, really had to.suffolk009 said:
danp said:
SHutchinson said:
I like his attitude. It's become so valuable that it's more like a museum piece than something to use and enjoy. I doubt he needs the money and tearing about the country roads can't be as exhilirating as his many track outings in some often quite exotic metal.
If you don't need the money and still enjoy it not sure why you'd sell it, surely the value is irrelevant? (it's insured after all ;-). For me it'll probably be the ultimate car ever, no chance I'd sell unless I really, really had to.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff