High Performance, £30-40k, Least Depreciation?

[trowelhead]

So you have 30-40k to spend.

What options are there for desirable performance cars in this price bracket that will hold their value the best?

• Ability to be driven daily and add say 10k+ miles a year so no "garage queens" / classics...

My thoughts are that cars like the below are actually going to cost alot less than for example newer stuff like M4s / A45 AMG etc with their high depreciation..

W204 C63 COUPE - surely a decent example will hold it's value. Loads of stories of people "upgrading" to the newer model then missing the 6.2L NA. Also new enough not to feel dated, and not to have too much maintenance issues. Except horrific fuel bills
E92 M3 - as above, new M3/M4 seems to not hit the spot for some. Surely any of the limited editions and good examples will hold their value, perhaps even appreciate?
Nissan GTR - Special cars - newer models are way more expensive than when first released.
Audi R8 - Early ones seem like they do not budge in price, especially the early V8 manuals
Aston V8V - as above!

So can the above be ran effectively cheaper (regardless of higher fuel costs and maintenance) than the newer breed of M4 / C63s etc etc

Edited by trowelhead on Tuesday 27th September 16:28

[trowelhead]

Classy6 said:

My OCD - W124, don't you mean 204?

If you look at Merc prices historically they do depreciate quite a lot. The 204 C63 seems to of been holding out well but they've now released the 205 coupe so a few years+ down the line you might find they've dropped quite a bit more.

An important question to ask would be how long do you plan on owning the car as this factors a lot into how much depreciation you will encounter.

I'd put BMW in the same category as Merc above, albeit if you hold out for long term ownership and have a particularly nice example you may see values rise in the future.

Personally can't see the GTR, R8, V8V dropping much more. A 911 might be a good shout if again looking for long term ownership as values tend to dip, then skyrocket.

Another car to throw in the mix, although I'll let you make you're own mind up on whether values have yet to bottom out would be a Jaguar XKR-S.

Good Luck

Yes W204 my mistake! 911 and XKR-S are great shouts also. Absolutely Love the XKR-S and very rare also.

[trowelhead]

kambites said:

I'd probably go for an Evora S.

What are these like as daily drivers, liveable with?

[trowelhead]

DaveOrange said:

Cayman R.

Even with 10000 miles pa I don't think these will depreciate much at all over the next few years. Get the right spec and you may even see a profit.

I hadn't even considered these thanks!

[trowelhead]

X5TUU said:

rampageturke said:

e39 m5 and bank the rest

Except they're getting on now, look massively dated and are seriously overhyped on PH ... or to mention rapidly becoming the council car of choice ... great!

Hate to say it but agreed. I've owned one, it was ok but massively overrated imo compared to other cars on this thread. Really feel their age now, mine was 16 years old! Could have easily sunk thousands into upkeep also.

Credit where credit is due, it did sound good. And i do like the rear end!

[trowelhead]

g7jhp said:

Manual 997.2 coupe at just under £40k with circa 50k miles.

So this era of 911 is likely to hold up? I always assumed that they were high volume and therefore likely to follow 996 values (down at one point to 10-15k for early ones)

[trowelhead]

edo said:

981 Cayman S. 2 years Porsche Warranty.

2 year/20k service intervals. Done it's worst in depreciation.

eg:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2016...

These are certainly on my radar. I was thinking 981 Cayman S or F Type for the next car. (see http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

But then i considered it might be best to get something slightly older that will depreciate less...

[trowelhead]

Ozzie Osmond said:

I never understand these threads - if you can't handle depreciation, buy a cheaper car. The running costs will be a lot lower as well.

Almost every car depreciates around 50% in 3 years. The ones that don't depreciate either,

• never sold in very big numbers because they're simply not popular, so why would you want one (Evora), or
• depreciated like a lead balloon in their early years because there's no demand in the used market for a car with savage running costs (Maserati).

It is done as a mental exercise when approaching any higher priced purchase. I'm not saying i can't / don't want to handle depreciation, but if a GTR/R8 will retain it's value, it makes those higher running costs more palatable. So for the same price i can run a GTR/R8 vs a leased A45 AMG - now i get to pick which i like best.

I like R8s, i like 981 Caymans, i like alot of cars in between. So looking at depreciation and overall cost of ownership can highlight some interesting opportunities to own interesting cars!

[trowelhead]

The Surveyor said:

I agree with the pointlessness of the thread

[trowelhead]

mikearwas said:

Anyway, I thought you already had a C63?!

Hey mate! Yes i do and it's ace

Just planning ahead, i have a disease that means i usually am compelled to change cars every 6 months or so.

Things are looking good so far and the C63 is the first car in ages i have not wanted to change (fuel costs aside)

But looking ahead, it will be on the cards at some point!

I think a manual R8 V10, F-Type or 981 Cayman are front runners. Has to be special to match up to the C63.

On another note, have you mapped your C63?

[trowelhead]

g7jhp said:

I have no connection with this manual 2010 997.2 C4S coupe with 49k miles for £38,750 on Autotrader. But it does look like a great buy.

Now that is NICE!

[trowelhead]

kambites said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Not as odd as buying a car which you don't like simply because it holds its value!

Oh I agre,e making residuals the main criteria on which you buy is odd but that doesn't mean there aren't very good cars with very strong residuals.

Still, setting a maximum total cost of ownership and then choosing ones favourite car that falls within it seems sensible and depreciation is a major component of that, especially if you don't intend to keep the car very long.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 27th September 17:26

Yep - nothing wrong with trying to get the best car for your cash (/ spend on depreciation)

[trowelhead]

NickCQ said:

I'm convinced that the ugly fried egg headlights on the 996 are a bigger factor in its depressed values than anything else!

Yeah they are not my cup of tea

[trowelhead]

mikearwas said:

Not yet mate. To be honest I sometimes question the need. My mate has a Tamora running just under 400bhp and the C63 was only a tiny bit slower (half a car length) upto about 9 leptons from a roll and quicker above. It's already too fast for the road really and I'm worried il get myself in trouble.

It's more the fact that I know it's not producing what it can due to artificial restriction that bugs me more than the need for more power.

If you want more performance I would try the Ftype. Only car I've driven that was more lairy than the C63. It tried to spit me off in third gear, dry but bumpy road in a straight line with everything on. Luckily I was awake.

Edited by mikearwas on Tuesday 27th September 19:46

I feel exactly the same way. It's more the fact that there is an artificial limit there rather than i feel it needs more power (it doesn't!)

The V8 F-Type appeals to me in the same way as the C63 - i'm sure there are more accomplished cars out there but there is something about the V8 F Type that is just mental!