997 TT. The Cheapest Supercar to Run?
997 TT. The Cheapest Supercar to Run?
Author
Discussion

WetWipe

Original Poster:

3,019 posts

243 months

Monday 12th February 2007
quotequote all
Ok lets assume a TT is a "supercar" in the true sense of the word. I believe it is.

Evo mag this month have run a piece on the P1 club and its running (or should that be ruining) expenses. Here are the highlights:

Lamborghini
Murcielago - 2006 servicing costs - £37391!!! Clutch's cost £6k plus fitting. A bonnet badge is £392!

Ferrari
they bought a 456 in 2002. It had 800 miles on the clock and cost them £82k. Therefore it had cost the previous owner £96k in depreciation!

612 - annual servicing cost of £21150!!

BMW
M6 loses 47% depreciation in 1st year!!

Porsche 997 turbo running costs? £351 per year

I am sure those who run Lambos belong to the "if you have to ask you cant afford it" gang but how the hell can even the well wedged up afford such bills. £37k per year FFS

It looks to me as if the Pork Turbo is the supercar bargain of the century and even better is the thought that come 2010 they will be at affordable levels for us mere mortals beer

DeltaHedge

571 posts

243 months

Monday 12th February 2007
quotequote all
That article was pretty slanted though - think who the subject was, ex Maranello (not Ferrari UK as it claimed) and Ducati salesman Nick Hancock.

Wonder why he'd inflate the costs of owning a supercar....? Some of the numbers he/they came up with were laughable, but will serve as useful PR for P1 and put people off buying anything themselves

nem351s

6,021 posts

245 months

Monday 12th February 2007
quotequote all
Those numbers must include depreciation.

If not, it is a direct function of members ragging the car to within an inch of its life (you can smoke the clutch in only a couple of launches).

adam b

29,728 posts

284 months

Monday 12th February 2007
quotequote all
Look beyond the figures. The Lambo cost £37k to P1 not to a usual owner. Probably because it is one of the most popular cars (per the article), so in constant use and probably get 4 or 5 new clutches a year at 35k a pop + lots of tyres etc etc

The 456 deprecition per mile is shocking but mainly because so few miles were covered during many years of ownership. That said V12 Ferraris depreciate horribly and the Porsche costs are a great testament to the "everyday supercar" reputation.

wanta996

5,622 posts

237 months

Tuesday 20th February 2007
quotequote all
Good point BUT with all the TT's everday useabilty and overall fantastic speed and handling, for me, it does not compare to a Lambo in the thrill and I WANT ONE stakes - I know if i had to choose a car for a weekend away from one of these super clubs then i would defo go for the Murci. The TT is a supercar in terms of speed and handling, but in all other aspects, i just dont see it in the same bracket as i saw the original supercars of my generartion eg,Esprit,Testarossa(512),Diablo,EB110,etc,etc.

loach

3,357 posts

246 months

Tuesday 20th February 2007
quotequote all
wanta996 said:
Good point BUT with all the TT's everday useabilty and overall fantastic speed and handling, for me, it does not compare to a Lambo in the thrill and I WANT ONE stakes - I know if i had to choose a car for a weekend away from one of these super clubs then i would defo go for the Murci. The TT is a supercar in terms of speed and handling, but in all other aspects, i just dont see it in the same bracket as i saw the original supercars of my generartion eg,Esprit,Testarossa(512),Diablo,EB110,etc,etc.



You're right in that very little competes with a Ferrari or a Lambo in the 'I want one..' stakes. However, having had a year of servicing and running one of each, I can tell you that they both now feature very highly in the 'I don't want one any more please...' stakes. The figures above seem somewhat inflated, and as mentioned already, are more than likely designed to promote the club and deter ownership. But I've no doubt that a 997 TT would cost a fraction of the amount to run that would be needed thrown at a Lambo/Ferrari. But then that was always a big part of the appeal of Porsche's flagship - no? Ferrari performance without the hysterics.


wanta996

5,622 posts

237 months

Tuesday 20th February 2007
quotequote all
I agree Loach BUT saying a TT is a supercar is like saying an M3 or an M6 is a supercar - Both as practical and agrguably on your everday road as fast as a TT. I am looking at spending upto to £40k on a 996 and i am aware that i could pick up a used 355 but my head rules my heart when buying cars so i would always go for the more practical option which is the 996. I am in no way criticising the 911 BUT i would never compare it to a Murci.

loach

3,357 posts

246 months

Tuesday 20th February 2007
quotequote all
Fair 'nuff. No argument from me. I think a fair few people get both, tbh. A Murcielago for going to the pub, having it large and attractive everything within 5 miles with more than 5ppm peroxide, and a TT for slumming it.


Which is nice.




bastards

Pickled Piper

6,452 posts

265 months

Tuesday 20th February 2007
quotequote all
It was a very interesting article. I agree the cars must get to see some paricularly hard use every single weekend of the year and during the week as well.

Nothing new in terms of the relative running costs. Lambo and Ferrari cost an arm and a leg to maintain. So what's new? Porsche is a very reliable and cheapest to maintain. Yep, new that already. I was shocked by the depreciation on the 6 Series Beemer.

The article also stated that these cars were all under warranty, So aside of clutches, tyres and general service costs the club weren't actually shelling out the amount stated.

pp