Seriously Overpriced Cars

[Joratk]

To be fair, that Murci replica would probably fool me if it passed me on the road. If it was parked and you got a look inside though it would be a different story

[99dndd]

krisdelta said:

I can't think this isn't rather optimistic at £40k given other cars of this vintage are @30-40% less. The reason for the premium, Ross Brawn on the V5...... it's been for sale for 8 months or so now and no one biting...

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

Ad said:

THIS CAR WAS OWNED BY FORMULA 1 GOD ROSS BRAWN (NAME STILL ON LOGBOOK)

Is that his new job title? Liberty Media certainly are doing things differently.

[lowdrag]

Just had a press report in on a sale in Lyons the other day. Is a 1982 Renault 5 Turbo really £85,000 these days?

[MDMA .]

lowdrag said:

Just had a press report in on a sale in Lyons the other day. Is a 1982 Renault 5 Turbo really £85,000 these days?

No

[J4CKO]

99dndd said:

krisdelta said:

I can't think this isn't rather optimistic at £40k given other cars of this vintage are @30-40% less. The reason for the premium, Ross Brawn on the V5...... it's been for sale for 8 months or so now and no one biting...

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

Ad said:

THIS CAR WAS OWNED BY FORMULA 1 GOD ROSS BRAWN (NAME STILL ON LOGBOOK)

Is that his new job title? Liberty Media certainly are doing things differently.

Jesus, the desperation, nice car but not sure why a mildly interesting name on the logbook makes it 15 plus grand dearer than any other, it isnt worth any more than any other E63 AMG estate of similar age and miles

Not sure why any pervious owner makes any difference, its a car, ok, Jimmy Saviles molestation mobile is best avoided as is anything connected with someone that notorious if it is easily identifiable but would a nondescript car really matter, positively or negatively based on who has owned it ?

[Fast Bug]

lowdrag said:

Just had a press report in on a sale in Lyons the other day. Is a 1982 Renault 5 Turbo really £85,000 these days?

It's not your ruin of the mill 5 Turbo though...



1 of 7 in that colour if you're counting

[ambuletz]

Just came across this and I thought it was rather expensive.

mk4 GTi with 101k going for £4000. it's not an anniversary edition or anything.

[Fast Bug]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/272717880577?clk_rvr_id=...

[irish boy]

I get the retro thing but £22k for a golf gti with 100k is ridiculous.


http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C842008

[Dimebars]

ambuletz said:

Just came across this and I thought it was rather expensive.

mk4 GTi with 101k going for £4000. it's not an anniversary edition or anything.

"Future Classic"

Doubtful, given it's widely regarded as the worst Golf GTI in history, and that its green...............

[Screechmr2]

irish boy said:

I get the retro thing but £22k for a golf gti with 100k is ridiculous.


http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C842008

and in 34 years and 101k miles it's never been used in the wet, what did they do if it started raining - pull over, turn the car off, wait for the rain to stop and the roads go dry before setting off again? Must have been a bugger if they wanted a day out in it but it had rained recently, would have to take a different car or cancel their plans.

[Fun Bus]

Dimebars said:

ambuletz said:

Just came across this and I thought it was rather expensive.

mk4 GTi with 101k going for £4000. it's not an anniversary edition or anything.

"Future Classic"

Doubtful, given it's widely regarded as the worst Golf GTI in history, and that its green...............

Maybe, but they have a following. I sold a 65k mile, 2003, 180bhp Mk4 GTi for £3k and that was nearly two years ago. Ok, so it was standard, FSH and wanted for nothing. Went to an enthusiast who also had a Mk4 Anniversary show car.

[Gunk]

Dimebars said:

ambuletz said:

Just came across this and I thought it was rather expensive.

mk4 GTi with 101k going for £4000. it's not an anniversary edition or anything.

"Future Classic"

Doubtful, given it's widely regarded as the worst Golf GTI in history, and that its green...............

"Widely regarded" a caveat for your personal opinion. The Mk 4 was in fact a huge improvement on the Mk 3 which in GTi guise only produced 115 bhp and was as dull as dishwater. The 150 bhp 1.8T was not a bad car, very smooth and refined, great interior. it didn't have the best dynamics, but that was resolved in 2004 with the brilliant Mk 5

[Fun Bus]

I keep telling my Wife that I wish I'd kept hers. The 180bhp was proper quick. And, you know what, could be fun too.

[Gunk]

Fun Bus said:

I keep telling my Wife that I wish I'd kept hers. The 180bhp was proper quick. And, you know what, could be fun too.

My wife had a 1.8T and then a V6 4 Motion, I remember them as really nice cars especially the 1.8T, I ended up using it myself for work for about a year and the cabin was a really nice place to be.

[Sa Calobra]

Absolutely no offence meant but I've drive a few MK4's including the 4motion. They were lovely in a straight line or motorway/fairly standard stuff. I (personally) wouldn't describe them as fun.

[anonymous-user]

Sa Calobra said:

Absolutely no offence meant but I've drive a few MK4's including the 4motion. They were lovely in a straight line or motorway/fairly standard stuff. I (personally) wouldn't describe them as fun.

The 4motion was supposed to be dog st. the mark 4 could be fun in gti guise, yes not pin sharp, but the chassis was good, a bit heavy but defiantly not st. But it probably depends what you compare it to to assess fun level.

[f1nn]

Gunk said:

"Widely regarded" a caveat for your personal opinion. The Mk 4 was in fact a huge improvement on the Mk 3 which in GTi guise only produced 115 bhp and was as dull as dishwater. The 150 bhp 1.8T was not a bad car, very smooth and refined, great interior. it didn't have the best dynamics, but that was resolved in 2004 with the brilliant Mk 5

The Mk3 was available with the 150BHP ABF engine.

[Gompo]

f1nn said:

Gunk said:

"Widely regarded" a caveat for your personal opinion. The Mk 4 was in fact a huge improvement on the Mk 3 which in GTi guise only produced 115 bhp and was as dull as dishwater. The 150 bhp 1.8T was not a bad car, very smooth and refined, great interior. it didn't have the best dynamics, but that was resolved in 2004 with the brilliant Mk 5

The Mk3 was available with the 150BHP ABF engine.

Plus you could get a 115bhp Mk4 GTI anyway.

[Gunk]

Gompo said:

f1nn said:

Gunk said:

"Widely regarded" a caveat for your personal opinion. The Mk 4 was in fact a huge improvement on the Mk 3 which in GTi guise only produced 115 bhp and was as dull as dishwater. The 150 bhp 1.8T was not a bad car, very smooth and refined, great interior. it didn't have the best dynamics, but that was resolved in 2004 with the brilliant Mk 5

The Mk3 was available with the 150BHP ABF engine.

Plus you could get a 115bhp Mk4 GTI anyway.

I was only badged a GTI in the U.K. Everywhere else it was a GT