JohnJL

Jeff,
I saw your ad in my search, but was honestly put off by the mileage vs. price. I don't consider your mileage to be too high, just too high at that price. I'm seeing cars with 20K fewer miles with similar asking prices.

That being said, yours is one I lust after, but 42K is more than I want to spend right now as I need to leave room for the upgrades I know I'll want to add.

No offense intended at all, just contributing to the conversation....

adsc4s

Sorry for the incorrect name Doug,

My comment was regarding Turbo Look to Turbo relationship. The Speedster is not a Turbo Look.

I do agree that the C2S has depreciated much less than a turbo.

DC from Cape Cod

No worries, my wife calls me by the wrong name all the time...<grin>.

My example of the Speedster was to show evidence that a NA car could actually be worth more than a turbo (coupe) of the same year.

The basis for my belief in the 1998 model year is that it represents the end of the air-cooled era...and as long as their are air-cooled geeks like myself in the market, this model year will always be special.

adsc4s

I agree, 1998 is special. It was the end of the aircooled 911's.

If you want to see minimal depreciation, try getting a 993TT S!

Dr. No

JZ, I think you need pictures. As a 993 shopper, I get hinky when the car advertised has cosmetic or other mods, and there are no pictures that show "wow, neat car."

I'd be interested, but I'm not an Ocean Blue guy.

OldGuy

DC there is no relation between the turbo and a 98C2S They are two different cars with 2 different markets. Youre assumption that the last of the air cooled turbos would be worth less than a NA car period, is more than silly, no where in Porsche history is this true, no where! AND you decide that the last of the Air cooled Turbos will be less valuable. That is a crock! The fact that the C2S depreciated less than a turbo is because it was worth less to begin with, much less. The reasons the percentage is greater is because the Turbo was SO much more valuable to begin with. Almost twice. I admire you for your stubborness to ignore history but as Finn said not in a million years will your C2S EVER be worth more than a TT. (equivalent milage condition,)it aint gonna happen.
The reason I said fake is because a Turbo LOOK infers that it LOOKS like a turbo. ITs NOT a Turbo but LOOKS like a turbo. If a C2S was SO dang valuable JZ's C2S would have sold a long time ago. Your example of a speester is irrelanvant in this case. It would be more applicable in a disscussion of
low number example runs.
Numbers ARE relevant because scarceness increases value in some models sometimes SPeedsters are valuable because they only made 800 of em. They made less than 650 97 TT's and than number is relavant to your argument which is not supported by much at all.
You have no historical foundation, you use a couple of price checks and those arent right saying turbos were declining in value when in fact asking prices have been going up for half a year.
As Aerosmith once said "Dream On!"

DC from Cape Cod

I never said there was a relationship between the two cars. My conjecture was that, based on the 20% depreciation of the turbo v.s. the 0% depreciation of the C2S (over the past three years), that the C2S might wind up more valuable than in the turbo some day. The depreciation, as a percentage, has absolutely nothing to do with initial price...that would only apply to gross dollar depreciation.

1998 was the last year of the air-cooled car...1997 was not. We obviously disagree about the importance of this fact. That is fine.

The C2S was produced as the turbo was not selling well and there were extra bodies to be used. Saying it is a fake turbo is a bit of a stretch. If the C2S is a fake turbo...what does that make the C4S...that is everything a turbo is without the power?

Not sure about JZ's car...did he have a lot of miles? We were talking about low mileage cars, weren't we? Did you know that there were only about 1,000 1998 C2S cars brought to the US? For purposes of value, I submit that 600 - 1,000 run cars are in the same ballpark. Your opinion may differ, that is fine.

I have a historical foundation from monitoring actual selling prices, monitoring the trends in asking prices at a few high-end dealers, speaking with brokers and having almost daily discussions with Porsche experts and salespeople...some that you might even find posting here.

We are obviously not going to be in complete agreement. The facts are the facts...the top line turbos have dropped 20% in the past 3 years and the top line C2S have not dropped at all. Our area of difference is what we interpret from that data.

We will probably never be in agreement but that doesn't mean our discussion of the topic must deteriorate into using adjectives that are not relevant to supporting our positions.

nman413

Umm. I can't believe this thread has gone on for this long. I rather be driving my car.

That said, my car is very very close to 60k so I guess it must not be worth much. So I guess that's why I don't really mind taking things off although certainly not to Bob's extent.

For a comparison, compare a 1998 C2S to a 1998 Turbo S. I think that's a better comparison since they are both the "last of the last". Paraphrasing Highlander, "There can only be one".

CP

Jauder,

That's a GREAT point. Just for reference, the 993TTs are in the $100,000 range. Probably range from $92k minimum and up from there. Knowing that they retailed for $150,000+, they lost roughly 1/3 of their value. My guess is most of the owneers paid OVER MSRP when they got their cars then, so the hit is probably more than 33%. Wonder if the regular 98 Carreras are in a similar boat.

The last two years were brutal on the TTs. I'd say as late as early 02, they'd still be in the $130k range. Just took a dive in the last two years. I guess just 181 samples available still couldn't help hold it's value.

CP

adsc4s

I think this is a flawed statement. At the time of the C2S production, they were building TT's and C4S'. I believe the C2S was launched as the "swan song" to the air cooled cars and utilizing some excess parts in the parts bin.

Either way, it won't bother me because I am planning to drive the @#$%& out of my car so I am afraid my car will never qualify for a low mileage pristine garage queen.

Bradford

DC,

It's just the arrogance. You have a great car, you just don't need to jamb it down everyone's throat about the value of your 98' low mileage "S" model. You've told us over and over and over. The value means nothing unless you want to sell it. There are 4 of them for sale on ebay currently. The higher prices ones are not even getting bids, whereas the TT's are very hot right now and in great demand.

hddude

Even with the "high" miles (57k), doesn't this data point from one of the best markets for sports cars indicate most of this thread has been about one guy who probably also thinks NASDAQ is overdue for a thousand point run-up? I hope his optimism bears fruit because right now my 401(k) could use some help.

DC from Cape Cod

Thanks for the personal comment.

I wasn't talking about my car and I wasn't intending to be arrogant (if I came across that way, I apologize). My car isn't low mileage (IMO, low is under 15K) and it isn't for sale. We were talking about trends in general, not about specific cars.

Apparently, this is an extremely sensitive subject for some. If it is not possible to continue discussing it without personal insults, perhaps it is time to end it.

FWIW, I think the economy is in the toilet, the market is still grossly overpriced and we are due for a MAJOR correction. Cash is king.

Stevarino

I can't imagine anyone paying more for a C2S than a TT, all things being equal - mileage, etc... The TT is a supercar, the C2S is a sportscar. In addition, most of the C2S' I've seen have been light on options; less isn't more, more is more.

Valuation of my current car is all academic to me anyway. I'll drive my 993 as God intended - hard. When she starts to show wear, I'll be grateful to find someone's garage queen and do it all over again. But as the C2S has no performance advantage over any other NA car, I'd likely never consider it.

OldGuy

DC you are correct, we need to pull back, we both used the word "silly" I used the word "crock"

But you gotta admitt we had 8 pages of spirited debate and we only used silly and crock. Pretty good eh!

BTW I only give the 993 NA market a glance, But I keep very close tabs on the turbo market, as you say you do. So I know the prices fairly well.

8 pages and not a single cuss word

Damnit