Bond

Take a look at item 1842762511 on ebay, its a 1997 Porsche turbo with 8150 miles
reserve met - I am high bidder at 80,000 (my max bid is 81,001.01 - I spoke
with the owner the car is nice but wife says no black cars- I don't want to retract
my bid or become a non-paying bidder. So I wanted the group to be aware of this car. There is 8 months left on the
extended warranty, owner has posted his phone # - he is an older gentleman
that bought car in 1998 with 1100 miles on it.

Bond

Bond

Owner will take 80K, all records are at either Cutter Motors in Santa Barbara or Beverly Hills Porsche.

Bond

Phil

88clbsport

80k is not that great of a price IMO, especially if there are questions on it's condition. I know of quite a few that traded hands in the mid 70's

Bond

[quote]Originally posted by 88clbsport:
<strong>80k is not that great of a price IMO, especially if there are questions on it's condition. I know of quite a few that traded hands in the mid 70's</strong><hr></blockquote>

This car had 8150 miles no questionable history - what were the mileages for the mid 70's cars, the comparison would be useful (were they 96 or 97), thanks.

Edward

While low milage is good, significantly low milage is not necessarily good, nor worth paying a premium for, IMHO. Records, PPI, condition, and options, I feel, outweigh low milage, especially since a car that is rarely driven can have problems (e.g. hard/dry seals,o-ring/gaskets, etc.) that a car with regular "exercise" won't have. Just my thoughts. Good luck with the hunt.

Edward

Tone

I agree with Bond; a 97tt, w/ mileage and options as shown here looks like a very good deal at 80K. If the color or options don't work for you fine - but if they do, you'd be very hard pressed to do better than this example IMO. Please post any ads if you disagree.

88clbsport

97 with 45k for 76k (atlanta)
97 with 56k for 77k (here in so cal)

What they sold for!
80k is not bad, but IMO if spending that much your wife is right....get the color you want.

I hope the TT prices hold strong in the 80's however, it just seemed to me they were dipping from november 2001 to april 2002(when I was looking very hard to buy one)

How about this one?
Price $67900
Mileage 66433
Exterior Color Black
Interior Color Black
Stock No. 20516

VIN WP0AC2995VS375614


Comments
Fast and Furious ! 1997 Porsche Twin Turbo, black on black, aluminum package, motor sound, records. (3UHX315)

This is at California Cars here in So Cal. Price seems really low, but does have records etc.

This one sounds even betterPrice $66900

Mileage 49500

Exterior Color Black

Interior Color Tan

1997 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo, Black/Cashmere beige, Supple leather, aluminum instruments, shifter/brake upgrade, aluminum sill plates, CD changer, Colored Crests, Stainless Oval tips and more. 400+HP All wheel Drive, Warranty to Dec. 2004 and up to 75K miles included. Maint. records, original window sticker. Many say this is the best air cooled car ever produced by PORSCHE!!!!

Tone

88clubsp:
Sorry, I agree these are good prices, but all these cars you list are MUCH higher mileage. Show a couple examples as listed where it's sub 10K miles for $80K...I haven't seen many - therefore I think you're still off saying this is not a good deal, it is. You can argue that real-low miles don't justify the premium--that's still a consumer decision, but market prices very low miles higher - period. Considering most these cars get driven 5-10K per year, it'll take a few years of ownership of this ebay example before it reaches the miles of the cars you've listed....

Anir

Jason,

I agree with Tone. To my eye, your comparison would support the fact that $80K is a good price for the '97 model - 80% fewer miles for only $3K more. What's not to like?

The low-mileage cars that get into trouble are the ones that are rarely driven, or constantly driven over only very short distances without attention to proper maintenance. As long as fluid/filter changes have been performed, and the car gets to stretch its legs every few weeks, I would much prefer the example with only 8,000 miles.

I purchased my car with '97 993TT with 6,000 miles in 2000, and it still looked and smelled brand new. It's been a flawless car, and still has only 16,000 miles on it now despite the fact that it's a daily driver. I only live 3 miles from the office, but I make sure to perform maintenance more frequently than recommended, and stretch the car's legs on the highway and the track ("Italian tune up" ).

So...I wouldn't shy away from low-mileage cars if there is good documentation of proper owner care.

BTW, I agree that higher-mileage cars can be attractive buys if the price is significantly lower than a lower-mileage example. I purchased a '91 Q45 in 1994 with 44,000 miles for $20,000, and it served me very well until I sold it in 2000 with 150,000 miles. In that case, I received a discount of over 60% off the new price because of the mileage.

88clbsport

I just re-read this post(is that a word?) and you guys are right! I remember posting this and was doing a lot of work/multitasking. For some reason I didn't pay attention to the 8,150 miles just the 81k price....maybe when I saw the number I was thinking price. Whatever the reason I TOTALLY AGREE. I would have purchased this car for 5-10k more than one with 5x's the mileage.

I did end up buying a higher mileage (60k) c4s, but I use it as a daily driver. Due to the fact that I wanted to keep my Club Sport I decided against the TT.

I apologize for my oversight...glad to see you guys called me out though!

Christer

[quote]Originally posted by 88clbsport:
[QB]I would have purchased this car for 5-10k more than one with 5x's the mileage.

I did end up buying a higher mileage (60k) c4s, but I use it as a daily driver. B]<hr></blockquote>

Thank God some people are prepared to pay inflated prices for low-milers. Leaves some good deals around.

Interestingly, the automotive market is the only one (that I can think of) where this strange phenomenon (i.e. premium on underusage) happens. I wonder if this could catch on in housing. i.e. 2 houses of similar size, style and age - but one has had FEWER people living in it on average over the years. This one would be worth more, right?

Keep the pills going.

simaloney

I have to agree with the last poster. I think it is silly to pay a lot of extra money for a very low mileage car. I honestly beleive a well maintained but higher mileage car will be as good if not better than a near new 5 or 6 year old car.

I bought my 993 TT with nearly 40k miles it had a years warranty left looked and smelt like new. Would I have paid an extra 10K for the same car with only 8K miles ? Not a chance

Si

Bill P.

No question that these cars, when well cared for, are great regardless of the miles.

However, as I purchased mine as a daily driver and intend to keep the car for quite a while, low milage appealed to me. Also, I liked the idea of having a car that looked like new and I was willing to pay a premium for that benifit alone. The '97 I purchased a few weeks ago had 8800 miles on it.

Bill

Tone

[quote]Originally posted by 88clbsport:
<strong>I just re-read this post(is that a word?) and you guys are right! I remember posting this and was doing a lot of work/multitasking. For some reason I didn't pay attention to the 8,150 miles just the 81k price....maybe when I saw the number I was thinking price. Whatever the reason I TOTALLY AGREE. I would have purchased this car for 5-10k more than one with 5x's the mileage.

I did end up buying a higher mileage (60k) c4s, but I use it as a daily driver. Due to the fact that I wanted to keep my Club Sport I decided against the TT.

I apologize for my oversight...glad to see you guys called me out though!</strong><hr></blockquote>

-------
No problem Jason.
Just wanted to help out and make sure people didn't have unrealistic expectations on what prices really run.