I agree on that "low owners" myth. My car had many owners but there are absolutely no traces of abuse of any kind. On a flip side 1 owner can treat the car like garbage.

 

Low number of owners is not a "myth"... it's just that some people don't use the information correctly. If the car has been owned by the current owner for a long period of time, you can really draw some conclusions about how the car has been treated. It may show that the car has not been well cared for and to walk away, or it may show that the car has been impeccably cared for. Low owners by itself is not a win, and high number of owners is not a problem by itself, but in this case the OP described both cars as flawless condition, save for the cosmetic paint work. My only comment was to make sure that the car that has been flipped around actually has no paint work if that's the criteria he's using, because it can be hard to spot and it would be disappointing to buy a car specifically to have original paint and find out later that it's not. The things that you risk with many owners is a situation like that moron selling the 997.2 GT3 on bring a trailer in the paint to sample orange color with all the stickers all over it. He published a video for the world to see how he cold starts the car and then immediately starts shifting at 7,000+ RPM and not using the clutch well. When you have multiple owners at a short period of time the risk of having a bad driver who didn't damage the car enough to show is definitely higher.

Again, Low owners by itself is not a clear indication, but all other things equal on a flawless car, most people would prefer low owner numbers, especially if the most recent owner has been for a long period of time.

 

This is a good point... quality and known quantity of the previous owners can have an inverse relationship to the low owner theory.

 

Total myth. My car had 2 owners in the same family for the first two owners and then owner 3 and 4 were collectors so it moved from two collections quickly all in 9,000 miles. Car condition is everything...

 

personally I find it hard to give advice on which car you might want, since I have no idea if you are buying this as an investment or as a driver (& even then, street or track?).

27k miles is a tad up there,... plus I find it hard to believe that all those price points are equal cuz there's no way you are finding a 991.2 GT3 manual for the price of a 997.1 RS (w/ 27k miles). If you HAVE, then buy that one (cuz at that point who cares about depreciation!)

=Steve

 

I suggest you drive an 07/08 RS first before considering the swap. IMHO there is no discernible difference between the standard GT3 bar the flywheel, assuming both cars are either comfort or clubsport spec. The delta in price is definitely not worth a C4s. If you need to keep just one car, add some tasty mods to the GT3, it doesn't take much for it to surpass an RS as a driver's car.

 

But it will never have the exclusivity of the RS.

 

Thanks for all the comments - the current cars are in fact part of the problem - my current 2007 GT3 is a 20k mile car and the 2008 C4S a 25k mile car. Both are exceptionally clean drivers but not clean enough to warrant treating them as "collectibles". The GT3 RS does have a dose of extra cachet however that is also an indicator to keep mileage down - which seems to defeat the object of owning what must be among the most epic enthusiast's cars ever..

 

& there in lies the problem. If you buy into the "exclusivity" montra,.. then you'll tailor off as being a driver. At least of that car anyway.

be honest with yourself. Are you swapping to the RS because you want appreciation, or at a minimum for it to retain whatever value point you buy into it?

 

Documented bumper repaint? Or accident repair?

All else equal, , I’d prefer car w PCCB.