mitch236

I don't think it's fair to use the 996 model line for resale value comparisons. Let's face it, Porsche was in trouble and needed something like the 996 line which was relatively inexpensive to produce and with the Boxter, Porsche sold alot of units. That's what allows them to give us the GT-3's. Now with the 997 line, I think resale will improve. The car's lines are much more beautiful and artistic. The interiors are getting much better.

As for Porsche's desire to make the RS into a real collectable, I don't think that would even get a mention in a board meeting. The only thing Porsche cares about is profit. And that's the way it should be. If they think there is a market for another 1000 RS's, they will make them.

Jack

I agree -- more 's from all sorts of people regardless of age or type of car-make they prefer. 170 more, why not?

I haven't seen any on the road in SoCal either except for the ones my friends own.

Bob Rouleau

1) I think that using a Home Equity Loan to buy toys is foolish. That's a personal and philosophical thing with me.

2) I have no illusions about the depreciation of the RS. It may be a hot item right now, but when the 998 GT3 comes out with a 3.8 liter direct injection 475HP motor and 6 or 7 speed PDK gearbox, we will all rush to buy the newer car. I believe that the RS will depreciate more slowly than other models because it is limited production and has broader appeal than the 996GT3 which is more of a hard-core machine.

3) Porsches now depreciate like everything else because the production quantities have gone way up. As a shareholder I am not complaining. I bought on the strength of the 993 back in 1994.

4) Ferrari remains somewhat unique in two regards. They build many fewer cars than Porsche. This creates a surplus of demand over supply on certain models. Not all mind you, the mid engined "sports" cars do well. The front engined V 12's (the real Ferraris?) do not, although the 599 might change that.

When they do build a supercar, F40, F50, Enzo etc. the cars are sufficiently different that the older models maintain their appeal. The fact that they are built in very small numbers doesn't hurt either. The 73 RS falls into that category since nothing as light has come along in 34 years and given the safety rules probably won't.

The Carrera GT deserves to be on the same plane as the Enzo (400 made) or McLaren F1 (200) and would if they had built the 500 originally planned. Porsche got taken by speculators who artificially inflated the demand. Sad, because the car is absolutely superb.

best,

NOBLEGT3

[QUOTE=Bob Rouleau]. The 73 RS falls into that category since nothing as light has come along in 34 years and given the safety rules probably won't.

QUOTE]

LOTUS EXIGE S ...2000 POUNDS...TRY IT...YOU WILL LIKE IT...YES IM YELLING

Carrera GT

I don't think it's fair to forgive any competitor or make any concessions because they made a bad sequence of decisions. It's all part of their challenge. The 996 should not have been bland and it should not have had a cheap cabin (in design and materials) and it should not have looked and sounded the same as the entry-level Boxster at half the price.

For a 911 enthusiast, the 993 was nearing perfection (if a little heavy) for its shape, it's lines, the sounds (from the engine with motor sound package to the simple, quintessential sound of the door closing) and feel of it in handling and gear shifts and steering. Porsche should have progressed along those lines. Instead, the built a buzzy, frizzy engine with no character, the gear shift felt like a Toyota with the same Bowden cables, the suspension was dulled down, the body was slab-sided and bland to the point of being a parody with ridiculously long over-hangs and absurd compromises to shave manufacturing costs yet wildly expensive complex headlights.

Well, the 996 has already been beaten to death many times over, I'll just kick it once more and move on.

I sometimes wonder if the 996 wasn't meant to be the bearer of all bad news (water cooled engine, cheap manufacturing, mass production, more expensive, lower resale, second-rate electronics) you name it, the 996 brought every bit of bad news imaginable from Porsche.

And while the 997 is leagues ahead, it's still second rate in cabin trim, materials and electronics. Just compare a lightly optioned Carrera at say $80K to any fully loaded Japanese car at less than half the price. I can't explain why Porsche can't send their buyers to get the latest in electronics and the higher grades of plastics and materials? Sure, the car costs more to make and in far lower numbers, but that's all the more premium available to afford a decent nav system for $2K or improve the cabin trim to be actual CF lightweight trim instead of faux CF on plastic.

If they really had to crash test the RS to get the tin-top (no sunroof) then why no test their customers for manual windows, thin DOT glass, lightweight stripped cabin, etc. etc.?

But I digress. It comes with the territory ... : )

As for resale, I'm looking at an '06 C4S Cab with a window sticker of nearly $130K and barely 10K miles on the clock ... asking price with 100K mile CPO is under $90K.

Just look at the 40% residuals Porsche Financials sets for the GT3 over four years. I can't imagine the Carrera will fair any better. That's the same curve as the 996.

Of course, it's been ten years, so the 993 curves -- in body and in depreciation -- look great by comparison, but until Porsche takes some notes from the Ferrari play book, depreciation will be the major cost of owning a Porsche.

Time for a change.

I wonder what the resale percentages are like on a Ruf ...

Alan Smithee

Don't confuse artificially low lease residuals with future values. The former is not necessarily a prediction of the latter.

stuka

I have many hard money lender clients that are making $$$$ hand over fist right now. The story that they tell is just sickening, of how idiotic people are with their HELOC.

The lack of resale, and the army of them in the second hand market, and how cheap they are. Simply put, there are better SUV's out there for much less. And it, along with the Boxster, have done wonders to cheapen the brand.

Anyway, I just find this whole resale thing silly with the RS. It's a modern mass produced Porsche. It trades the lack of resale value for awesome reliability and cheap running cost. I would not even dream of running a 360, 430, or the CS variant as hard as any dry sump P car. Just let other guys have their RS and let's all have fun driving it.

NOBLEGT3

[QUOTE=Carrera GT]



If they really had to crash test the RS to get the tin-top (no sunroof) then why no test their customers for manual windows, thin DOT glass, lightweight stripped cabin, etc. etc.?

[QUOTE]

head out of the sand please......oh yeah and power windows are lighter than wind ups nowadays...welcome to the 90's

Alan Smithee

Crash testing a car with manual windows is especially difficult when there is not one 997 with manual windows in existence.

tocho1

I've been watching this (and other threads) on the subject and can't help it anymore...blah,blah,blah,blah....the Porsche 911, in all in its variations, has been in production for 40 years now and every new iteration is better than the one before...I still remember the first time I drove one almost as much as I remember other most personal things...No other car that I know of has the character the 911 has....yes, some are faster and some have nicer wood interiors, so what? IN 1 or 2 years they will be all gone, and guess waht, the 911 will still be here...Ah, I forgot! And yes it depreciates and you know why? Because we all DRIVE the damn cars as opposed to park them somewhere like he Ferrari guys do.

Sorry if somewhat OT, just tired of all the whining about what I think is probablky the best sports car ever made.

And the RS is worth every penny!

ebanzero

Amen. and with that in mind, lets give this topic a rest.

fc-racer

If it weren't for the depreciation that Porsches have, I would not have been able to get into p-cars at all so I, for one, am happy with the depreciation levels and could care less how many they produce. The more GT3's at the track, the better! In case I crash mine, I want there to be a huge supply out there to replace it with.

I've always wanted a Ferrari, but can't get into them at a decent price point because of their low depreciation. I was looking at a 360 instead of the GT3, but spending the same money for a 7 or 8 year old car just didn't appeal to me and from everything I've read, the GT3 is superior in all aspects except raw beauty.

If I owned Porsche, the company, I would want to produce cars that generate a depreciation curve better than the mass market cars, but worse than Ferrari. If I could keep it in that range, it would still be a great buy relative to other cars and would open up the secondary market to more Porsche enthusiasts which can then drive my parts and repair business.

///Mous3

Nick

Bob, to my dismay, if the rumors are true that Ferrari is introducing a model below the 430 next year, then I believe Ferrari is taking a page out of the Porsche book and depreciation will accelerate for the mid-engine model.

I am not optimistic because when Ferrari executives were asked which car manufacturer they felt had its act together they indicated Porsche. Those of us who moved away from Porsche because of their business practices (not the time or place to discuss) may find ourselves back into what we have been trying to avoid.

BTW, how do you handle the warranty issue while tracking Porsche's? It is my understanding Porsche does not extend the warranty to failures as a result of track events.

eclou

The rumored Dino doesn't sound like it will be priced too far downmarket - $150k+. Not exactly a Boxster-type loss leader