Which holds their value better?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/...29/article.html
Mwhaha.
However: http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/...67/article.html
I've also seen numbers as high as 62% for the Z.
In the end they are about the same. But the numbers don't really mean anything. I mean they are a good benchmark for "worth" but they'll vary with location and condition.
Mwhaha.
However: http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/...67/article.html
I've also seen numbers as high as 62% for the Z.
In the end they are about the same. But the numbers don't really mean anything. I mean they are a good benchmark for "worth" but they'll vary with location and condition.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
as a 350Z owner, I was always under the impression that the S2000 held its value better than the 350Z (as a percentage of original value).
But, lets just pretend that...for the sake of this argument, the S2000 retains 52% of its value...and the 350Z holds 51% of its value. (the numbers stated in the edmunds article)
As all of us know...buying any car as an investment is stupid. But what would be even more stupid, would be feeling a sense of pride based on how well it holds its value w/out considering the entire picture.
for example:
in the above scenario, if you were to sell your car after 5 years at that percentage on the S2000 you would have lost $16,440. On the Z you would have lost $13,549.
Now...what would be even dumber than either of those, would be feeling a sense of pride in that you are actually loosing less money (making the less dumb choice). And even dumber than that would be proving it on the rival car's forum.
In fact, the only smart choice here, is to be that guy who buys it for 51 or 52% of what it had originally cost.
WORK IS SO BORING!!!
But, lets just pretend that...for the sake of this argument, the S2000 retains 52% of its value...and the 350Z holds 51% of its value. (the numbers stated in the edmunds article)
As all of us know...buying any car as an investment is stupid. But what would be even more stupid, would be feeling a sense of pride based on how well it holds its value w/out considering the entire picture.
for example:
in the above scenario, if you were to sell your car after 5 years at that percentage on the S2000 you would have lost $16,440. On the Z you would have lost $13,549.
Now...what would be even dumber than either of those, would be feeling a sense of pride in that you are actually loosing less money (making the less dumb choice). And even dumber than that would be proving it on the rival car's forum.
In fact, the only smart choice here, is to be that guy who buys it for 51 or 52% of what it had originally cost.
WORK IS SO BORING!!!
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,605
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Originally Posted by harshfury,Oct 24 2006, 11:26 AM
as a 350Z owner, I was always under the impression that the S2000 held its value better than the 350Z (as a percentage of original value).
But, lets just pretend that...for the sake of this argument, the S2000 retains 52% of its value...and the 350Z holds 51% of its value. (the numbers stated in the edmunds article)
As all of us know...buying any car as an investment is stupid. But what would be even more stupid, would be feeling a sense of pride based on how well it holds its value w/out considering the entire picture.
for example:
in the above scenario, if you were to sell your car after 5 years at that percentage on the S2000 you would have lost $16,440. On the Z you would have lost $13,549.
Now...what would be even dumber than either of those, would be feeling a sense of pride in that you are actually loosing less money (making the less dumb choice). And even dumber than that would be proving it on the rival car's forum.
In fact, the only smart choice here, is to be that guy who buys it for 51 or 52% of what it had originally cost.
WORK IS SO BORING!!!
But, lets just pretend that...for the sake of this argument, the S2000 retains 52% of its value...and the 350Z holds 51% of its value. (the numbers stated in the edmunds article)
As all of us know...buying any car as an investment is stupid. But what would be even more stupid, would be feeling a sense of pride based on how well it holds its value w/out considering the entire picture.
for example:
in the above scenario, if you were to sell your car after 5 years at that percentage on the S2000 you would have lost $16,440. On the Z you would have lost $13,549.
Now...what would be even dumber than either of those, would be feeling a sense of pride in that you are actually loosing less money (making the less dumb choice). And even dumber than that would be proving it on the rival car's forum.
In fact, the only smart choice here, is to be that guy who buys it for 51 or 52% of what it had originally cost.
WORK IS SO BORING!!!
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Saki GT,Oct 24 2006, 12:27 PM
I think Nissan sells something like 35k 350Zs each year in NA, so I don't really care what the resale is - they are too common imo.
funny...you know what else is rare? people who eat bowls of shlt. Want me to fix you a nice steaming bowl?
