2000 ap1 a classic now?
Unless you find a sucker the right person, you can't expect to get KBB value out of a car. Having that low of mileage for its age would make a huge difference, but like everybody else said, even if you don't drive it much, there will come a time that you'll regret getting rid of it if you do. Unless you really need the money, definitely hang on to it.
This is why you should do an average of KBB, NADA and Edmunds for the three pricing categories: Trade-In, Private Party and Dealer Retail. I've done this for every car that I've sold private-party and it cuts down on the haggling because the other person knows that they're getting a fair deal.
So far I've (heard on this thread) read that a classic car is more of a classic based on miles. That would be a no. It might be more valued but it won't make it more of a classic, either it is or it ain't.
It's a classic based on supply and demand? Err, no. The retro styled Challenger was selling for 10k over cost for a while from dealers... it ain't no classic. Classic cars can't be decided by a demand curve alone.
Example. The "57 Chevy" is a known classic, so much so, people don't call it a Bel Air although it is. The 52 Bel Air not, as well known, is also a "classic".
I think it should be understood that the use of the word CLASSIC can be arbitrary and used loosely, and that trying to tie it down to one factor is near impossible. Age is the most clear cut category and even that gets muddled, and did so on this thread (20 vs 25 years).
I love the S2000. I think it has all the things to make it a classic. A cult like following, good looks, great mechanics, durability, and history. I keep hearing this "not many stock examples around". In the end it won't matter, a high number of number matching cars haven't remained "stock" through out their lives. We see plenty of examples of great high dollar cars rolling around and up for auction bringing a price, yes it's true that "stock cars" bring higher values, but just like all things change so will the kind of cars that we look for as time moves forward. Time will tell.
It's a classic based on supply and demand? Err, no. The retro styled Challenger was selling for 10k over cost for a while from dealers... it ain't no classic. Classic cars can't be decided by a demand curve alone.
Example. The "57 Chevy" is a known classic, so much so, people don't call it a Bel Air although it is. The 52 Bel Air not, as well known, is also a "classic".
I think it should be understood that the use of the word CLASSIC can be arbitrary and used loosely, and that trying to tie it down to one factor is near impossible. Age is the most clear cut category and even that gets muddled, and did so on this thread (20 vs 25 years).
I love the S2000. I think it has all the things to make it a classic. A cult like following, good looks, great mechanics, durability, and history. I keep hearing this "not many stock examples around". In the end it won't matter, a high number of number matching cars haven't remained "stock" through out their lives. We see plenty of examples of great high dollar cars rolling around and up for auction bringing a price, yes it's true that "stock cars" bring higher values, but just like all things change so will the kind of cars that we look for as time moves forward. Time will tell.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



