Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › An audiophile and petrolhead's journal: Buckle up!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

An audiophile and petrolhead's journal: Buckle up! - Page 122

post #1816 of 7132
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post


Except a Prius. Those will never be too valuable to trade. The problem will be that no one will want them. They will be the old floral pattern couches of the car world - you will see one rotting in every empty lot.

 

I think that's the case with most economy/daily cars. Still, the amount of Lithium in those batteries may be valuable in a few years. The same can be said for Tesla.

post #1817 of 7132
I was thinking the A-pillar and roof line might be damaged. I might also be worried about the front suspension, steering, etc. But - if they say its all cosmetic...

Some day, I could envision you getting your own big oven so you can cook your own composite panels. You could also rent it out to Boeing and Lockheed for making aircraft parts... tongue.gif
post #1818 of 7132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

I was thinking the A-pillar and roof line might be damaged. I might also be worried about the front suspension, steering, etc. But - if they say its all cosmetic...

Some day, I could envision you getting your own big oven so you can cook your own composite panels. You could also rent it out to Boeing and Lockheed for making aircraft parts... tongue.gif

It appears that's a reflection, the mono-cell is okay. However, I was informed that if I get it, we can't sell it. She was rather adamant about that. The Pantera, has been sold, to the guy who I thought would buy it. Rebuilt, w/ 550bhp on tap.


post #1819 of 7132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magick Man View Post

It appears that's a reflection, the mono-cell is okay. However, I was informed that if I get it, we can't sell it. She was rather adamant about that. The Pantera, has been sold, to the guy who I thought would buy it. Rebuilt, w/ 550bhp on tap.



Who said "no selling" on that black lambo? The person selling it right now?
post #1820 of 7132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post

Who said "no selling" on that black lambo? The person selling it right now?

My "boss". The "sexy evil" in it is too strong, so I was told.
post #1821 of 7132
lol - sounds to me like you should ONLY be buying black cars. Might make things MUCH easier...

And thumps-up for the blue paint on the Ford block. ALL ford blocks should be Ford blue.
Edited by billybob_jcv - 2/6/13 at 2:40pm
post #1822 of 7132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

lol - sounds to me like you should ONLY be buying black cars. Might make things MUCH easier...

And thumps-up for the blue paint on the Ford block. ALL ford blocks should be Ford blue.

Even with the new steering wheel/column, interior work, engine rebuild, and paint, we're making ~$10k in profit on the Pantera. That isn't awesome, but it's worthwhile and pays the bills. I'm hoping these flips become a regular part of what we do and not just side-projects, they get everyone pumped up.

The Heffner care packages arrived and we're GTG on that. It's very exciting and business is up all around.
post #1823 of 7132
Thread Starter 
What is a supercar? Are supercars worth the money? Used, older supercars, are they a smart buy?

Some questions I've fielded lately, and I want go over them.


What is a supercar? This has been a hot-button topic where I work, and in simplest terms it comes down to 3 criteria; exclusivity, performance, and styling or "poster appeal" (though not exactly beauty).

Some cars hit one or two of those areas, but not all 3. Like the Viper, Corvette ZR1, BMW M5, and Shelby GT500. They're plentiful, or not quite eye-catching enough. One I'm also going to throw in is very controversial, the base Lamborghini Gallardo. What?!? eek.gif Yes, the Gallardo. While it has the performance, the pedigree, and the looks (arguably), they've made ~12k of them. Also, although it isn't a huge factor, they depreciate faster than a half-eaten Big Mac. The only car, that I know of, that's worse is the Maserati Quattroporte (which loses 70% in the first 48 months).

Did you know you can get a "no stories" stock AWD Gallardo, that's less than 10 y/o, for <$80k? In fact, there are so many of them for sale on the used market that there's an actual glut (casually searching I found >340 for sale in the USA). As a test, I tentatively offered a guy 65k for a 2005 coupe and he replied with "in cash?". The same thing happened recently for a 2008 spyder for 85k (I'm still considering that one, she's a beauty with 25k miles). An exception is special editions. Although there are many of them, they're only spit out in numbers of 10-20, so they hold up fairly well. Comically, the Audi R8, that's based on the small Lambo, is more stable. See if you can figure that one out. It's the same issue with the NSX, it fits in most ways, but they did make 20k of them. So, it's a sports car, not a supercar. Widely available != super.

Anyhow, I digress. Performance. I grew up in an area where you take an X or Fox-body heap, add 5 grand, and you have an 11 second car. Put in a few thousand more and it could handle too. It's not a big deal, power is cheap and cornering isn't much either. So an Italian that can break 13 secs in the quarter, and do 0-60 in less than 4, doesn't raise an eyebrow around here, we have pickups that can do that. Sexy, rare, and fast, that's where it's at. Never fear, there are some great American supercars being built, unfortunately they're almost never built by the Big 3 (the Ford GT being the major exception). You have to shop Mosler, Saleen, Falcon, and SSC. (Not Hennessey, however. Anyone can chop up a Lotus Elise and stuff a TT V8 into it. $1.2M for that? LOL! Very funny, John.)

Are they worth the money? As a financial investment? No. Hell no. Sure, some might hold their value fairly well, but these aren't potential Ferrari 250s, never assume that they'll go up in value. They're toys. In that capacity, they're exciting and worthwhile, but only as diversions. If you have the disposable income and want something cool that catches attention, they do that better than just about anything else. When I'm driving one I get honks, thumbs-ups, and engine revs at every light. They're fun. If you buy such a car and lock it away in a vault and spend your quality time rubbing it with a cloth diaper, you're doing it wrong. They're meant to be taken out and enjoyed.

Used supercars, are they worth it? The general consensus is "no", but I'm going to buck that trend. Some are, some aren't. More recent examples, those built in the last 10 years or so, are much more reliable and practical than the ones of old. We bought a Ferrari 360 and it's been a peach; quick, pretty, comfortable, and relatively inexpensive to buy and maintain. Avoid anything from the late-70s through early-90s, unless you just want a neat-looking money pit. wink.gif Check service records and receipts, have the car thoroughly inspected (or make sure it was inspected by a neutral 3rd party), ask lots of questions, and don't assume that low mileage means it's been pampered or is like-new. If you do your due diligence you can come away with a good value.

The McLaren 12C is weird. It's rare, very pretty, crazy fast, and more advanced than anything else on the road. But, it's also economical, safe, mild-mannered, and as comfortable as a Bentley. Should cars like these be so easy to live with? Personally, I say absolutely. This is what super/hypercars are becoming. Increased efficiency standards and higher expectations with regards to comfort and durability are changing the playing field. Even the Ferrari 458 is a relatively docile beast, unless you poke it with a sharp stick. Interestingly enough, the car that we have that's closest to the McLaren is the juiced-up NSX. Speed? Close enough as makes no difference. Handling? Very close. Ride? The 12C is better but the NSX isn't bad at all. I can tick down all the boxes and there isn't a $200k difference between them, not by anyone's practical evaluation. If you want a mid-engined monster on a budget, find a nice NSX, pay a guy a decent sum for turbos and upgrades, and you'll have it, in spades. The mystique is missing, though, and no amount of tuning can add that.
post #1824 of 7132
Hmm - I'll add some discussion points for you. I think a car like your NSX is disqualified from being a supercar, not because of performance, but because it was turned into a hyper-performance car through aftermarket mods. In my mind, supercars come from the maker as a supercar. The stock NSX is a very nice sports car, but not a supercar. The new NSX? I don't know. I also disqualify the professional tuner cars. So, anything from Hennessey is out - any car that used to be something else isn't a supercar.

Where I have some trouble is with the production numbers aspect. On the one hand, I agree with you that a supercar should be exclusive - and supercars do not come from mass production factories. On the other hand, I also have a problem with some of the VERY low production cars that are really just hand-built, one-off cars that really aren't much different than some of the tuner cars - except the hand-builder didn't constrain himself to working from a pre-existing vehicle. It's almost like the difference between a top-fuel dragster and a top-fuel funny car. The funny car pays homage to a "real" car, but the dragster doesn't. Other than that, there's not much difference. Now the obvious next question on my thinking is: What separates the guy that makes 1 car every other year from the company that makes 1 car a month? Why would I consider the latter a supercar and the former not? I can't answer that. I'm not even sure if I agree with what I just said - maybe both are supercars?

How about this for a criteria:

If you can pull up next to any random supermodel, and she will get in the car, then it's a supercar. tongue.gif
post #1825 of 7132
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

Hmm - I'll add some discussion points for you. I think a car like your NSX is disqualified from being a supercar, not because of performance, but because it was turned into a hyper-performance car through aftermarket mods. In my mind, supercars come from the maker as a supercar. The stock NSX is a very nice sports car, but not a supercar. The new NSX? I don't know. I also disqualify the professional tuner cars. So, anything from Hennessey is out - any car that used to be something else isn't a supercar.

Where I have some trouble is with the production numbers aspect. On the one hand, I agree with you that a supercar should be exclusive - and supercars do not come from mass production factories. On the other hand, I also have a problem with some of the VERY low production cars that are really just hand-built, one-off cars that really aren't much different than some of the tuner cars - except the hand-builder didn't constrain himself to working from a pre-existing vehicle. It's almost like the difference between a top-fuel dragster and a top-fuel funny car. The funny car pays homage to a "real" car, but the dragster doesn't. Other than that, there's not much difference. Now the obvious next question on my thinking is: What separates the guy that makes 1 car every other year from the company that makes 1 car a month? Why would I consider the latter a supercar and the former not? I can't answer that. I'm not even sure if I agree with what I just said - maybe both are supercars?

How about this for a criteria:

If you can pull up next to any random supermodel, and she will get in the car, then it's a supercar. tongue.gif

I can agree with your reasoning here - my two cents would be that cars that exist just to keep a manufacturer eligible for racing due to arbitrary production standards are equally nuts, and fit into the "building one car a month" thing. But the exclusivity component is a bit prickly imho - because it clashes with performance and styling. There are plenty of super-rare, super-expensive, and (for their era) high performance cars from the 1950s-1980s that will get stepped on by more modern cars that are cheaper, more reliable, more comfortable, and arguably better looking vehicles as well. And that's where I see the whole "let's decide what is and isn't a supercar" thing as kind of a pissing contest - just like the "what is and isn't hi-fi" pissing contests (wink.gif). Yeah, I think it's fair to say that it's a moving target - the McLaren F1 is still faster than a lot of production vehicles, but the MB 300SL is not (both held "fastest production car" and neither is just a rocket-sled) - but I think there's a degree of nut-buster when it comes to paying a million dollars for a 300SL (or whatever other "look at me but don't carjack me" auction fodder), when a lot of modern cars are out and out better in one way or another. It will ultimately circle back to "high quality" versus "hi-fi" - one category is based on bona fide abilities, measurements, etc; the other is more of an arbitrary "I'm better than you for owning this" kind of thing (and I think we can all attest to having seen this kind of argument volleyed back and forth over the years; often to not effect but a lot of hurt feelings). I think my biggest hang-up is the whole "put it on a pedestal" kind of thing (both figuratively, in that there's a cult of personality associated with most "poster appeal" vehicles, and concretely, in that a lot of these cars only exist today because they're kept in a garage and rubbed with a diaper and never driven).

Also, if I knew where one could find "any random supermodel" just walking the streets, I'd be willing to put that hypothesis to the test with a Daewoo Lanos (in yellow, of course), and a sack of money. I'm guessing we could very quickly escalate a number of fairly mundane vehicles to supercar status by that criteria. tongue.gif
post #1826 of 7132
I think supercars have to be evaluated within the context of their prime production years. It isn't fair to declare that the Miura isn't a supercar just because it can now be beat from 0-60 by a 2013 BMW M3. The 300SL *was* a supercar - now it's simply a rare collector supercar.

Hmm - I hadn't thought about the bag of money angle. A bag of cocaine would also probably work.
Edited by billybob_jcv - 2/6/13 at 5:38pm
post #1827 of 7132
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

I think supercars have to be evaluated within the context of their prime production years. It isn't fair to declare that the Miura isn't a supercar just because it can now be beat from 0-60 by a 2013 BMW M3. The 300SL *was* a supercar - now it's simply a rare collector supercar.

And here's where I'm gonna refer you to Occam, and say that this is getting needlessly complicated just to continue the whole "what is, and isn't, a true Scotsman." Personally I will say that I'm not interested in spending more to get less, just because the "less" item has some ascribed "bling" factor (e.g. 300SL vs a modern Mustang GT-CS). Go ahead and call me uncultured - I just wasn't raised that spending more for less makes sense. Sure, the 300SL is a cool car, but it's not $1M cool. Also, to pick at nits, I'm not sure the phrase "supercar" was regular parlance in the 1950s - I don't pretend to know the full history of the automotive press, but I feel like it's one of those wonderful 1980s-1990s phrases created just to satisfy people with more money than sense, who need even more Eagle than the base model offers (like "reference level sound" or "audiophile quality").

Basically I'm fine to appreciate the 300SL as cool, but basically along the same lines as the Regal GN (in that both are neat, rare-ish, quick, and kind of impractical (neither is really so impractical you can't drive it, ignoring that the 300SL is like driving a house in value, but neither is really a family car either). I know, heresy. redface.gif But I'd qualify something like the McLaren F1 into a different category, because it IS impractical to drive around on the street, is ungodly fast (and it doesn't matter if cars come out that can do 0-60 in 1s flat in the future; 25-65mph is still pretty much the rule of the road, and it will barely come out of 1 to satisfy that), and there's less than 100 on the road. To continue the audio analogy, it's kind of like the difference (imho) between older McIntosh or Accuphase equipment, and modern Goldmund equipment. One is more of a "we build good quality stuff the best way we know to build good quality stuff" (and in the future it just happens to become fairly valuable) versus "this was built to be collected, cost a ridiculous amount of money, and be 'no holds barred in a box.'"

Quote:
Hmm - I hadn't thought about the bag of money angle. A bag of cocaine would also probably work.

And for the less civilized members of society (or you cheapskates out there), a handgun would also likely work (and you could probably put it together with the Daewoo for under $10k - you didn't say we had to earn it honestly after all tongue.gif). But even if we confined it to a bag of money, I'm pretty sure a Daewoo Lanos and $100,000 cash would go a lot further than whatever you could buy for ~$105,000. I mean honestly I'd wager $100,000 in cash and you could probably talk most anyone onto a city bus with you; and if you wanted to get more philosophical about it I guess you could talk about Veblen, and the *reason* an expensive and exotic car (ostensibly) helps you pick up chicks. It has nothing to do with the vehicle, and everything to do with what the vehicle represents. And I think the rarefied exotics are just a better bet that the driver isn't hoodrich more than anything else.
Edited by obobskivich - 2/6/13 at 6:00pm
post #1828 of 7132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

lol - sounds to me like you should ONLY be buying black cars. Might make things MUCH easier...

And thumps-up for the blue paint on the Ford block. ALL ford blocks should be Ford blue.

She really likes the Aventador, ever since we saw one at a show 2 years ago. The $500k for a new one was the limiting factor. So curious, I expected that one would climb past 200k, but it barely reached over 120. Well, I guess we'll see how much it'll cost to fix after all. biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybob_jcv View Post

Hmm - I'll add some discussion points for you. I think a car like your NSX is disqualified from being a supercar, not because of performance, but because it was turned into a hyper-performance car through aftermarket mods. In my mind, supercars come from the maker as a supercar. The stock NSX is a very nice sports car, but not a supercar. The new NSX? I don't know. I also disqualify the professional tuner cars. So, anything from Hennessey is out - any car that used to be something else isn't a supercar.

Where I have some trouble is with the production numbers aspect. On the one hand, I agree with you that a supercar should be exclusive - and supercars do not come from mass production factories. On the other hand, I also have a problem with some of the VERY low production cars that are really just hand-built, one-off cars that really aren't much different than some of the tuner cars - except the hand-builder didn't constrain himself to working from a pre-existing vehicle. It's almost like the difference between a top-fuel dragster and a top-fuel funny car. The funny car pays homage to a "real" car, but the dragster doesn't. Other than that, there's not much difference. Now the obvious next question on my thinking is: What separates the guy that makes 1 car every other year from the company that makes 1 car a month? Why would I consider the latter a supercar and the former not? I can't answer that. I'm not even sure if I agree with what I just said - maybe both are supercars?

I have no problem with cars being "made in a shed", one at a time, as long as the quality is there. Most hypercars are built by hand, one at a time, like Koenigseggs and Paganis. Just because they've only built a handful of Huayra doesn't mean they aren't supercars.

The NSX, as you said, isn't a supercar. The only Japanese car I'd classify as one is the LFA, even the GT-R falls short, despite its performance numbers. Also, like you said, supercars of yesteryear are still "supercars", they still have that rarity and air about them. A Miura feels every bit as special today as it did 40 years ago, as do any that have been described in such terms, again because that goes back to the exclusivity. Their performance relative to today's standards is almost irrelevant, though any car that can do 0-60 in 6.5 sec, like the Miura S, is still quick. The Merc 300SL is another good example, though very slow today. However, I'd say it wouldn't be nearly so iconic without those doors. If you get a spare moment, look up the 300SL AMG, see what happens when modern tech meets classic steel.
post #1829 of 7132
I think "supercar" includes some element of "exotic" - and that's where your Buick GN or a Chevy Typhoon pick-up just doesn't qualify as "super". On the other end of the spectrum are the Pagani Huayra and Ferrari FXX (and presumably what the F70 will be) For me, those are, without debate, the very definition of exotic supercars.
post #1830 of 7132

Talking about supercars, did anyone read about the W Motors' Lykan Hypersport?

 

Looks pretty futuristic, especially the instrument panel:

 

 


Edited by proton007 - 2/6/13 at 7:36pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › An audiophile and petrolhead's journal: Buckle up!