Welcome Guest Login or Signup
LIVE CHAT | INSTANT MESSENGER | BOOKMARK

Go Back   Gears Garage Auto Forum > General > General Chat

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2009, 01:54 PM
sccavette's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: United States - Indiana
Posts: 297
Default DO NOT buy a new Maybach or Rolls Phantom

You might take a BIG hit after owning it 1 year!

Automotive News reports that Maybach has the highest depreciation rates of any car on the market (subscription required). During the first year of ownership, a new Maybach 62S loses $183 thousand dollars off its half-a-million-dollar sticker price. That’s a 39 percent drop in the span of a year. The Rolls-Royce Phantom, by comparison, loses “only” about $100 thousand dollars, or 24 percent.

Talk about a BAD investment!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2009, 02:57 PM
apolloGT's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: United States -
Posts: 1,073
Default

99.9% of new cars are a bad investment. However, even if I was made out of money, I would never buy a Rolls or a Maybach. Maybe, just MAYBE... a Bentley Continental GT Speed.. but highly unlikely. Cars like Rolls and Maybachs are for people who dont drive.
__________________
2003 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra
4.6L DOHC V8 - 6 speed manual
520rwhp - 525rwtq at 16psi on stock blower
2002 Ford Mustang GT
4.6L V8 - 5 speed manual
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2009, 03:22 PM
sccavette's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: United States - Indiana
Posts: 297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apolloGT View Post
99.9% of new cars are a bad investment. However, even if I was made out of money, I would never buy a Rolls or a Maybach. Maybe, just MAYBE... a Bentley Continental GT Speed.. but highly unlikely. Cars like Rolls and Maybachs are for people who dont drive.

I agree a NEW car is a bad investment unless it is a rare short run car. The difference is in this case you are loosing 6 figures compared to loosing 5 or 10K on a normal car.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2009, 03:52 PM
SuperchargedXJ's Avatar


Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: United States - California
Posts: 322
Default

Oh! I guess I'll have to cancel the order I placed on a 62S this morning! Damn!
In all seriousness though, the people who are forking out half-a-million dollars for a car probably don't care about depreciation too much. Interesting to see the differences though.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2009, 09:27 AM
sccavette's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: United States - Indiana
Posts: 297
Default

Here is a list of some others if you want to look at % lost in the first year. There are a lot that loose a higher % but not as mutch total cash do to the initial price of these cars.

2009 Hyundai Accent 3dr HB Manual GS - MSRP: $9,970, 33% Depreciation year 1

2009 Hyundai Tucson FWD 4dr I4 Manual GLS - MSRP: $18,070, 35% Depreciation year 1

2009 Kia Sportage 2WD 4dr I4 Manual LX- MSRP: $16,695, 40% Depreciation year 1

2009 Ford Ranger 2WD Reg Cab 112" XL- MSRP: $16,395, 38% Depreciation year 1

2009 Mitsubishi Raider 2WD Ext Cab Manual LS - MSRP: $21,135, 59% Depreciation year 1

2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 2WD Reg Cab 119.0" Work Truck - MSRP: $19,375, 50% Depreciation year 1

2009 Ford Ranger 4WD 2dr SuperCab 126" XL - MSRP: $21,810, 34% Depreciation year 1

2009 Nissan Frontier 4WD King Cab Manual SE - MSRP: $23,060, 34% Depreciation year 1

2009 Chevy Silverado 1500 4WD Reg Cab 119.0" Work Truck - MSRP: $22,615, 46% Depreciation year 1

2009 Ford F-150 4WD Reg Cab 126" XL- MSRP: $25,710, 56% Depreciation year 1

2009 Pontiac G6 4dr Sdn w/1SA - MSRP: $20,490, 33% Depreciation year 1

2009 Mitsubishi Lancer 4dr Sdn Manual ES-Sport - MSRP: $16,540, 35% Depreciation year 1

2009 Mitsubishi Outlander 2WD 4dr ES - MSRP: $20,380, 42% Depreciation year 1

2009 Chevy Equinox FWD 4dr LS - MSRP: $24,315, 34% Depreciation year 1

2009 Dodge Grand Caravan 4dr Wgn SE - MSRP: $24,230, 39% Depreciation year 1

2009 Chrysler Town and Country 4dr Wgn LX - MSRP: $26,430, 38% Depreciation year 1

2009 Kia Rondo 4dr Wgn i4 LX - MSRP: $18,495, 39% Depreciation year 1


a BMW 7 Series loses a tear-jerking 51%, and a Mercedes S-Class 47%
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2009, 09:32 AM
sccavette's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: United States - Indiana
Posts: 297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperchargedXJ View Post
Oh! I guess I'll have to cancel the order I placed on a 62S this morning! Damn!
In all seriousness though, the people who are forking out half-a-million dollars for a car probably don't care about depreciation too much. Interesting to see the differences though.

Most of the millionairs I know did not make their fortune by loosing 180K on a car purchase. Most of the ones I know are welthy because of good investments they have made over time and would be concerned about loosing almost 200G on depreciation. I do agree that there are some out there that do not, we call these rap singers. these are usually the same ones you see on TLC talking about how they lost everything and have no idea where all their money went.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2009, 09:52 AM
cyberwaste's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: United States - Illinois
Posts: 176
Default

why do newer cars suck so bad in so many ways?
__________________
______________________
Cyberwaste
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2009, 10:13 AM
sccavette's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: United States - Indiana
Posts: 297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberwaste View Post
why do newer cars suck so bad in so many ways?
Are you refering to the resale value of a new car?
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2009, 12:26 PM
cyberwaste's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: United States - Illinois
Posts: 176
Default

yeah like resale ,cost, all the complex tech in them. there all bad but i think they should try to keep more simple so that way you dont have to buy special tools
and why do they cram engines into cars? like in the pictures of the 2009 Honda Accord and the Challenger SRT i have look at the engine room...there isnt much

sorry i got kinda carried away but it doesnt make since to make things harder
__________________
______________________
Cyberwaste
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2009, 04:16 PM
apolloGT's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: United States -
Posts: 1,073
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberwaste View Post
yeah like resale ,cost, all the complex tech in them. there all bad but i think they should try to keep more simple so that way you dont have to buy special tools
and why do they cram engines into cars? like in the pictures of the 2009 Honda Accord and the Challenger SRT i have look at the engine room...there isnt much

sorry i got kinda carried away but it doesnt make since to make things harder
Refining the automobile = more speed

I like it.
__________________
2003 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra
4.6L DOHC V8 - 6 speed manual
520rwhp - 525rwtq at 16psi on stock blower
2002 Ford Mustang GT
4.6L V8 - 5 speed manual
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.



GearsGarage.com Copyright 2007