Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i've been lookin at the dep rate of these cars for a while now. from what i can gather, they seem to lose around <5k a yr (base model). do u reckon its possible or safe to say that we'll see the 350z around the < 41k mark at the beginning of next yr (jan, 2006) ?

lowest price ive seen a 350z go for was $45000 and the the lowest price for a rx-8 was $39000.

just like our belovered R34 which had a price tag of 45-47k in 2003 and it dropped significantly in 2004.

maybe im dreaming, but anything is possible. i say this becoz i want a 350z bad but ive only got around 40k to spend.

what are your opinions ?

I reckon theres a big difference btw what pple are asking for and what pple are actually willing to pay.

So u may see someone asking for $XXX on the papers, but that dosent mean he will actually get it.

Its ridiculous to see a 60k car depreciate just 5k a year esp in the first few years. If u ask me, i would personally put it at 8-10k for the 1st year, and mebbe 6-8 for the following year.

Think abt it. If it was asking 65k brand new...and it actually just depreciates 5 k a year, would u pay 60 k for a 2nd hand one when u can put in 5 k more and get a brand new one? At that level where u are forking out 60k for a car....how significant would 5k be?

Dealer will bend you over.. they always do on a trade-in.

There is no solid rule of thumb.. Nissan sports seem to hold their value a lot better than your average commodore or worse still, falcon. Just have a look at the current price of an average S15 (200sx) of around 2001 to get a bit of an idea of where the prices will be in about 4-5 years.. They were on sale for $45k I remember new for a few years.

350Zs will start dropping in price, now that the "honeymoon" period for the flash new coupe are over. It doesn't help that there is a "newer" model that makes more power. Coupes are fashion cars, and so after their initial release, when everyone wants one, the price drops as people move on to the next car.

It happened to the Monaro. When they came out, they didn't depreciate at all (some people managed to sell them above list price a year after, with the waiting period) but now that you see the Aussie 2 door taxis everywhere they're back to depreciating again.

The 350Z is the same. When they came out, they were pretty uncommon on the road and there was a 3 month wait for them. Now that you can't turn around without seeing one, the prices will drop.

And we've seen from HSV resales what happens when you churn out a new model every year with a little more power. With the 35th Anniversary model out, regular Track models might drop in price too.

The S15 held its value well because of its publicity, and then being discontinued. After winning PCOTY every arriviste wanted one (along with people who wanted to drive a quick Aus-delivered coupe in the $40K price bracket, and your hektic bros wanting to be "different" from their WRX counterparts), and when Nissan stopped building them people who would have paid new-car price couldn't get one, and so buoyed the used car market value.

Just wait for the "new"- RX-7 to come out-

I think the prices for rx-8will drop even further- faster!

If we do evetually get the new Skyline you'll see the 350z drop quite a bit!

How long befor the R34 GTR's are under 50k- their getting close?

I reckon theres a big difference btw what pple are asking for and what pple are actually willing to pay.

So u may see someone asking for $XXX on the papers, but that dosent mean he will actually get it.

Its ridiculous to see a 60k car depreciate just 5k a year esp in the first few years. If u ask me, i would personally put it at 8-10k for the 1st year, and mebbe 6-8 for the following year.

Think abt it. If it was asking 65k brand new...and it actually just depreciates 5 k a year, would u pay 60 k for a 2nd hand one when u can put in 5 k more and get a brand new one? At that level where u are forking out 60k for a car....how significant would 5k be?

Things such as Vehicles depreciate on the reducing balance method.

For example:

Vehicle was purchased brand new for $60,000 and will be depreciated 15% RBM

1 year later: Vehicle has Depreciated $9000, Carrying Value: $51,000

2 years later: Carrying Value: $51,000, Depreciated (15% of Carrying Value): $7650 Current Value: $43,350

So in 2 years the Vehicle has an Accumulated Depreciation of $16,650

This works that the vehicle is depreciated more in its younger years and depreciated less in its older years.

Now if we did the same vehcile using the Straight Line Method were it is depreciated exactly the same ammount each year.

Vehicle was purcahsed brand new for $60,000 and will depreciate 15% SLM

1 year later: Vehicle has Depreciated $9000, Carrying Value: $51,000

2 years later: Carrying Value: $51,000, Depreciated $9000, Current Value: $42,000

So in 2 years the Vehicle has an Accumulated Depreciation of $18,000

Between the 2 methods there is a difference of $1,350, but if i were to continue in the years the difference would get much greater...

Aussie cars dont depreciate that much compaired to the ones overseas..............the 'drive em till they explode' culture prevents that. once the new car warrenties run out on them all and they need to be serviced they're price will fall quite a bit.........

Things such as Vehicles depreciate on the reducing balance method.  

For example:

Vehicle was purchased brand new for $60,000 and will be depreciated 15% RBM

1 year later: Vehicle has Depreciated $9000,     Carrying Value: $51,000

2 years later: Carrying Value: $51,000,  Depreciated (15% of Carrying Value): $7650   Current Value: $43,350

So in 2 years the Vehicle has an Accumulated Depreciation of $16,650

This works that the vehicle is depreciated more in its younger years and depreciated less in its older years.

Now if we did the same vehcile using the Straight Line Method were it is depreciated exactly the same ammount each year.

Vehicle was purcahsed brand new for $60,000 and will depreciate 15% SLM

1 year later: Vehicle has Depreciated $9000,   Carrying Value: $51,000

2 years later: Carrying Value: $51,000, Depreciated $9000, Current Value: $42,000

So in 2 years the Vehicle has an Accumulated Depreciation of $18,000

Between the 2 methods there is a difference of $1,350, but if i were to continue in the years the difference would get much greater...

Accounting gives me the shits, piss easy but OMG how boring. :chairshot

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • The rain is the best time to push to the edge of the grip limit. Water lubrication reduces the consumption of rubber without reducing the fun. I take pleasure in driving around the outside of numpties in Audis, WRXs, BRZs, etc, because they get all worried in the wet. They warm up faster than the engine oil does.
    • When they're dead cold, and in the wet, they're not very fun. RE003 are alright, they do harden very quickly and turn into literally $50 Pace tyres.
    • Yeah, I thought that Reedy's video was quite good because he compared old and new (as in, well used and quite new) AD09s, with what is generally considered to be the fast Yokohama in this category (ie, sporty road/track tyres) and a tyre that people might be able to use to extend the comparo out into the space of more expensive European tyres, being the Cup 2. No-one would ever agree that the Cup 2 is a poor tyre - many would suggest that it is close to the very top of the category. And, for them all to come out so close to each other, and for the cheaper tyre in the test to do so well against the others, in some cases being even faster, shows that (good, non-linglong) tyres are reaching a plateau in terms of how good they can get, and they're all sitting on that same plateau. Anyway, on the AD08R, AD09, RS4 that I've had on the car in recent years, I've never had a problem in the cold and wet. SA gets down to 0-10°C in winter. Not so often, but it was only 4°C when I got in the car this morning. Once the tyres are warm (ie, after about 2km), you can start to lay into them. I've never aquaplaned or suffered serious off-corner understeer or anything like that in the wet, that I would not have expected to happen with a more normal tyre. I had some RE003s, and they were shit in the dry, shit in the wet, shit everywhere. I would rate the RS4 and AD0x as being more trustworthy in the wet, once the rubber is warm. Bridgestone should be ashamed of the RE003.
    • This is why I gave the disclaimer about how I drive in the wet which I feel is pretty important. I have heard people think RS4's are horrible in the rain, but I have this feeling they must be driving (or attempting to drive) anywhere close to the grip limit. I legitimately drive at the speed limit/below speed the limit 100% of the time in the rain. More than happy to just commute along at 50kmh behind a train of cars in 5th gear etc. I do agree with you with regards to the temp and the 'quality' of the tyre Dose. Most UHP tyres aren't even up to temperature on the road anyway, even when going mad initial D canyon carving. It would be interesting to see a not-up-to-temp UHP tyre compared against a mere... normal...HP tyre at these temperatures. I don't think you're (or me in this case) is actually picking up grip with an RS4/AD09 on the road relative to something like a RE003 because the RS4/AD09 is not up to temp and the RE003 is closer to it's optimal operating window.
    • Either the bearing has been installed backwards OR the gearbox input shaft bearing is loosey goosey.   When in doubt, just put in a Samsonas in.
×
×
  • Create New...