[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Man I hate the stupid third pipe on the 458. Awesome on the F40 when it was functional. Dumb as hell on the 458. Bad homage is bad homage.

Hi, I'm Debbie Downer today.

[Humdizzle]

Originally Posted by David70

This would matter far more to me than a comparison test where one car was judged to be slightly better than the other. If the numbers are accurate an additional $100k - $150k over the time I own it would matter as this is over an additional $1000 per month. Wouldn't matter if I could afford it, the cars are too similar to want to throw this money away.

Often wondered what the true cost of a 458 purchased today, driven 4k miles a year and sold 5 years from now. Possibly not that extreme?

Buy it for $185k and 5 years from now it is worth $150K? and I lost $7k a year in depreciation plus maintenance and repair (all rough estimates not based on a lot)? Buying a new Corvette would remove maintenance and repair but the depreciation would be similar and at 20k miles over 5 years even the 458 would have manageable maintenance and repair?

buying a used exotic will almost always save you more money. My 458 costed me less then a lot of the M3 leases I see here. I'd save I've gotten 10k in depreciation over 3 years and 6000 miles. Add in another 15k for the insurance and property taxes and 1000 a year for maintenance.

But you need money to do it. As in a large downpayment on a loan. Money saved up for if something catastrophic happens to your engine or tranny. Its easy to get a lease or get financed for a new car compared to a 5-10 year old sports car / exotic

[David70]

Originally Posted by Humdizzle

buying a used exotic will almost always save you more money. My 458 costed me less then a lot of the M3 leases I see here. I'd save I've gotten 10k in depreciation over 3 years and 6000 miles. Add in another 15k for the insurance and property taxes and 1000 a year for maintenance.

But you need money to do it. As in a large downpayment on a loan. Money saved up for if something catastrophic happens to your engine or tranny. Its easy to get a lease or get financed for a new car compared to a 5-10 year old sports car / exotic

Thanks, interesting information. I understand completely on the large initial money outlay and of course this also comes with a cost as it gets taken from somewhere. I also wouldn't do it unless i could pay for it and have a reserve for catastrophic issues.

With the $15k for insurance and property taxes, what property taxes? If $15k for insurance it seems high, even with the high value car, as much of the insurance covers other cars and people and I wouldn't expect this would be much different regardless of the car.

[Darth One]

McLaren is not going to win any depreciation contests against any exotic carmaker besides maybe Aston Martin. That’s a staggering expense for owners, but it’s also a fantastic opportunity to get possibly the best supercar performance bargain ever on the used market.

Ferrari, on the other hand, has an extremely low cost of ownership (especially now with the 7-year warranty/maintenance program), but it comes with its own baggage - there’s a huge disincentive to actually drive (put mileage on) your cars, you have to deal with bullshit Ferrari sales practices....just to name two.

[Humdizzle]

Originally Posted by David70

Thanks, interesting information. I understand completely on the large initial money outlay and of course this also comes with a cost as it gets taken from somewhere. I also wouldn't do it unless i could pay for it and have a reserve for catastrophic issues.

With the $15k for insurance and property taxes, what property taxes? If $15k for insurance it seems high, even with the high value car, as much of the insurance covers other cars and people and I wouldn't expect this would be much different regardless of the car.

I mean 15k over the last 3 years. roughly 2500 a year for insurance and about the same for property tax.

[Humdizzle]

Originally Posted by Darth One

McLaren is not going to win any depreciation contests against any exotic carmaker besides maybe Aston Martin. That’s a staggering expense for owners, but it’s also a fantastic opportunity to get possibly the best supercar performance bargain ever on the used market.

Ferrari, on the other hand, has an extremely low cost of ownership (especially now with the 7-year warranty/maintenance program), but it comes with its own baggage - there’s a huge disincentive to actually drive (put mileage on) your cars, you have to deal with bullshit Ferrari sales practices....just to name two.

exactly. I know I made the comparison of the 458 being less costly to own than a new M3cs. But with the lease you can put 12k miles a year and you're paying the depreciation month to month. 12k miles a year on any Ferrari/McLaren/Porsche and you are burning your wallet.

and most Ferrari dealerships are pricks. The service guys in the back are usually cool though.

[Shiza]

Originally Posted by Run Silent

I own and drive a Ferrari 360 Spider. I am by no means wealthy. I paid cash for the car and my total price after taxes, shipping, PPI, etc came out to about $90K all in. I drive it about 250-300 miles per month.

.

[IllSic_Design]

Ever seen the movie "The Accountant" lol?

[Run Silent]

Originally Posted by IllSic_Design

Ever seen the movie "The Accountant" lol?

Why yes - yes I have.

[Darth One]

Is he disbelieving that you got it for that much? Because that looks like a pretty fair price for a non-manual.

[IllSic_Design]

Originally Posted by Darth One

Is he disbelieving that you got it for that much? Because that looks like a pretty fair price for a non-manual.

I think he was referring to the "I am by no means wealthy part"?

[SunnyD]

Depends on how you define "wealthy", but stating that you don't meet that definition and then spending $90K on a depreciating asset isn't exactly financially sound, especially for an accountant.

[David70]

Originally Posted by SunnyD

Depends on how you define "wealthy", but stating that you don't meet that definition and then spending $90K on a depreciating asset isn't exactly financially sound, especially for an accountant.

Impossible to say with the information he shared and as you said, depends on what you think defines "wealthy". An "accountant" only defines one part of his overall wealth, nothing about assets, nothing about his history and nothing about expenses.

To be in the top 1% in the world you need to make about $32,400 so defining wealthy using this information I would hope he is.

[Run Silent]

Originally Posted by Darth One

Is he disbelieving that you got it for that much? Because that looks like a pretty fair price for a non-manual.

Yep - here was the breakdown:

Car: $79,000
Taxes: $7,505
PPI: $1,450
Shipping: $1,500
Total: $89,455

Originally Posted by SunnyD

Depends on how you define "wealthy", but stating that you don't meet that definition and then spending $90K on a depreciating asset isn't exactly financially sound, especially for an accountant.

It's not really a depreciating asset. There will be a loss, sure, but mostly due to absorbed taxes, repairs, et al. I'm probably one of the most fiscally conservative member in these forums, lol - you can see the analysis of this purchase over at F-Chat.

https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/th...e-plan.593122/

Originally Posted by IllSic_Design

I think he was referring to the "I am by no means wealthy part"?

Yes, that is correct. We certainly are doing fine, financially, and make a decent income, but I wouldn't consider us "wealthy" by typical American standards. Our net worth slightly more than a million dollars, but not by a large amount.

Originally Posted by David70

Impossible to say with the information he shared and as you said, depends on what you think defines "wealthy". An "accountant" only defines one part of his overall wealth, nothing about assets, nothing about his history and nothing about expenses.

To be in the top 1% in the world you need to make about $32,400 so defining wealthy using this information I would hope he is.

Well - globally, yes, we are wealthy as are likely most everyone in this forum. Nationally, we are certainly in the top 10% or so, but we don't live in a mansion in Hollywood and take a helicopter to work, lol.

[David70]

Good information and I forgot about the "depreciating asset" that really has minimal depreciation. I am also fiscally conservative and wondered about overall costs.

Currently driving Z4M - weekend car, 2013 Cadillac ATS (55k miles, perfect condition, maybe $13k value) and wondered which would have a higher 5 year cost, sell the ATS and buy a new M3 or keep the ATS for 5 more years and buy a car similar to your Ferrari in value (not sure i really want a Ferrari). M3 would have far greater depreciation but close to zero repair, M3 would be much cheaper to insure compared to ATS & high end weekend car.

[Alfisti]

This Ferrari maths and my Porsche maths has a term ... it's called "man maths".

[Run Silent]

Originally Posted by David70

Good information and I forgot about the "depreciating asset" that really has minimal depreciation. I am also fiscally conservative and wondered about overall costs.

Currently driving Z4M - weekend car, 2013 Cadillac ATS (55k miles, perfect condition, maybe $13k value) and wondered which would have a higher 5 year cost, sell the ATS and buy a new M3 or keep the ATS for 5 more years and buy a car similar to your Ferrari in value (not sure i really want a Ferrari). M3 would have far greater depreciation but close to zero repair, M3 would be much cheaper to insure compared to ATS & high end weekend car.

Yep - it's all in what you want and how you want to structure it, along with an appropriate consideration of risk.

Personally, I've wanted a Ferrari forever, so it was a goal that I was determined to make a reality. Most exotics that are over a few years old typically don't have a notable depreciation curve after a certain point, so long as you keep the mileage in check.

I was surprised at insurance costs - they are actually quite low. I have extremely heavy insurance on the car, but if I was to up my deductibles to $2,500 or so - the annual premiums would have been below a grand. That's not bad.

I've typically always had a weekend car (although nothing at this price point before) and other than taxes and M&R, rarely have I sold it for much less than I paid for it. Last two 'fun cars' were a Miata and an Alfa Romeo. Both of those I made a profit on the sale, but washed out as a slight loss after M&R over the ownership period. So you can do it on non-exotic cars too, just takes some planning.

It seems that moderate mileage E92 M3's are at the bottom of the depreciation curve as well right now - so if an M3 is something you are looking at, that might be a decent prospect as well.

[jayb289]

guys are now running 8 seconds with just a tune and downpipes

[scoobysaurus]

Got a CPO late model MP4-12C with warranty and haven't given any Ferrari a second look ever since. My other weekend car is a Viper known to be the most ruthless cars on the road and the McLaren is just as engaging. & Yes I could've gotten a slightly older 458 for the same price but having driven a 458, aside from the sound it has nothing going for it. & FWIW the 12C with sport exhaust sounds absolutey sinister. You would not believe the number of people that said they couldn't fathom McLarens sound so good because auto journalists in Ferraris pockets had them think that Ferraris are the be all and end all of supercars when in reality all they do is play second fiddle to McLaren Lamborghini & Porsche and rely on their brand to sell cars. If I ever were to buy a Ferrari it would probably be a Portofino because nobody sells a 4 seat front engine super-GT with a convertible hardtop. I do not care for marketing and buy whatever suits my requirements best. Just my 2 cents

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by scoobysaurus

Got a CPO late model MP4-12C with warranty and haven't given any Ferrari a second look ever since. My other weekend car is a Viper known to be the most ruthless cars on the road and the McLaren is just as engaging. & Yes I could've gotten a slightly older 458 for the same price but having driven a 458, aside from the sound it has nothing going for it. & FWIW the 12C with sport exhaust sounds absolutey sinister. You would not believe the number of people that said they couldn't fathom McLarens sound so good because auto journalists in Ferraris pockets had them think that Ferraris are the be all and end all of supercars when in reality all they do is play second fiddle to McLaren Lamborghini & Porsche and rely on their brand to sell cars. If I ever were to buy a Ferrari it would probably be a Portofino because nobody sells a 4 seat front engine super-GT with a convertible hardtop. I do not care for marketing and buy whatever suits my requirements best. Just my 2 cents

Hm ... is that true?

[Humdizzle]

Originally Posted by WestRace

Hm ... is that true?

its somewhat true. chris harris wrote an article for jalopnik about it a while ago. If you talk shit on Ferraris latest cars they wont give you first dibs on the next press car release.

granted.. he is back at raving about the latest Ferrari's and how good they are since then.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by Humdizzle

its somewhat true. chris harris wrote an article for jalopnik about it a while ago. If you talk shit on Ferraris latest cars they wont give you first dibs on the next press car release.

granted.. he is back at raving about the latest Ferrari's and how good they are since then.

Well it's hard to believe but everybody has the rights to his belief.