Base Model is better choice than S

[Brucelee]

If we are talking about a new S model as an "investment", actually, it is not a wise choice. The reason is that is depreciates faster on a % basis than the base model.

To wit, the price difference new is about $10G. The difference on a three year old model is down to about 4-5G.

That is why the S model is def. the one to get if you are buying a used Porsche (IMHO).

However, it is clear that cars are NOT an investment over all. It is also true that if you don't have the dough, you don't have the dough.

These are really good problems to have, no?

[markk]

IMHO someone who is thinking rational will never buy a Porsche. There's lots of other cars out there for less money.

I'm in Europe/Holland and my new MY01 BoxsterS set me back 80k euro's which is more than I payed for my house. No way I can rationalise it. I just had the money to spent, only live once and wanted to spoil myself with a open sportcar (open was THE criteria because I like cabrio's).

Considered:
- F360 spider
- Corvette Convertible
- Honda S2000
- Audi TT cabrio
- Porsche Boxster

Never considered a 911. Too big for my taste and engine in the back !!!!????!!!!
Corvette Convertible is to big/heavy, F360 spider I could buy but questioned whether I could affort the running costs and why think of a S200/TT when you can affort a Boxster.

So I ordered MY ultimate Boxster. An S, speedyellow, special paint on dash, GT3 rims, sportsuspension, no psm, no airco, sport-exhaust, full leather, sportseats and some other nifty things. Rational NO WAY, fun ALL THE WAY.

Though about letting Gemballa put a 450bhp bi-turbo set on it. Then I became rational again;-)

So basically If you shopping in this range. Think rational about how much money you can spent on something non rational/bisare hobby of yours and then let your heart get in and buy the best possible within the rational set budget. For me there was no question about it I had to have the S because I like power (there is never enough) and could affort it. For you the base might be better because you have other things in your heart. But _PLEASE_ don't rationalize buying a Boxster. There is nothing rational about it !


Mark.

[tqtran]

My thoughts exactly.
Enjoy what you have because you are in a small percentile of people that are in the position to say, "I enjoy driving my Porsche"

[mrockrat]

I love my boxster i had enough money to buy an 03 facelift or an 02 s i drove sevaral and decided on the 03 base never looked back and never been beaten by a z4 yet...

[Lux]

Bruce, you sell cars so you must know what you're talking about. But I don't understand the comment on faster depreciation. There's less S cars, and as more enthusiasts discover the Boxster I would assume supply/demand would generate a higher price for the S.

The only reason I can see an S depreciating more is because people are getting rid of them for way less than it's worth. Again, supply is less than a base model so it doesn't make sense.

Here's what I see on KBB based on 2002 Boxster and Boxster S w/ 25000 miles:
Box msrp: $42600 Private sale: $27950 Cost to own: $14650
Box S msrp: $51600 Private sale: $34950 Cost to own: $16650

So the difference is $2K.

The S comes with a few extras like bigger wheels, interior bits, etc. that would easily make up the $2K difference. Not to mention the obvious bigger motor.

-

[Brucelee]

In real terms, I will pay an extra $10K to buy an new S vs a standard Box.

Say three years later, I go to buy a used Box. I will likely pay about $5 more for the S vs the standars Box.

So, the S has depreciated at a faster rate, ie, it has not maintained that edge of $10G but that edge has declined some 50% or $5G.

So, in relative terms, the S "incremental cost" has degraded faster than the base car's depreciation, which is less than 50%.

This is not surprising. The cost of options follows this path generally speaking. For example, you may pay $2G for the full leather interior or similar option. 3 yrs later, it is worth $425 as an add-on value in your car.

Now, as to WHY this is, well, I never try to figure this out. The market is the market!

Make sense?

[ho2go]

Would it not be better to compare the price diff between the base and S in percentage? I don't think a cold-hard $10k figure is an appropriate basis of comparison as time progresses (you have to leave room for that price difference to depreciate as well, no?).

For easy figuring let's say a new new base model is $40k and a new S is $50k. So you'd have to pay 25% above the cost of the regular Box to get into an S. This translates to a $10k difference.

Now let's say the avg used Box (regular model) after several years is $32k. In this case the basis of comparison to see which model has depreciated faster is 25% above $32k = $40k for the S. The original $10k difference is now $8k (but more "fair" I'd think).

According to Lux's MSRP figures earlier in this thread (KBB used 2002 MY w/ 25000 miles):

Box msrp: $42600 Private sale: $27950
Box S msrp: $51600 Private sale: $34950

we see that in 2002 one paid 21% more than a new base model to get a new S. And according to the private sale figures, today you'd pay 25% above a used regular Box to get a used S. Meaning the base model is depreciating faster than the S *assuming* the KBB prices are indicative of what consumers actually pay (big assumption).

Please correct/update the calculations if you have more accurate prices. I tried to get real-world asking values from autotrader.com but couldn't separate regular model vs. S model pricing.

Sorry to math-out like that, hope it was clear (-ish). ;b

Originally Posted by Brucelee

In real terms, I will pay an extra $10K to buy an new S vs a standard Box.

Say three years later, I go to buy a used Box. I will likely pay about $5 more for the S vs the standars Box.

So, the S has depreciated at a faster rate, ie, it has not maintained that edge of $10G but that edge has declined some 50% or $5G.

So, in relative terms, the S "incremental cost" has degraded faster than the base car's depreciation, which is less than 50%...