Why do 8cyl Ferarris hold value better than 12cyl?

Long term vs short term?

 

maintenance, and most 8cyl ferrari's are converts or targas, people love open air driving.
Erik

 

to answer your first question: they dont in the long term.
initially 8 cylinder's are every boy racer's dream, so they tend to have a wider audience and therefore remain bouyed in the used car market. but they also get thrashed and abused, and since the production numbers are higher, it all starts to weigh on the market. 12's are usually owned by older and less abusive drivers, put on less mileage, and made in fewer numbers, so eventually the market turns up for them.

 

Because the modern 8s are actual sports cars whereas the modern 12s are not

 

I think the only concurrent models where an 8 did not retain as much of their initial MSRP as a 12 would be boxers vs 308's and even there, it's only because boxers have had a lot of appreciation lately mostly due to the weak dollar.

Dave

 

Very good point. And for this reason so many F car owners prefer the mid engine F430 rather than the 599, which is really a GT. I own a F430 spider and have driven my buddys 599 many times...the 599 is a remarkable car...but i prefer the F430.

 

+1 I do not believe it has anything to do with the number of cylinders, but rather with the kind of potential buyers they appeal to.
I for one am not attracted to 8 cylinder engines as for me the quintessential Ferrari has a V 12 in the front and a gate shifter,
but I am older, I enjoy taking my family along and as a consequence my Ferrari is a 456 GT, that is a quasi daily driver for me.
Maintenance also is not an issue, particularly when considering that with some 8 cylinder engines replacing the timing belts
means the engine has to come out of its bay.

 

There you have it.

I think you need to break this out by era. Obviously cars like the 250 GT SWB and CA Spyder haven't exactly languished in the market. The 'Daytona' has also done very well, and still overshadows its little cousin, the 246. However, the 308 changed the Ferrari world and the 288 GTO/F40 seem to have made it official -- Ferrari's sports cars would have a V8. I'd guess the TR series lived on as long as it did because it took Ferrari a while to replace it during the early '90s recession.

As posted above, for most guys, the Ferrari fantasy is a low, slinky and loud sports car. 'Taking the family along' and 'daily driver' are understandable needs, but don't mesh well with the Ferrari dreams of most gearheads.

Maintenance may well be an issue -- TRs are very expensive to maintain relative to their market value (basically 328/355 range) -- and any of the V12s can hit you with a five-figure service tab. That limits the pool of interested buyers.

 

The last good looking 12s, where you didn't have to guess it was a Ferrari, were the TRs and 512 derivatives. In my view there hasn't been a good looking 12 since. - Some will argue the 599 is a step up from the 612 stylingwise and I will agree, but just imagine the styling statement Ferrari could have made with the 599 engine and features in a low wide mid-engine up dated version of the T/R or just scaling up the F355 and up dating some of the features like headlights and nose etc. Audi wouldn't be selling 1/2 the Murcis they are, if Ferrari had taken that step. The problem I have with the late model 12s is they are not low and wide enough to make a visual "Super-Car" statement. Thats why the 575s, 612s dropped like rocks and give it a couple of years, and so will the 599. - Now watch the flames from all the late model 12 owners!

 

Just as one is able to recognize a vintage 12-cylinder Ferrari, one is able to recognize those cut from the same cloth. Perhaps not the same mold, but the pedigree is there, all the same. The TR and 512 were exceptions, to some, exceptional; created in, of, by, and for the "[Look at] Me" generation. In pursuit of that particular cache, 8-Cylinders followed suit; while 12-cylinder Ferraris as we know it returned to being 12-cylinder Ferraris as we knew it.

 

One of my favorite is the BB12 Boxer

 

I don't understand why this is such a surprise to everyone. This is typical in the auto industry. Check out these numbers:

Current value:
1997 BMW 328i: $7,500 (20.3%)
1997 BMW 528i: $8,600 (19.5%)
1997 BMW 740i: $8,100 (13.2%)

1997 Mercedes C280: $7,400 (19.5%)
1997 Mercedes E320: $8,800 (18.8%)
1997 Mercedes S420: $11,200 (14.8%)

2000 Audi A4 2.8: $8,900 (29.3%)
2000 Audi A6 2.8: $9,900 (28.6%)
2000 Audi A8 4.2: $12,200 (17.8%)

The lesson here is that big cars always depreciate more, and typically significantly more. I can't explain why, but it's probably due to their extremely high prices from the beginning. Ferrari's not alone in this, and I don't understand why people are so consistently surprised by it.

 

Markets are a balance of supply and demand - less supply of V12's more than offset by greater demand for V8's. My suggestion to you is to try both. 550 is a fantastic car and completely different from a 360. Forget about depreciation curve and buy the car that best makes you happy

 

So... what are Enzos down to now?

Sports cars generally hold their value; GT cars generally don't.

 

I don't own a late 12, but I'd say the 550/575 was the most recent Ferrari with design potential to be a classic (albeit with a bunch of electronics/microprocessors that mean it probably won't be...)

I haven't crunched the numbers but I don't think TRs have held their value well at all, probably no better than the 550.

 

thanks Bullfighter...I was reading this and wondering why nobody mentioned the Enzo.

 

I believe the 599 is technically a mid engine car too since most of its engine sits behind the front axle...the 599 is also faster around Ferrari's test track...

 

Because all the other cars mentioned above (including 599) are just regular,non limited production cars,unlike the Enzo...

 

First, you need to get your point of beginning straight. While, for example, the sticker on a 2003 360 was say $170k and the sticker on a 2003 575 was say $235k (and probably sold for $220k). Truth is that most 360s sold for something over sticker. Let's say in this case that the 2003 360 actually sold for $200k.

Second, you need to realize that the 360 Modena in general and the 360 Spider more specifically was a "knock the skin off, bottom of the 9th, last game in the world series" home run. You can go on and on as to why; but for now, just accept the fact that the 360 greatly expanded the potential buyer market for Ferraris. A lot of people who would have never considered a Ferrari before brought one with very little knowledge of the V12 heritage; indeed, many of these new buyers really didn't care.

Third, the 360 is sexy looking sports car. The 550/575, by design, is a legacy GT. Luca built it to create a link to the historic Enzo Ferraris of the 50s and 60s (and the early 70s in the case of the Daytona.) So if you are the type that would consider buying a Porsche Twin Turbo (and lots of you are, including me ) the 360 is the car for you. However, if you grew up driving cars with BIG front engined motors and you like the legacy styling, the Maranello is the way to go.

So the answer to your question is supply and demand. There are simply more people who want to buy a 360 than a Maranello.

Will the 360s eventually start depreciating? Of course, my guess is that they will eventually trade at roughly 50% of sticker. However, they are holding their value very well. Going back to the 2003 360 that had a sticker of $170k and sold for $200k. My guess is that these cars are trading around $135 or so? (I don't really follow this market.) I would also guess that they will not hit bottom (i.e., $85k) for several years to come. Again, just supply and demand.

What about the 2003 $575 that stickered for $235k? I'm guessing that these cars are also selling for about $135 or so? However, the 2003 575 will depreciate faster than a 2003 360 and probably fall to maybe 40% of sticker. Again, supply and demand.

About maintenance costs, they are the same. You should budget $1 a mile. Ferrari parts are unbelievably expensive, even to the dealers!

Dale

 

no, a good one can be had for $115. earlier years can be under $100. and going down.

 

Amen. Expanded market, sexy car, etc.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I had a buddy check 2003 on Manheim -- here's the tape:

Date Auction Sale Type Price Mileage Cond Color Eng Trans In Sample
01/15/08 FAAO Lease $91,000 14,721 Above RED 8G A No
11/29/07 NEVADA Regular $125,000 8,873 Above YELLOW 8G A Yes
10/18/07 MANHEIM Regular $134,500 4,643 Above RED 8G A Yes
09/20/07 MANHEIM Regular $135,000 5,324 Above RED 8G A Yes
04/05/07 MANHEIM Regular $144,000 4,158 Above RED 8G A Yes
03/13/07 W PALM Regular $140,000 7,503 Above YELLOW 8G A Yes

I'm guessing the first car had issues, but what do I know?

But if you compare the 3/07 Yellow 2003 w/7.5k miles at $140K to the 11/07 Yellow 2003 w/9k miles at $125K that's a big drop in 8 months. However, I doubt that a Yellow 2003 w/9k miles would go for under $115k WHOLESALE at today's auction. My guess is that $125k to $130k RETAIL would be the number.

Dale

 

http://www.sportscarcompany.com/ferrari.aspx?_makef=Ferrari&_model=360+Modena&_sort=yearasc

Looks like asking price for a low mileage '99 Modena is about $100K. Not sure what these went for, but Jim does negotiate a bit to keep the 'inventory' moving.

 

Early Boxers+288GTO+F40= legends.