162 mile F40

There is a 78 mile example here California. If that car is based out of Texas, that F40 is part of a collection with two other F40s, the other two are also under 200 miles. Not my cup of tea, and if you don't drive them things will go wrong, but to each their own.

 

Definitely

 

not my cup of tea. but there its nice to know there are a hand full with amazingly low milage considering there was over 1000 made.

 

...why bother with a belt change if the car is not driven and is purely for show? A full museum "mothballing" would be a better long term strategy...

 

Probably so that it has pristine servicing. What a shame.

 

i do not understand the rationale for this.

i do not understand the person who wants this.

i can understand driving them sparingly and only on really opportune moments etc, but NEVER DRIVING THEM?? thats just messed up.

 

Its easy to not understand, but, at least the car has been well-preserved & taken care of, rather than neglected.

As we speak, 91407 is spoken for, and will begin a life in new ownership shortly.

How many people would like the chance to buy a brand new 1992 F40 with sticker still in the window today? At least one.

 

I'd pay the sticker price if the sticker is still on

 

what a waste

 

Feel better in the knowledge that this car is going into one of the best homes a Ferrari could go into.

 

Lawrence bought it???

 

Again....to each their own, and I'm sure it's exactly what the new purchaser wants -- so, good for him.

But, "brand new" --- not hardly. That car still has 20+ years of age-decomposition on every non-metallic piece on it. Plus, who knows how much pitting and corrosion on all the mechanicals that have been fermenting in non-circulated fluids / oils / greases / gases all this time.

It's going to be a tough car to start driving on a regular basis ---- if that's the owner's intent. Once a piece of machinery has been sitting like that for that long, it is destined to stay in that state of use (non-use) forever, IMO.

 

Whos to say it doesnt get started? I personally would buy one with this mileage in a second. Costs are all relative....Itd be like a time machine for me.

 

Low mileage doesn't necessarily mean that car hasn't been started, or that fluids haven't been circulated, or that fluids haven't been changed regularly.

All low mileage cars are not in the same category. On one extreme, you might have a car that's been literally abandoned and neglected. We've all seen examples But a low mileage car might also have been kept in a climate-controlled environment, started, maintained, fluids circulated & changed regularly, etc

Maintenance is the key ... in all cases ... more so than miles, in my view.

 

As Werewolf states, depending on how a car has been stored, and how it has been maintained (starting, fluid changes etc), the legitimate concerns you state, may or may not be an issue. There are low-mileage cars that have been neglected, and low-mileage cars that have been properly stored & maintained. Rest assured, 91407 falls into the latter category. A rarity, I will agree, because most low-mileage cars fall into the former category.

Best,

 

No.

Oh, and its 167 miles. Not 162 as erroneously stated in the thread title. That makes a big difference

 

Simply starting an engine and letting it run does not solve the problem. There's more to the car than just the engine. Engines need to reach full temp and pressure to be considered "run".

That said, if I had the cash, I'd buy this car and put 10k miles on it in no time. Why not? You only live once.

 

True. This has been done.

 

I guess you're right... if it was Larry, his cronies would have had Rob take down the pics... Like in the other thread(s)

 

1315 made in total BUT some 600 of them were USA spec - a different animal. A good number met an untimely demise, only 50 were built with lexan windows and (very) lightweight doors and there are only a limited number that are non-cat and without the "lift" suspension.

The most sought after ones are Lexan, non-cat, non-lift suspension WITH the original IHI turbos.

Mileage: better a car with miles than without especially on a car that is now 25 years old, where mileage becomes insignificant.

 

No Peter, completely erroneous information!

Just 213 USA spec cars built - 211 road cars and 2 LMs. I keep a careful watch over my Registro and my list matches that of Ferrari SpA and Ferrari North America.

As for what is most sought after, it depends who you ask, what their intended use is, and where they live.

Best,

 

Perhaps because the F40 was deemed collectible from the get-go and a number of them were mothballed at birth, mileage will always be significant in the case of the F40 marketplace as there'll likely always be a few with next-to-no or crazy-low miles - and valued accordingly. Granted, messageboards often prefer cars w/miles - though customers seem to pay up for those w/out - as Joe can probably confirm.

 

Indeed.

The notable exception with USA cars has been the Last one built - 93627 (Ferrari North America & Ferrari SpA confirmed) - which I secured for my client. The unsolicited offers he gets beg belief. That car has significant mileage - 9k plus - but if ever there was a USA F40 whose value was mileage-proof, that's the one.

 

The sub 1000 mile cars in any collectible Ferrari will be priced at a premium. In the case of the F40 does mileage matter much after 10K miles? What is the difference in price between a 10K mile car and a 20k mile car?