Value / price reduction for non-original colour?

Presumably in maximum the costs of a quality respray in original colour?

As the owner an Espada in non-original colour, I would tend to say "none"

 

If you make a color change I would at least make it a factory color that was available for that year. I also think that as the cost of a respray becomes a smaller percentage of the total value of the car a non original color is less of a liability when the time to sell comes, especially if it is a popular/attractive color.

 

I think it mostly has to due with a few things...

Rarity/popularity of the model. A daytona may need to be an original color, but a 250 cali or a GTO... it largely doesn't matter. There are buyers around the block. So that would weigh my decision.

Original color: How attractive is it? If its red, or black or yellow or a pretty grey... stick with original. I have done this many times (not with a ferrari) and at the end of the restoration my shift on the having the ferrari my way isn't as important or as fullfilling as having restored a piece of history. Getting it back to exactly as original can be very fulfilling and that wont really hit you until the end. Once it is all done you will appreciate it and you kind of feel prideful for doing so. There are plenty of people who will applaud the originality so you will always have a crowd. However... if your car was a hideous shade of brown or purple or lime green... that you just can't stand I dont see a problem with changing it to a more popular color from the same era.

Now... if this is your dream car. Your dream Ferrari and you don't care if you ever sell it... Then just pick the color you want. Please don't put a modern car color or a color off of another make on your car. Don't take a 275GTC and paint it lamborghini orange LOL. Or Nissan truck blue

 

A non-original colour does not prevent Classiche. Indeed, many older Ferraris are not their original colour. However, if you want to show the car it should be a colour that is appropriate to the car (i.e. was available on that model when new).

Jonathan

 

I'd throw out "15%, to a future collector"...it would probably be "zero" to an average consumer.

The effort to repaint is considerable, I would strongly lean to the original Factory color (as I recently pondered myself) if you want to preserve top value for the future.

That said, you own it, so any damn color you like is fine, IMO

 

I tend to buy based on color, say if it was painted in a color I like I'd have no issues. If it's red id want a discount.

 

given that i think it is a sellers mkt..... very little.

u going to drive down to the next dealers lot and look at another ?

 

I repainted my Porsche in the original color (after doing the research to find it). I would pay a premium for the correct color, but there's a school of thought that something that is model-year correct is also acceptable to a lot of buyers. Changing to a color that was unavailable for the model year seems to be less acceptable.

How does that translate to a value reduction? That's a pretty subjective call...

For me, personally, I wanted to feel like I had just taken delivery of the car as it was made, and I wanted to experience it as it was in 1956.

 

The safest bet is to go original for a serious collector car, but a Daytona or 275 will always find a buyer. A lot of them seem to have been color-changed, so it's pretty common. For a time-capsule, top shelf preservation (rather than restoration) car, I wouldn't color-change it.

 

I have changed colours on some of the vehicles I have restored.
For me, the important part is to paint them in a colour scheme that is authentic for the time of production. On pre WW2 cars it is usually impossible to find the exact RAL shade, an approximation is in order.
I have seen that a time correct colour but not original shade, does not detract from the value.