Trade-in a 2017 SL65 for a Portofino?

It has been years since I have owned a Ferrari. I used to have a couple of 308 GTSs and loved them.

I purchased a 2017 SL65 AMG over a Turbo S cab because I didn't like the wrinkles in the pcar soft-top. Although I like the SL it is a much heavier car at almost 4200 lbs vs 3700 lbs. It has been but not ideal because I do like to take my cars to the track every once i a while and the SL is too heavy for that, let alone terrible front brake cooling. After 21 laps at a recent HPDE event, the front carbon ceramic brakes were toast. So now I am somewhat jaded by the brand. Front brakes are now being replaced since I want the car mint no matter what decision I make.

My attraction to the Portofino:
1) It is a drop-top
2) I like the styling
3) It is only 3400 lbs
4) They have front aero to specially cool the brakes

I am being told by MB dealers that my car with only 3085 miles is worth $120k. That represents a $110k hit after only 2 years. Is the Portofino going to depreciation like that?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

 

I would say no chance it would depreciate that heavily, I would expect a 2-year old low mileage Portofino to remain just under $200k based on how the California T has held its value, and the California/California 30 before that. Somewhat dependent on options and color, etc. A heavily optioned car, you're not likely to see much of that money back once it's used.

 

^Agree with above. The prevailing F-chat wisdom seems to be that you never make all your money back on options. If you do get a Porto, the "popular" options - for resale - seem to be Scuderia shields, MagnaRide suspenion, LED lights on steering wheel and avoid crazy color schemes. Best of luck...T

 

I agree with the everyone's logic above with respect to resale of the Portofino and option value recovery. I just spec'd out a Portofino through Lake Forest Ferrari (IL) and the cost of options is... let's say eye-opening. The Daytona seat-style option is $5,985. I'm not sure I like it enough for $6,000 and know that will not be recovered at resale. The front and rear camera option is $6000 (that may hold some value) on the 2019 Portofino. I hear Apple Carplay is a $5K option. That's likely a total loss.

 

I got my Portofino last week and it has just under $50k of options - pretty much the ones mentioned above with some interior additions - and the dealer said I got what was needed if I want to eventually sell it. I was not a fan of the Daytona seats and had no interest in Apple Carplay. The cars are slowly coming off the assembly line but it will take a while to saturate the market so the prices should hold for a while.

 

3400 lbs? Expect 3900.

 

3406 lbs dry weight
3669 lbs curb weight

 

C/D weighed a California T and found a curb weight of 4064. Having the Portofino come in about 400 lbs less would be nice,but I won't believe until I have put mine on the scale.

 

The Portofino is advertised to be 80 Kilos or 176 lbs. less than the California T. That's a lot but not 400 lbs.

 

Any AMG 65 car is going to be the king of depreciation.

If you track your car that heavily, that you are fading carbon ceramics, I actually think going more sporty would make sense. SL and Portofino are luxury GT convertibles. They don’t feel at home on a track. The Turbo S is a lot more suited to that dual purpose you seem to be looking for.

Based off of your use case, I would go F12 or 458 Spider (or 488 Spider if within budget).

 

Ha, been there. I got wrecked by a 2016 sl63 depreciation wise. Haven’t lost that much on a car since. Have a porto coming, but they’ll be ok value wise this early in the cycle. I still have yet to see even one actually out on the road in south Florida so they must be pretty scarce for now. To me Portofino is a much better choice over the sl if you’re looking for another gt hard top convertible.

 

Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I did some checking and it appears as though the issue with the SL65 front brakes is cooling. They don't get enough air flowing through the wheel well. They have small louvers in the front of the wheel well, but the front left and right intakes above the front splitter are almost entirely consumed with intercoolers. Apparently this is a well known issue with some MBs as noted by MBWorld forum users. I think it is very misleading by AMG to have a Race Mode on the dial and 5 pages of the owners manual speaking to performance on a race surface. Essentially false advertising. After my dealer denied the repairs being covered by warranty I contacted Tobias Moers, chairman and CEO of AMG and he also declined taking care of the repairs under warranty. The good news is that the dealer cut me a very good deal on the repairs.

I have also learned that the Portofino does not yet have any of the safety nannies that are in the MB. Once you use them they are hard to do without. Apparently they are likely to appear in next year's Portofinos as a stated strategic direction for Ferrari. They are already in the Lusso.

 

Well based on a thread on the AMG GT forum you are not alone. Funny that they advertise the car as track focused but have brake cooling problems. I ran my 991tts the way you described about 6 times while I owned it and never had a problem with rotor wear or fading brakes. So far my 488 Spider has been to the track twice and I can run hot laps in 20 minutes sessions an hour apart for the whole day without brake fading or wear issues afterward. I did have to replace pads a couple of times on the 991tts but no other issues.

I didn't buy the AMG GT C Roadster for the track but for my wife and she loves it so I am happy. She is going to a track day that she got with the purchase of the car but it will be using company cars and not hers so I won't need to be concerned for her brakes. I would bet the Portofino would be fun at the track because I took my Cali T HS once before I traded it and it did fine. I think you can live without the nannies unless you commute in the car a lot and that is why you need them. I will say that sitting in traffic in a Ferrari is decidedly not fun and not a good way to enjoy the car so I only take mine for DD errands if there is low traffic.

 

If one tracks his/her car, a coupe is always the better choice.

 

I don't think the California T HS held its value at all. I traded it in after 3000 miles from new in 8 months, I was hit 60k loss.

To the op, California T or Porto are not meant for track use. They are awesome GT cars, just like your MB. You may be disappointed.

 

Somewhat of a bizarre ending to this story. After Mercedes declined to warranty the SL65 front brakes, I traded both my AMG cars in for two new Porsches, a GT2RS and a Cayenne S. I also decided to use my McLaren 720s as my 17-mile drive car and dedicate the GT2RS to track usage. I am so jaded by AMG's false advertising and what I consider a mechanical defect by not having front brake cooling ducts, I will never ever buy another Mercedes or AMG product. In retrospect, I should have purchased a Turbo S Cab instead of the SL65 since that car has no issues with an occasional track day.

Thanks once again for all your thoughts and advice.

 

FWIW , I recently looked at trading my 2017 SL 63 DD for a California T. ~ 50k and my car. I was not impressed with the California as I felt the SL 63 had much more power. The salesperson then let me drive a Portofino, it was very impressive but it was 150k plus my car. I was not wanting to spend that on a DD so I passed. If I had the extra buck and a half I would definitely buy the Portofino over my SL 63 Best ,Kirk.

 

The SL isnt a track car. Look at the weight.

 

Never said it was. Just wanted to have it in a HPDE. I pride myself on being easy on the equipment. Look at the video. Look at my hands. It was a very easy drive. Braking early. No corner slides, etc. With that said, I also have 100's of laps at Laguna and know the line quite well.

 

Great video, and you are a skilled driver.

My point was merely that its a huge, heavy, cruising GT car.

 

Nice driving!

 

Pardon what may be a dumb question. What are the "safety nannies?" I believe MB has a top speed limiter but they wouldn't put that on a AMG would they? I had CLK 55 but, never went above 155mph to test that limit.

 

I think the Porsche is far better suited to the track. I tend to do things differently than most, since I think NO car out of the box is perfect. My AMG GTS is pushing a bit over 640hp and tq is also over 600. My California T has just been tuned and now have about 115 more hp and 120 more tq. I am now transforming the 2018 Cayman (gearshift car I wanted old school for the track) (tune, suspension,down pipe, pedals, short shift kit, lightweight 18" wheels, throttle controller), when I am done it will be a better car than a GT4. I also have a 650hp 2304lb 911 with no traction controls, that car would likely kill me on a track so I keep it to remind me of what I could do when money and time were not important. I keep 2 other Porsche's (my winter 991C4S (also modified)and my girlfriends Cayman S). AMG is not alone when it comes to track related issues (have a look at the Corvette forum). My biggest gripe with the GT's (they put this on the GTR should have been on all of them) is that to really get what you can out of the car you must be in race mode and turn off the traction controls (my 07 M6 was like that too you needed to be in S6 or the traction controls ruined the car). The GTR has a dial to control the traction controls. I have another month till my summer cars come out, but I usually make changes to them while they are in storage. I know my way is not the norm, but for someone like me if I had to keep my cars stock, it would ruin ownership of any car.

 

Collision prevention assist plus, attention assist, pre-safe, blind spot assist and lane keeping assist are several of the AMG safety features/options.

 

720S and GT2RS in one garage? You're winning at life enjoy both on the track.