Guest Posted February 13, 2000 Share Posted February 13, 2000 I see a lot of old cars that are really stylish, powerful, and comfortable, but are grossly undervalued.<BR>Examples:<BR>1969-1973 Full-Size Chrysler Products, Chryslers and Imperials in general.<P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/" TARGET=_blank>www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/</A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2000 Share Posted February 13, 2000 Look at it this way, the undervalued cars are a great gateway into the hobby for the next generation.<P>As for your insurance loss, if you're really worried about that then you should look into agreed-value coverage.<P>Cheers, 3MP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted February 14, 2000 Share Posted February 14, 2000 Foriegn Sports Cars. Nothing says undervalued more than this. Every 2 door V8 Chevy ever made is worth more than my TR6. It amazes me that Jaguar XK's and Austin Healey's, the cream of value in sports cars, are blown away by the very Ford and Chevy's that some deride as poor imitations of their panache. <P>If you've got $6000 and want the best, most fun, most interesting and distinctive car you can buy for it, your choice is between four door American sedans and MG's or Triumphs. No brainer there!<P>Also, can somebody please explain to me why, as you ascend Alfred Sloan's ladder of automotive prestige (Chevy-Pontiac-Olds-Buick-Cadillac) 20 or 30 years after they've been produced, with a few noteworthy exceptions they've reversed positions in value? As historically significant and popular as the 1955 Chevy was, it was not as good a car as the 1955 Olds or Caddy. Ditto for just about any year you can think of. Why are the Chevy's invariably worth more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 14, 2000 Share Posted February 14, 2000 I agree totally!!!!!!!!!<BR>My wife & I have 2 1960 Impala sport sedans, but since they are 4 door cars their value is low in comparison to convertibles or coupes. Yet it still costs as much if not more to restore or maintain them. We really like them and enjoy them so I guess that is what really counts even though we would really take a loss on insurance or selling them. <P>[This message has been edited by RANDJFLO60@AOL.COM (edited 02-13-2000).]<p>[This message has been edited by RANDJFLO60@AOL.COM (edited 02-13-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 14, 2000 Share Posted February 14, 2000 A lot of people, when they finally enter the hobby, seek out the cars they had in their youth (or wish they had). A lot more people owned Chevys than Cadillacs.<P>Also design is a consideration. IMO the luxury marques of the period were gaudy and overdone, whereas the budget marques were (generally) much cleaner. Apparently a lot of other people share this view.<P>Parts availability is a concern. You can get SBC parts anywhere. Caddy or BOP parts are a lot harder to locate. Double for trim pieces.<P>For my $6k, hmmm a TR6 might be interesting, but I bet I could scare up a /6 Barracuda and a 360, and put them together for a similar sum. Decisions decisions. Right now, today, I'd probably take the TR but I already own a musclecar. If I didn't, how would I choose? I don't know.<P>Part of the British cars' problems is their well-deserved reputation for marginal reliability. Now, with three old American cars in my garage, I know as well as most of you that with the exception of the nigh-indestructible engines, American cars from the same period aren't exactly a model of peerless craftsmanship. But there's a perception out there, and by the time someone finds their perceptions are incorrect, it's too late -- they already own the thing.<P>Cheers, 3MP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronbarn Posted February 14, 2000 Share Posted February 14, 2000 To paraphrase a line from the Animal Farm, all cars are created equal, but some are more equal than others. If "value" only relates to a dollar sign, then it's a simple "what the market prefers" problem. If you want "value" to include such factors as quality, performance, design, rarity, etc. then I'll agree that there are many undervalued cars. I prefer to look at "value" as one's personal preferrence and agree with 3MP that the dollar sign approach really opens a lot of opportunities for newer hobbiests and those of us that are able and willing to take the risks related to resell and insurance factors. I prefer to think of value as related to how much fun and pride you get as the owner of any older car and in the opportunities you have in the hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 15, 2000 Share Posted February 15, 2000 Dave@Moon- Good point about GM's price ladder. Values for 1955-1957 Chevys are at cloudlike levels, whereas Buicks and Oldsmobiles are the reverse.<P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/" TARGET=_blank>www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/poland/356/</A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronbarn Posted February 15, 2000 Share Posted February 15, 2000 Dave Moon, I have said the same thing so many times but never so concisely or eloquently. I intend to quote you often. Thanks, Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted February 15, 2000 Share Posted February 15, 2000 I've never made money on a car, but I've profited from all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave@Moon Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 CAPAC's recent threads have been along the same vein as this one and several others from the past. Now that there are over 3000 of us here (instead of about 700 as there were when this thread started), I thought I'd dig it back up.<P>This was one thread I always thought had a lot more milage in it. Also I think it's one that could be of educational value to a lot of readers, especially me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 This thread should really be called ?Under-appreciated Collector Cars? instead of ?Undervalued Collector Cars?.<P>Price can?t be influenced through protest. Price is determined by supply and demand. Until you modify one of these variables price will never change.<P>To modify demand required education. When we educate people to <I>appreciate</I> the uniqueness and collectability of station wagons, 4 doors, foreign cars, and orphan makes then demand will go up, followed by price.<P>To modify supply requires explosives and cunning. I have neither. <P>Just my two cents worth.<P>Peter<P><BR>------------------<BR>Peter Gariepy<BR>peterg@aaca.org<BR> <A HREF="http://www.aaca.org" TARGET=_blank>www.aaca.org</A> <P>[This message has been edited by peterg (edited 01-19-2001).]<p>[This message has been edited by peterg (edited 01-19-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianaCarGuy Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 Antiques, and collecting cars is either a form of pleasant insanity, or an incurable disease which affects both the mind and the personality of those affected. Personally, I accept my lunacy, and I feel no compunction to either lessen it's effects, or be cured of it. I think I would be a far worse person if I ever regained my grip on reality.<P>RS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 Peter ~ That's about the best 2 cents worth I ever heard. ~ hvs<P>Now, about supply modification. <P>That smilie on the heading is not what I intended. It was supposed to be the cool guy.<P><p>[This message has been edited by hvs (edited 01-20-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Thanks HVS,<P>Its amazing what i remember from my economics class. <P>Peter<P>------------------<BR>Peter Gariepy<BR>AACA Webmaster<BR> peterg@aaca.org <BR>www.aaca.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now