Crazy car prices

[Dougieboy1]

Perhaps not what you were expecting....

I recently bought a 1972 911 sales brochure, the oversize one with the picture of a white 2.4E rear end on it.

Inside is an AFN retail price list dated March 22nd 1972.

Using an online calculator that adjusts for inflation, the cars listed would today cost the following (inc purchase tax):

Cheapest on the list is the entry level T - Then £3,838.02, today £49,894.26
Most expensive was S targa sporto - Then £5,692.81, today £74,006.53

My own 1972 911S coupe, then a range topper, would have cost £5,221.56 or £67,880.28 which would get me today (nearly) the entry level 911, a Carrera 3.4 which is £73,000 give or take, an RS5 Audi cabriolet or any Volkswagen i wanted.

If I wanted Recaros in my entry level T, they were £35 (£455 today) a pair with £18 (£234) extra to have them fitted with headrests. I would also have to pay an additional £10 (£130) to have my seats raised by 0.8" if i needed it....

[hot66]

always interesting to compare with hpuse prices and wages of the day if you can find the info

[Dougieboy1]

According to Nationwide, Q1 1972, average house price was £6,000 = £78,000 inflation adjusted.

Actual 2016 average house price £217,928 according to the Land Registry.


Average salary in 1972 £2,262 according to the FT = £29,404 inflation adjusted.

Actual 2016 average salary £26,500 (i read somewhere recently)


So in 1972, my car was essentially the same price as the average house and 2.3 times the average salary..........

Today using £150,000 as the guide price for a 1972 911S in perfect condition blah blah, it is worth 69% of the average house and 5.7 times the average salary proving, for all the economists out there, that investing in cars is way better than investing in houses and much more fun to boot.

[inaglasshouse]

proving, for all the economists out there, that investing in cars is way better than investing in houses and much more fun to boot.

Um... not sure of your maths here. Surely the house has done rather better?!
Or is this an advanced form of man maths?

[Dougieboy1]

oops yes, the other way round, investing in houses is much better but not so much fun.

[inaglasshouse]

oops yes, the other way round, investing in houses is much better but not so much fun.

Agreed!

[smallspeed]

this sort of shows what I was trying to explain to a mate the other day - I think Porsche have lost the plot price wise recently.. Would be interesting to see the above numbers for each generation of 911, as I think its happened recently (997.2 onwards, possibly since VW "took over"? ) rather than a gradual thing over the years

for me, in terms of market positioning, the 911 used to be semi-affordable; a step up from an m3, or maybe a replacement for an M5 once the kids had left home and you didn't need the space - offering similar performance levels, but with a more dynamic drive, a sexier shape, etc., etc. Close to Ferrari performance with better reliability, lower purchase and ownership costs - a true daily sports car.

Now, if you take a 911 S and spec it how you'd expect it to be as standard (for me halogen lights on an £85k 911 is unacceptable when xenons are standard on most 35k cars now!) then its a £125k car, MORE if you want some "fancy bits" adding. This puts them firmly in the realm of R8's, 540C's, etc which are spec'd to the level you'd expect as standard, AND arguably are a step up in terms of exclusivity, performance, etc.

This leads me to believe Porsche (UK, or gmbh marketing dept) are either "shrooming" or they need a radical re-think of the 911 - stick with the £100k+ price but go to mid engine, ditch the rear seats, etc. and turn it into a true competitor again, OR drop the price..

B

P.S. Not trying to start an argument re: whether the 991 is any good or not (I'm sure its a wonderful piece of kit) but it appears to be an 80's BMW in terms of standard spec, and the options list is eye watering! Its also a rare beast around this part of the country; I think I've seen 5 in total (one of which is owned by a mate of mine) whereas the 996's and 997's were everywhere when they first came out..

[Dougieboy1]

More from the list under options:

Electric sunroof 'Golde' - £150
Fog lamps - £17 plus £4 to fit them
Special colour paint job from factory selection - £90 (only £68 if you had a 914)
Special colour paint job according to your own spec - £160
Tinted glass and a heated rear window - £48 but this was standard on the S, as were Recaros and a rear wiper

Also says you can only have a 914 or a Targa in Left Hand Drive.

[Burma-Shave]

need a radical re-think of the 911 - stick with the £100k+ price but go to mid engine, ditch the rear seats, etc. and turn it into a true competitor again, OR drop the price..

Hey, that could work. Maybe they could name it after a small agile crocodile, and list it in the £40 - 60k bracket..

[Dougieboy1]

or resurrect the 914 badge and go retro....

[Sam]

or resurrect the 914 badge and go retro....

Build a mid engined car with less power than a 911, 2 seats and a boot at both ends?

Bearing in mind the 914 never really caught on I can't imagine Porsche trying that again.

[hughes73]

Given that most of us probably bought second hand I'm not sure the original price when new matters that much to most of us. My mate bought a '69 E in the 90s for £5k. A nice matching numbers car. So I wonder what that would be the equivalent of if he bought it today?

Perhaps there is a golden era when cars were cheap relative to inflation / depreciation etc. They went down in value didn't they before they went up? That would be interesting to know.