993RS showroom prices in 1995

[clubsport]

On the basis of another thread where somebody needed to know the price of a 993 in 1997 and recent discussions on the cost of converting 993 RS "replicas" from C2, I looked through some old magazines and found list prices for 993 variants in Nov 1995.


Porsche 968 Clubsport = £29,975
--------------------------------------------
Porsche 993 C2 = £58,995
Porsche 993 C2 cab = £64,950
Porsche Targa = £64,250
Porsche 993C4 = £62,495
Porsche 993C4 cab = £68,450
Porsche 993RS = £68,495
Porsche 993RSR = £74,975
Porsche Turbo = £93,950

I appreciate the RSR mentioned above in the price list is not the real deal race car, the Clubsports were called this to differentiate them from the 968 Clubsport available for sale at the time for £29,975.

I thought it was interesting, in that the RS appeared to be a bargain?...almost the same price as a C4 cab!!! With only 41 + 7 cars coming to the UK, I am sure there must have been much more interest relative to the number of cars made available.

Also the RS premium over C2 was £9500 or 16%, you could easily spend £9500 on a C2 in todays money and get nowhere near to RS spec on upgrades.

Before we all get excited about values, base rates were 6.75% when the above prices were in effect...if you had deposited the funds into a savings account and earnt a modest average of 4% over the period, the account would have £118,611 in it now (before taxes).
So that shows the cars have to be used as they have not actually made money (yet?), also if you work it back a 997 GT3 gen 2 at todays showroom price equates to £47,350 in 1995!

 

[65 mat]

So what you are saying is stop poilishing them, get them driven and also buy a 997 GT3 RS because they are a bargain! [][]

 

[johnny senna]

That's a cool post Paul. To my mind it just makes modern GT3s look very cheap brand new!

 

[roygarth]

also if you work it back a 997 GT3 gen 2 at todays showroom price equates to £47,350 in 1995!

Handbuilt V Mass Production

 

[Ferry Man]

I confess I was one of those punters who walked through the door in '95 and bought a brand new 993.
In Midnight Blue.

I do recall the price difference being modest at the time but I plumped for a C2.
The RS was poorly equipped, noisier & firmer on the ride.
Who'd pay a premium for that?
In my defence it was my daily driver so I settled for a less extreme, more comfortable experience.
Why, I even bought a Tiptronic. [8|]

Anyway, with a modest few options the price came to £62k.
I sold after just less than a year to a dealer and incredibly only lost £4k in depreciation.
Even brand new 911's had good residuals back then.

So that's the background.
But of course the reality is that eventually I realised that I should have bought the RS all along.
And so.... ....early last year I bought one. In Midnight Blue.
And it cost me more than the price it was listed at above. [] Hey ho. []

 

[johnny senna]

Good story! I like that.

 

[Richard Dawson]

I think it is clear that, particularly if you use them and more so as intendended, few if any Porsches will be an investment in the true sense of the word.

Once you factor in insurance, service and repairs then they really don't work like a traditional investment.

I do think however RS Porsches do allow the biggest traditional cost of running a car, depreciation to disappear and compared to Ferraris or such like the running costs are containable with DIY and good parts source and of course the fact Porsches stand up to hard use well!

Still if 993rs prices do reach the apparently heady heights of the 2.7 rs i may change my tune!!

 

[clubsport]

It's all a game and although we may think the cars have stopped depreciating, you still need to use them...I looked back at older cars using the same Time value of money scenario.

I found the new price for a 911 2.4S in Jan 1972 was £5401.88 (motor road test)

Now if you had invested the money at an average of say 5% over the last 37 years (ex taxes)..that money would now be worth £32,851

So in effect a top notch 2.4S (@£50k+) today is relatively expensive in real money terms, you would have done better to buy a new one in 1972.

Obviously there is potential for confusion here with a new car in 1972 and the money that would have to be spent on a 37 year old car to get it to the same standard.

I couldn't find the new UK price in 1972 for a 2.7RS, it was $10,300 in the states....now lets assume it was 50% more than a 2.4S and cost say £7500 in the UK, I don't think that is too far out.

Again assume you decided to invest your £7500 instead of buying the RS and achieved 5% return (ex taxes), today 37 years later you would have £45,610.

So on that basis at current prices, the early cars have actually performed as investments....you may consider the fun of driving one along the way has offset the running costs,,or conclude that the old cars are overpriced today?

 

[vic cohen]

Oh Paul , of all people ............u know theres only one way ...................................what someone will pay for a given piece at a given time ..................i mean how would u explain purchase new 1995 £120k ish ; price 2003 less than £100k ................sale price this year £ 200k ish [ sold in sterling so no fx gain].........................................and be polite! Maybe luck and buying at the right time helps ?......................................oh amd of course nett of any taxes as its a hobby ........................

 

[Nick Moss]

The interest rates/inflation figures that you are using are not accurate, remember (well I do) that we had 25% inflation in 1975ish and interest rates around 17% several times. I did find a website a couple of years ago that calculated the inflation from a selected date. I worked out that a 2.7RS would have been worth around £90K, a bit more that they were fetching at the time, now they are ahead of the game again.

 

[Richard Dawson]

As a "shoestring owner" who uses his car an interesting aspect of this debate is the running costs.

I probably over service my car in that oil is done every 2000 miles, brake fluid every 6 months etc and any bit that needs attention gets it. A luxury of doing much of the work myself i suppose.

The bits for 993 RS are not too scary, other than say discs. Cetainly they are signifi
cantly more than for a 2.7 RS!

Now I don't ever see watercooled stuff rising in value as there is too much of it and the drive is playstationtastic and inevitably the next GT3 is always faster than the last with little to give enthusiasts a reason to buy a 996 over a 997. That aside the running costs of the watercooled stuff is viscious due to dear shiny bits like brakes and the fact their girth means they eat brakes and tyres for fun.

I also question how they'll be in 10 years time to keep on the road with all that electrickery in the suspension to replace at epic cost too!

It will mean only he wealthy will want them but then they will be into the 999 or whatever Porsche do then!

So to me the aircooled cars are the only one where we will be able to contemplate a sensible ownership cost as discussed earlier?

obviously they are also the best fun and feelsome!!

 

[vic cohen]

Richard, IMO ur last line says a lot ...............................they re fun ! I can see nothing in having these cars unless u enjoy them , i ve done a bit of polishing as well , like to think my kit s not too shabby, but one of the reasons the 993 rs is such a hit is appart from the 2.7rs, i cant see anything, within mere mortals price bracket that gives the same bangs for ur buck

i bought my 1 st 911 in UK in 1975 for £4250 [2.4 e ] and traded it for an rs touring and had to pay £6250 for a 5 year old car .................not so many opportunities for Track days then but ordinary servicing was nt huge ; subsequentlywith twin turbos and the heat generated , let alone the power, ate pads /discs and tyres and changed oil every 4 track days . Reverting as i have recently to a normally aspirated 993 for track days delighted to see costs coming down to a more acceptable level...............i cant propose any other car that gives quite as much satisfaction on track for actual running cost ....satisfaction to be defined , but i can live with no turbos and maybe only 150 ish on The Lavant as a trade off ..........the other thing not much else provides is the ability to drive to circuit, adjust tyres , drive home ....reliability !

 

[Richard Dawson]

Vic

Dead right i think. To me that has always been the RS appeal.

The 993 RS for me is my ideal car in that like you i find the running costs bearable with trackday use, perfect balance and in reality as quick as most things when you drive it well (there is real fun in hunting down the poorly driven GT3...) and yet able to go out for lunch in with the Mrs, drive to the 'Ring without a pre booked chiropractor and ear defenders.

I had a 964 and I am sure it was as fast but it failed as an allrounder for me in the UK as it was too harsh.

I think it is the inherent balance of the qualities of it with the real fun and feel it gives that makes it long term on a value front sure to reach or outdo the 2.7rs. The shame is those same values then hamper the usability as it becomes a pain to insure!!

 

[clubsport]

That is the problem Nick, collating the correct data....I have looked at some of those sites and most are based on Cpi data, started in 1996 and then become more spurious on the earlier data, there were different baskets to consider. As I am sure you are aware the CPI is considered overstated by as much as 1%.

Just looking at one of those sites, "whats the cost" which equated £7500 in 1972 to equal £63k now,,,,with prior 2006 levels of inflation based on "historical" data...how is that constructed? (the average rate works out to 5.92%).

Away from those sites, If we had used 7% (after tax) average over the period investment, which doesn't appear to have been possible for anyone with an annuity after fees etc...then we could arrive at £91,600, close to your £90k figure.

Vic, That is what I am pointing out,,the difference between what something is trading for against the time value of money.

Just look at 2.7Rs vs 993Rs in 1995, 2,7Rs had come off of their 1990 peak and were cheaper than the new car....Looking at cost today vs value of the money.


I was trying to simplify things by using a stated attainable rate of return for comparison purposes, to me this (for a brief moment) was more interesting than to consider where things are going next,,,,these are hardly homogenous commodities....it is very unlikely that we see large sellers of 2.7Rs to steam in and buy 2006 GT3 on a value basis as there is obviously far more to this than price.....if anything this highlights the investment performance and potential of certain cars.

For those who can remember, look at the house you could have bought in 1972 for £7500 and what that would have been worth today, no comparison....there are so many coulda, shoulda, woulda, hindsight investment opportunities.....This is more about straightforward look at the implied value of money?

 

[vic cohen]

i Rarely take the wife to lunch, hence latest 993 is actually a Cup Car ..........................not a problem ! Except cold , mists up when wet etc etc ............
ps i have delighted in rs and rs cs, in recent past though ..........................

 

[vic cohen]

small dete Paul ithink the rs was actually abt either side of £6k when new , just cant remember exactly ......was in Mayalsia at the time ! Thought the Burzel looked a bit funny!

When car things took a tumble '89 seemed to follow abt a year after equities , Art took a real hammering abt the same point . Other than folk perhaps being more selective in waht they buy nowadays, i dont think real quality cars have lost out if at all , maybe peaked for a bit but the Art reports say they ve fallen 35%................................hence while i dont dispute what ur saying ,the real price is what folk will actually cough up !

 

[clubsport]

Vic the real price of cars yes in terms of transaction, Yes,,,the real value of money, which is what this is about is a different conversation...we are not talking about the same thing here. I clearly would not dispute price is where buyer and seller transact, but that was as aside to the original post.

I understand art price indices have had a terrible time over the last 6 months, mainly through liquidation as other investments have under performed and margin calls in certain cases....as I know even less about art than cars, I expect some sectors have outperformed others, some may even have risen? It seems classics on the whole seem to be doing ok for the moment.......personally, I think it all gets a bit grim when central banks start to raise rates again, in fear of inflation as the embers of recovery start to glow....then we will reconsider the value of money as it will be relatively more expensive than now.

 

[vic cohen]

ok Paul, i surrender ......................off to Chez G Bishopsgate anyone welcome to continue there, downstairs by the window if anyone organises a drive by shooting .............................it looks good outside think i ll try the Rosee!

 

[johnny senna]

It's alright for some!! []

 

[vic cohen]

Doc breathed some extra gas first .........................converted a treat all working thks