Investment Grade Cars

[Dottore]

So a good friend of mine with far too much money has been bitten by the vintage rallying bug. (He did the California Mille last year with a mate of his.)

He has been looking for a car to buy with which he can participate in these kind of gentleman's rallys, and has narrowed things down to a 1962 300SL, a C-Type Jag and a Ferrari Lusso. All are in spectacular shape and have a good provenance, and there's not much that separates them in terms of money.

They're all brilliant cars of course, and I would love to have any one of them. Still, if pressed, I'd probably take the 300 SL. But that's just me.

All other factors aside, which of these cars do you guys think has the most upside potential seen purely as an investment?

[Paul_Heery]

The provenance extends part the year and make of the car. What is the history on each? Owners, race history, etc.

[Rikao4]

is the 300 a Gull ?

Rika

[boba]

Originally Posted by Rikao4

is the 300 a Gull ?

Rika

I think '62 would be a roadster.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by Rikao4

is the 300 a Gull ?

Rika

No. Roadster.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by Paul_Heery

What is the history on each? Owners, race history, etc.

Assume for the purposes of the question that the history/provenance of the three cars is equally interesting (or uninteresting).

[dd74]

Also, how gentle is a gentleman's rally? Hence, ever see a million-dollar Ferrari crash during a Historic at Laguna Seca?

Sort of looks like...



...that.

[Rikao4]

goggle show's some Gull's..for 62
good replicas are going for silly $..


Rika

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by Dottore

All other factors aside, which of these cars do you guys think has the most upside potential seen purely as an investment?

for that question specifically, the 250 GT/L for sure.

ferraris generally have the most price elasticity among collector sports cars. so if the criteria is "most possible upside," the answer is the ferrari, for sure.

Lussos are currently what, around $500-$600K? Before the economic crash, an ex-Steve McQueen lusso sold for $2.3 million (in 2007). When (if) the world economy turns and collector car prices start going up again, Lussos will explode big time.

[boba]

Originally Posted by Rikao4

goggle show's some Gull's..for 62
good replicas are going for silly $..
Rika

I may be wrong but I always thought Gullwings were 1955-57.

From wiki.

The Mercedes-Benz 300SL was introduced in 1954 as a two-seat, closed sports car with distinctive gull-wing doors. Later it was offered as an open roadster. It was the fastest production car of its day.

Built by Daimler-Benz AG and internally numbered W198, the fuel-injected road version was based (somewhat loosely) on the company's highly successful competition-only sports car of 1952, the somewhat less powerful carbureted Mercedes-Benz 300SL (W194).

The road model was suggested by Max Hoffman. Being intended for customers in the booming post-war American market it was introduced at the 1954 New York Auto Show, unlike previous models introduced at either the Frankfurt or Geneva shows. In Mercedes-Benz fashion, the "300" referred to the engine's three liter cylinder displacement. The "SL" stood for "Sport Leicht" (Sport Light).

The 300SL was best known for both its distinctive gull wing doors and being the first-ever gasoline-powered car equipped with fuel injection directly into the combustion chamber. The gull wing version was available from March 1955 to 1957. Production of the roadster ended in 1963 with the introduction of the 230SL.

[tchanson]

I would find the C Type to be easily the most interesting, as a dedicated sports car vs GT's like SL and the even cushier Lusso. The Jag is the the one I would most want to drive, which would be my criteria.

As for appreciation, I have no clue, but would suspect the rarer C Type would excel in that are as well. But then, gaudy Plum Crazy Hemi 'Cuda's were going for 7 figures a few years ago as well, for awhile anyway...




Tim

[boba]

While it would be nice to be able to choose from the listed cars, I think looking for a car to use and for an investment might be mutually exclusive objectives. This is not to say that the value could not go up, but use for events present risks. Maintenance cost for these cars used in anger could also cut into any value increase. If you can afford it and understand the risks, buy the car you have a passion for and enjoy it. If when it is time to move on, you have a gain, big plus.

It is generally a bad idea to view cars as an investment. It is at the high end where automotive art comes into play that you can start to talk about investment. I say this with the understanding there is a distinction between investing and speculation. Just look at some of the big winners at BJ every year. Not sure I understand the valuation system there.

[notfarnow]

The 300sl is a beautiful car, but even the gullwings were never considered *amazing* cars to drive. My dad's neighbor had a 300sl GW and he said it was a goegeous car, great for turning heads, but not nearly fast enough. Called it a "porker". I can see the historical appeal of a c-type, even a replica, but I don't think they are particularly pretty... and I can't imagine they'd be all that comfortable for more than a couple hours.

I'm simply shocked that any of you could suggest anything *other* than the Lusso. Was this a trick question?

[dd74]

Investing for profit, IMO, should be dispassionate. Stocks are a perfect example as emotionally, one is not so much linked to the corporation from which the stock is issued and consequentially, maintain an idea of the stock's value. Other factors determine the value.

OTOH, investing in cars is very subjective. When a person thinks subjectively about the value of their investment, more often than not, unless dealing with an even playing field of investors who understand a certain car's value, another person may not consider the car in the same way as the owner. Your $1M car may only fetch $750,000.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by boba

While it would be nice to be able to choose from the listed cars, I think looking for a car to use and for an investment might be mutually exclusive objectives. .

Not necessarily. I think all three of these cars are solid investments—based on past appreciation. And they can be enjoyed. We're talking gentlemen's rallies here, ie, scenic tours punctuated by champagne and tiny salmon sandwiches.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by tchanson

I would find the C Type to be easily the most interesting, as a dedicated sports car vs GT's like SL and the even cushier Lusso. The Jag is the the one I would most want to drive, which would be my criteria.

As for appreciation, I have no clue, but would suspect the rarer C Type would excel in that are as well.

Tim

That's exactly the way he's leaning, interestingly enough. He thinks the Jag has the biggest financial upside. (Also his wife likes it the least—because of the absence of all creature comforts— and is unlikely to want to join him on these tours—which he sees as a plus.)

[Damian in NJ]

C-type, much more rare, eligible for any event. I think only one or two Lusso's have track backgrounds, and none as a factory entrant.

[MattKellett]

Originally Posted by notfarnow

I can see the historical appeal of a c-type, even a replica, but I don't think they are particularly pretty... and I can't imagine they'd be all that comfortable for more than a couple hours.

I'm simply shocked that any of you could suggest anything *other* than the Lusso. Was this a trick question?
]

Jake

Did you bang your head this morning?

The C Type is one of the worlds most beautiful cars imho.

With only 52 built, all for competition, I would say that this would be the safest investment, but really these are all blue chips cars, so I don't think there's a wrong answer.

[notfarnow]

Originally Posted by MattKellett

Jake

Did you bang your head this morning?

The C Type is one of the worlds most beautiful cars imho.

Crazy talk. Now if we were talking D types, then yeah, I'd hesitate for 10-15 seconds before taking the Lusso.


Either way, not a bad conundrum to have.