Can I afford this car?

[Jac]

Originally Posted by Annahra

Racing driver in an 86 (even modded) is not pro.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

Ok, but do you see my point regarding need? There's a very select few who need a sports car/BRZ.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Are you one of those guys who won't touch a car after 100k miles?

No. But I wouldn't buy one assuming that it would be reliable. It's a simple fact of engineering that the more miles a car has on it, the more likely it is to suffer mechanical failures.

My Cherokee has 160K miles on it now, and I'm keeping it. But I'm not keeping it with the assumption that it will continue problem-free for another 160K miles. It's being relegated to non-DD status.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

When I was shopping a few years ago I was tripping over RSX's and Celicas in that price range, cars that are easily capable of 200k miles with nothing more than routine maintenance, yes the bigger services were coming up (water pump, timing belt) but a far cry from "not going to buy you anything reliable".

I think we have different definitions of reliable. It's possible that those cars keep going that long. It's also possible they don't. For my daily driver, I can't risk getting one of the ones that doesn't.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Edit: Agreed that it's definitely cheaper to stick with the car he's got until he's sure of his needs and his capability of affording it.

[SirBrass]

Originally Posted by Jac

Ok, but do you see my point regarding need? There's a very select few who need a sports car/BRZ.

According to your definition, there's very few of us who "need" (if even that) a beater camry.

You're talking to enthusiasts. Need doesn't factor into it according to your definition. "Need" here includes the strong desire for a sports car that is also practical for values of sports coupe.

[Jac]

Originally Posted by SirBrass

According to your definition, there's very few of us who "need" (if even that) a beater camry.

Agreed, I doubt that some people even need a car to begin with.

Originally Posted by SirBrass

You're talking to enthusiasts. Need doesn't factor into it according to your definition. "Need" here includes the strong desire for a sports car that is also practical for values of sports coupe.

I think 'want' and 'need' are different. I wanted a BRZ because i'm an enthusiast and i like driving. But did i really need it? No.

EDIT: Btw, i think my quote was taken a little out of context:

Originally Posted by Jac

All sports car purchases are unnecessary and bad investments. Just comes down to how much you like/want the car.

[Annahra]

I get your point. I drive 50 mi a day for work and road trip 1500 3-4 times a year so I NEED a reliable (read very low mileage with warranty) car with good gas mileage and nav. I could probably get this for $22K or so. You can argue that the extra $6K I spent to get a BRZ is luxury, and I would agree with you, but most of my purchase was not.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[Jac]

My BRZ is also my DD. I'm definitely not advocating that everyone goes and buys a Corolla, that would be a very boring world. I think as sports car purchases go there's definitely worse ones than the BRZ.

I got 41mpg on a trip to Maine, there's some economy cars which would struggle to hit that!

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Jac

Just because a car depreciates less than another doesn't make it a good investment.

Now you're changing your language. We weren't talking about good investments. You singled out sports cars as bad investments, but you haven't shown how being a sports car makes it any worse an investment than a minivan.

Originally Posted by Jac

A good investment is an asset which appreciates in value, a BRZ will not do that.

That's an incredibly simplistic view, since it completely ignores income producing assets whose value is derived from cash flow rather than growth (like rental properties or dividend stocks). It also ignores investment in cost centers that create no cash flow on their own but contribute to overall profitability. A company may build an industrial building that loses market value over time and seems to do nothing but cost the company money, yet that structure is necessary for the company to produce its product and operate profitably.

I take a similar view toward my own personal finances. I bought the BRZ as an asset that contributes to my overall profitability by allowing me to perform certain job duties (specifically travel) at a relatively low cost. If I had not bought a car, I would not have been able to keep my job, and therefore not buying a car would have been more costly in terms of opportunity cost than buying one.

The truth is that the BRZ actually appears to be making me money right now. So far I'm getting more in mileage reimbursement tax free from my employer than it is costing me to own and operate the car. At my current monthly mileage, I'm projecting that condition to continue for four years, but I'm planning for three just to be on the safe side. When the asset reaches the end of its useful life, I'm still expecting a pretty decent salvage (resale) value to recover some of my investment (although I doubt I'll actually sell it at that point).

So no, even in purely financial terms, I do not agree that this is a bad investment. A $60K or $70K sports car might not have been as sound an investment because of the leverage required and the cost of interest, but this is not a $60K or $70K car. And none of this even takes into account the value of the pleasure I receive from the asset and how that pleasure helps me do my job. That's just a bonus.

Full disclosure: I'm a former Big 4 accountant with a finance background, currently working in the insurance industry. I do understand a little bit about finance, although I usually try to keep my posts more conversational.

Originally Posted by Jac

Get a Corolla. Seats 4, better gas milage, cheaper, and more reliable.

I don't need four seats, the gas mileage is only slightly better, it's not really that much cheaper, and it's not possible for you to say at this time that the car is more reliable, when the BRZ has only been out for a couple of years. At the same time, the Corolla is a car designed to drive until it dies and throw it away. I seriously doubt a Corolla is going to hold its value the way a BRZ will.

So even if I save $5K up front on a Corolla, I'm going to get more than that back in residual value on the other end, when the BRZ can still be sold and the Corolla is at Pull-a-Part. I haven't crunched the numbers, but I anticipate that the present value of that difference in salvage value at the end of the asset's useful life will make the BRZ a better investment than a Corolla.

Originally Posted by Jac

1. Cars are bad investments (apart from a very select few, like i've highlighted).

Since you like numbered lists:

1. Again, you're changing the language, which is usually a sign someone realizes he has stepped in it. You singled out sports cars as bad investments without providing any support whatsoever for that distinction.

2. Cars in general are not necessarily bad investments either when considered as part of a complete financial strategy.

Originally Posted by Jac

Prove me wrong.

Prove yourself right. Basically all you have said is that sports cars are bad investments because sports cars are bad investments. If you're going to make a sweeping generalization, you ought to be able to back it up without resorting to circular logic or saying "prove me wrong" when you can't.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Annahra

You can argue that the extra $6K I spent to get a BRZ is luxury, and I would agree with you, but most of my purchase was not.

I would disagree. If the BRZ holds its value better than the cheaper car, which I think it will, then that extra money is an investment and not just a frivolous luxury.

[poundsand]

Originally Posted by AG74683

Exactly my fear, that I don't quite understand what I'd be getting into with this.

ain't that complicated - how much do you have left at the end of every month? how much are you saving, and how much do you have saved?

[poundsand]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I laugh at the "if you have to ask" kneejerk reaction whenever this question comes up.

"no" might be a kneejerk reaction to the question, but if you have to ask, you probably shouldn't, even if you can, as you are clueless enough about your own finances that you're asking on an internet forum, where nobody knows you, how much you actually make, or your expenses. let that sink in - so clueless about that stuff that they're asking people who have no idea about their situation.

[SirBrass]

Originally Posted by poundsand

ain't that complicated - how much do you have left at the end of every month? how much are you saving, and how much do you have saved?

To the OP:

Also, how much does an economical fun-to-drive car mean to you, and can you cut certain expenditures that you can easily do without to better afford this?

Such as biking to work instead of driving (will save you gas, and if you are under a certain mileage per year on your primary vehicle, you can get a pretty decent reduction on your insurance rates for that vehicle, which translates into money saved on expenditures). Also, I know some of us are saying to keep your current vehicle, but if it's a gas hog and you're not going to use it for offroading much, then sell it and use the money gained through private sale as part of the downpayment on the BRZ. There's money saved as well. But that has to be your choice. If keeping your current vehicle is a must then it's a must and costs for it have to be factored in.

But driving less and biking more will also save you money in gas (even more significant in savings than per month insurance), especially if you're driving a fuel-drinking vehicle to work right now.

If you still can't manage the cost of the vehicle without maxing your per month budget (which means that technically you CAN afford the car... but trust me, maxing the budget expense is NOT a fun state to live in, as you're living at the edge and any fluctuations in pay or prices of items WILL bite you hard in the rear end... and that stress makes for a great deal of vehicle dissatisfaction, which was one of the very powerful motivators that prompted me to get rid of my STI for a BRZ, even at a trade-in loss), then wait. If this is the vehicle you really want, you will be able to afford it eventually. It'll just take time.

Good things come to those who wait... and plan accordingly. I'm not the greatest with financial planning and budgeting (despite not being a slouch with numbers. it's just that I'm not the greatest with money and saving it), but if there's something I want, I WILL wait and reduce spending elsewhere till I've set aside enough to afford it. I do it regularly for car mods, and plan out WHEN I will buy them based upon my once-every-two-weeks paycheck amount, which part of the month it's coming in (I generally don't do big purchases on the paycheck which also funds rent, utilities, electricity, cable internet, cell bill, etc), and when the overflow will fund what I want and give me enough of an overflow that it won't severely hurt too badly.

[poundsand]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

$10K is not going to buy you anything reliable with reasonably low mileage unless it's beat to hell.

$10k can get a very nice miata with low miles.

[Annahra]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I would disagree. If the BRZ holds its value better than the cheaper car, which I think it will, then that extra money is an investment and not just a frivolous luxury.

Excellent point, and something I should've thought of since I was right-side up on my BRZ loan about eight months before I was on my Genesis.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Jac

1. Cars are bad investments (apart from a very select few, like i've highlighted). Prove me wrong.

I think you're attacking this very aggressively from a flawed position. Rephrase your argument and nobody would be disagreeing.

Cars are not an investment (edit: defining investment as putting money in and expecting a positive monetary return), they invariably go down in value (lets not talk about collector cars). Financially it would be more prudent to buy lightly used economical vehicles. Sports cars have higher insurance rates, generally higher fueling costs and higher replacement part costs, not to mention higher initial purchase price.

Other side of the coin is that the happiness for the amount of money spent can be well worth it.