Any good reason to stick with 1st Gen?

[bcj]

Back in '13 people without one were predicting they'd be able to pick up a lightly used one for $5k in the next year or two.

Hmm.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Number of units made have some impact but its not as much as you might think. I mean, Chevy built 243,085 1969 Camaros. Go price one of those sometime.

3/4 of those were sold for scrap metal 40 years ago, not relevant when looking at the value curve of the s2000 which is still <25 years old.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Too many 86s made, na Miata and 240sx is closer to what you'll see, both still cheaper then s2000 despite going out of production over a decade before the s2k did.

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1992-nissan-240sx-13/

There are more pre-facelift FRSs made in 4 years then there are s2ks in the US. Not even counting BRZ, facelift or upcoming mk2s.

I tend to share this view. Total FRS/BRZ/86 sales in the US alone were over 120,000 units compared with the s2000 at around half that.

On the plus side, that means there should be double the available spare parts for these cars in the future. That’s increasingly becoming a concern for s2000 owners who want to keep driving their cars.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

3/4 of those were sold for scrap metal 40 years ago, not relevant when looking at the value curve of the s2000 which is still <25 years old.

Yea, but that still leaves 60,000 cars from just one production year.

I think my point stands. Limited production of a model is a small factor in its price in the future. Just because a car saw limited production is not an indicator of its future value as a "classic".

I doubt the twins will reach the level of an S2000 but that has more to do with the attributes assigned to the cars by collectors than the numbers produced over its lifespan. Also, if the S2000 is already having parts issues, and there aren't enough of them to justify a 3rd party stepping in, their attainability will continue to drop.

[Th3rdSun]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Number of units made have some impact but its not as much as you might think. I mean, Chevy built 243,085 1969 Camaros. Go price one of those sometime.

Or a Chevette. I can't remember when the last time I actually saw one of those on the street,but I did see one for sale one in someone's yard about three years ago. Can't imagine that were going to get much for it.

[Ernest72]

Personally, if you are buying a twin for future value, you are missing the point. And this goes for many cars. Its either a utility or a toy, and you use it have fun or get places and when you are done you move on to something else, usually at a loss.

Do not read much into the current market, it’s an anomaly, people who paid high prices for cars recently will be selling them for cheap in a few years. The same way one of my neighbors paid 1.2mil for a new McMansion in 2006 only to sell it for 870k in 2009. My house just got close in value to what I paid for it in 2006, only took 16 years. Asset bubbles suck when you time it wrong. Cars will be worse.

[bcj]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Also, if the S2000 is already having parts issues, and there aren't enough of them to justify a 3rd party stepping in, their attainability will continue to drop.

Honda is diluting the OEM value. LOL.

You’ll Be Able To Buy Brand-New S2000 Parts From Honda Soon

[wbradley]

Try to find a better, cheaper rear wheel drive sports car.

[NWFRS]

I think the real challenge will be finding one that’s not completely clapped-out in 25 years.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by NWFRS

I think the real challenge will be finding one that’s not completely clapped-out in 25 years.

I dont think that will be too hard.

Gas prices will be so high in 10 years that they will only get driven on weekends! heh.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by wbradley

Try to find a better, cheaper rear wheel drive sports car.

Miata/Fiata.
Lighter, better suspension design, basically as quick in a straight line, it's a better sports car hands down.

But I don't want a convertible so FRS it is, more practical as an only car due to the storage space.

[Kona61]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Miata/Fiata.
Lighter, better suspension design, basically as quick in a straight line, it's a better sports car hands down.

But I don't want a convertible so FRS it is, more practical as an only car due to the storage space.

Id agree. It’s also a terrible car to drive regularly even besides it’s ability to hold “stuff”. They are cramped, loud, and not relaxing to drive at all. Day-to-day I wouldn’t want one.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Kona61

Id agree. It’s also a terrible car to drive regularly even besides it’s ability to hold “stuff”. They are cramped, loud, and not relaxing to drive at all. Day-to-day I wouldn’t want one.

So, then, the Miata is a better sports car as long as you don't want to actually drive it...

Pretty much sums up my position on it.

[Kona61]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

So, then, the Miata is a better sports car as long as you don't want to actually drive it...

Pretty much sums up my position on it.

Well no, it’s a better sports car as long as you don’t HAVE to drive it.