You are here: Forums Smart Shopper Smart Shopper-Archives Any Questions for a Car Dealer? 

Any Questions for a Car Dealer? - READ ONLY

16377 messages,  Last post on Feb 11, 2006 at 4:59 AM

You are in the Smart Shopper-Archives Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester

Messages Page 4 of 1638 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1638 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#29 of 16377 Depreciation question by andre1969 Jan 09, 2001 (12:07 pm)
Do American cars (or cars in general) depreciate quicker than they used to? I was just wondering...my grandfather saved the paperwork on just about every car he'd ever owned. And it looks like back in the 50's and 60's, he would get about 1/2 of what he paid for his cars when he traded (usually about every 3-4 years). For example, he bought a 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 for $3500, and got around $1700 or so when he traded it for a 1961 Galaxie 500. Come to think of it, I think he got about $6800 tradein on his 1985 LTD when he traded it for an '89 Taurus, and that was about 1/2 or a little more than he paid for it.   But nowadays, I doubt a 4 year old Taurus, Intrepid, or Lumina with average miles would be worth half its original selling price.   -Andre
#30 of 16377 Check out Kiplingers Personal Finance magazine by timadams Jan 10, 2001 (5:42 am)
The Dec. issue of Kiplingers has tables that indicate the projected resale value of most of the cars on the market after 2 years and 4 years. The resale value is indicated as a percentage of the original MSRP. The figures came from a leasing consultant company.   In general, big three domestic cars do depreciate faster than many imports, but there are also exceptions. In general, Honda, Toyota, Subaru, VW and many luxury brands depreciate slower, but so do some domestic models such as the Pontiac Firebird and Chevy Camaro and Corvette.   In your example, here are the figures provided by Kiplingers for competing family sedans, 2 year/4 year:   Ford Taurus 53/35 Dodge Intrepid 50/33 Chevy Lumina 46/32 Chevy Monte Carlo 56/42 Acura Integra 59/46 Honda Accord 61/47 Mazda 626 58/36 Mitsubishi Galant 55/41 Nissan Altima 58/41 Olds Intrigue 49/35 Pontiac Grand Prix 56/39 Subaru Legacy 58/44 Toyota Camry 57/43 VW Jetta 60/45   The paper magazine has the cars in tables, but you can look up individual cars on Kiplinger's website at:   http://www.kiplinger.com/php/cars/2001/   The web site provides the same resale value information for each model.
#31 of 16377 Thanks by Car_man HOST Jan 10, 2001 (9:32 am)
Kip lingers certainly has some interesting information about automobiles on their Web site. Thanks for sharing the link with everyone, Tim.   Car_Man Host Smart Shoppers / FWI Message Boards
#32 of 16377 Yeah Tim, thanks! by andre1969 Jan 10, 2001 (10:54 am)
That Kiplinger's link is great! One thing I find interesting is that the Dodge Intrepid (which I own) numbers are close to the Taurus and Lumina, and even the new Impala is rated at 53/38%. I keep hearing people say how horrible depreciation is on Intrepids, although it looks like its numbers are in the ballpark with its closest competition.   -Andre
#33 of 16377 by timadams Jan 11, 2001 (5:46 am)
You're welcome! But please remember to take the figures with a grain of salt.   I'm not questioning Kiplinger's integrity or accuracy, but you do have to remember that the figures they provide are "in advance" projections used to calculate lease payments. What the actual depreciation of a car will be in 2 or 4 years might be quite different, due to supply/demand at that time (as SUV owners will find out, I predict).   I'm sure Isell or Bill might pop in and relate their experiences that, say, Toyotas or VWs or whatever actually do better than projected in holding their value while Chryslers or Pontiacs do worse (just examples).   In other words, while the projections used by leasing companies are valuable information, actual results might tell a slightly different story.   p.s. Andre, the one that surprises me most on the list is the high expected resale value of the Chevy Monte Carlo. It is way out of trend with most other GM cars (other than Firebird/Camaro and Corvette).
#34 of 16377 timadams by audia8q Jan 11, 2001 (8:03 am)
The problem with the kiplinger type statistics is that everyone thinks their cars or truck is the pefect one...I have found plenty of toyota's that have 95% deprec after 36 months and some Ford's with much higher resale than the toyota... It truly depends on the individual car and how the owner keeps it...   Also when you call the 1-900-crystalball number you bank on things never changing. But they always do...this is why the so many huge players in the leasing business are out of the business or near financial ruins basing things on kiplinger type statistics...consumers change long before the statistics do... look at the statistics on Audi before and after the phony 60 minute story.. BTW: some of the numbers are rather accurate but some are totalreal world fiction (like the camaro /monte)   Rich
#35 of 16377 Lease residuals... by isellhondas Jan 11, 2001 (4:41 pm)
Many a bank and car company has been burned big time by setting residuals too high.   The Intrepid (or whatever) comes off lease after three years and the lessors walk away.   The residual was set at 12,000 and they are begging at auction for 8500.00.   And...the banks get smarter, and tighter.   And the customer wonders why he can't get the same payment next time!   Why? Because the banks dropped the hell out of the residuals!
#36 of 16377 depreciation by stickguy Jan 11, 2001 (5:30 pm)
Don't you also have to take into account that the percentages are off of MSRP? For instance, the Taurus might look worse than it really is. Say MSRP is 20,000, factor of 50%, so residual is 10K. But if you only paid 17,000 for it, your real depreciation is much less.   I also don't care much about percentages. Dollars count. 40% of a 40K car is more than 50% of a 25K car,
#37 of 16377 stickguy by audia8q Jan 12, 2001 (12:28 am)
you are correct about the % of MSRP. If you figure in .9% financing for 60 months along with a rebate that dodge/ford et al offer the numbers start to get more inline...   rich
#38 of 16377 No doubt by timadams Jan 12, 2001 (4:44 am)
Like other things in life, hindsight is 20-20. I imagine we will look back at the early and mid 90's as a period of leasing bargains, with the pendulum swinging back now to where residuals are much less optimistic. Meaning that leasing payments are higher for the same price cars.   As an admitted SUV hater, I am probably biased. But I think depreciation on many of the SUVs out there will be greater than owners and leasing companies think. Once the craze has abated, they will be worth less than projected. Kiplingers shows many of them worth over 60% after 2 years and 45-50% after 4 years. The old "trucks/4WD vehicles hold their value better" will be an outdated aphorism as supply outstrips demand. It used to be true when a guy wanted a 4WD "beater" to take in the woods and there weren't many around, but that isn't true anymore.

Messages Page 4 of 1638 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1638 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Smart Shopper Smart Shopper-Archives Any Questions for a Car Dealer?