| XwChriswX |
04-02-2013 02:09 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam426
(Post 2247171)
True. It is a depreciating asset and time, not mods, are the main driver of the depreciation. And I will say that there are effective mods. For sure. Mods that increase performance (whatever that is- acceleration, handling, whatever) are readily available. But I question their value. Then again, if value is what you are after- then get a Honda CR-Z. I guess I was really debating the merits of stock versus modified cars for myself. To each his/her own. There are some cool mods out there.
What I am sure of-is that OEM wise- we are experiencing a golden age of automobiles. Look at the performance we get stock for the money. A stock $35k Z that will blow the doors off of 95% of cars made 10 years ago at any price.
|
So if I buy a car, it depreciates. Correct?
I mod it, it depreciates faster. Correct?
If I return it back to stock, prior to selling, does it magically regain that extra depreciation back? Because that's what you're alluding to... :ugh2:
If you want value on your return, you obviously get something more economical and mass produced. However most people that buy a Z fit into two categories. They want a Z and it is the epitome of fun for them, or they buy a Z because they can afford to buy it, enjoy it, and sell it to get their next fun car at their leisure. Modded or unmodded has nothing to do with either.
Of course it's going to smoke lots of 10 yr older cars... That's the nature of advancement. But whos to say the "new" developments 10 years ago in their prime didn't mean the golden age of automobiles, some would say the muscle car era was the peak due to the fact no one cared about emissions or restrictions. It was build a good looking car, put the biggest motor you could find in it, and melt tires. :driving: |
