What? You expect a mass produced car to gain in value after 33k miles?

Look at exotics and how fast they plummet in value. Especially if 33k on the clock

Here's lease pricing from Nissan Acceptance Corporation on a 2017 Sport Tech. I did mis-speak and I apologize. I misrepresentedt the residual value by $350. Note that Nissan's guess at residual value in three years is $15,945.

What SINISTER meant is 15,945 residual for CURRENT 2017 used price, not in 3 years..

So the residual is is 46%. Since you can easily find 25% discount on any new 2017, the adjusted loss is only 29% for 3 years. Not too shabby

Exactly...plus who cares in 3 years most cars drop like rocks ...trying to buy a car based on what it will be worth in a couple years is futile. Expect it to drop like a rock if you drive tons of miles and you purchased the base model anything.

As an example I will say that most 2013 Nismos are selling around 28k with low miles...thats 4 years old and at MSRP of around 43k back in 2013 about a 34% drop in 4 years. No way near your 3 year 50% drop analysis. Plus consider like ssmoked mentioned that no one pays MSRP....plus honestly anyone buying new is making a mistake already...

Not a Priority?
 

Don't forget the Porsche 911. It's been the same basic shape and drivetrain design/layout since the 60's and no one has a problem with that! The 911 cannot do any wrong and car reviewers never bitch about that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

re: Death of the Z
 

Agree... although gas prices have settled back down again, and the "Great Recession" is pretty much behind us too -- other than some residual fallout of slow job growth since then.

Car dealers were doing a booming business for much of 2016, and only in the last few months has there been an indication that it's slowing a bit (which is only to be expected, once the pent-up surge of buyers, post recession, have made their purchases).

Right now, I think Millennial indifference is putting the most hurt on the sports car segment. Plus, buying habits and trends change with time. Right now, a lot of people who would have been drawn to a sports car in the past are looking at luxury sedans or SUVs or even Jeeps instead. I know several people in their early 30's who I would have pegged as a definite candidate for a nice sports car who bought a Lincoln MKZ instead. Where I work, in downtown Bethesda - it's one of the wealthiest suburbs in America. You see nothing but high end cars on the roads out here. And yet? The 2 seater sports car is fairly uncommon. More people are attracted to a high performance version of an SUV so they can have something fast that they can still take the dog to the vet in, or give several co-workers a ride to and from lunch during the day.

Yes, but the point s he has been updated since it came out. The 911 had a major update in 2011. The 370z hasn't had any major changes since 2009.

Your comparison is flawed. You talking about an entire series of cars, and comparing it to a single generation of a car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only fallacy with your Porsche 911 argument is that it out performs every car in its segment with its engine and handling

The point being that the residual value on my 2011 370Z was $23,000. The residual value on my 2014 is $22,500. The residual value on a 2017 is $15,945. It's a dying car line. They can't afford to upgrade it because it will be so expensive that no one will buy it. For now, they can afford to keep it in the catalogue, but sales are so increasingly pathetic that, in three years, Nissan is confident that the car will be worth less than 1/2 of its purchase price. To me, that signals that the end of the Z is near - likely within 3 years.

Yes but does the base 911 out-accelerate or have more horsepower than every car in its segment? No it doesn't. This is my point. Neither does the 370z. However, a sports car needs to do everything well, not just accelerate 0-60 or 1/4 mile. It needs to feel and handle like a sports car. As long as it has that, it is still relevant.

In its price range, I challenge you to find a better sports car than the Z (no, hot hatches don't count). :tup:

Same goes for the GTR. It still kicks *** in its class.

Not if they upgrade it and just make it more performance based....because as I mentioned the drop in value was only around 30% in 4 years for my Nismo....Also note that their calculated residual values are based on a car that probably drives the typical miles which is around 45k in 3 years....so they are showing the residual value on the two extremes: base model and high miles...its not reflective of a higher performance based model. Which they essentially almost do not have.....I get what your saying and if they do drop it I would be happy. I have mine and that is all that matters....it will also become more rare than it already is...:tup:

Wishful thinking. The Z will be dead in three years.

I posted this in the Z35 thread but it applies here too.

I feel like some of you guys are reading too much into what that guy said. The article quotes him saying that the 370z is not a priority. Why would the 370z specifically be a priority now after years of stagnation? I think he is referring to the 370Z specifically, especially since there is no other context given to us and he actually says "370z". Maybe that was a response to a question regarding the heritage edition. Then he said he hopes that they will have a successor, which falls in line with what Nissan itself has been doing with Z speculation. Not confirming, nor denying. I really think his comments are being taken out of context and people are running with it. Thats the kind of thing these articles do to generate buzz. Especially since every outlet that I can find only quotes the same 2 exact things as everyone else and nothing else that he said in between or before those quotes. It leads me to believe that they are just piggybacking off of what one journalist wrote and building on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk