Evo X or 370Z???

cossie1600 · 10-30-2012, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Post your numbers then.

I just showed it to you on my Prius, I will show you another one. How about that?

Blackbook listed my Lexus as such, KBB has it listed at $1K+ lower. How is that higher?

Black Book Trade-In as of 10/29/2012
Clean Average Rough
Base $39,570 $37,110 $31,105
Options $750 $750 $750
Mileage ($2,250) ($1,600) ($1,075)
Total $38,070 $36,260 $30,780

Excellent
$36,510
Very Good
$35,710
Good
$34,410
Fair
$30,610

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Go ahead and show me the post where I claim that.

Btw, comparing the 370z to the Japanese cars of the 90s is laughable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cossie1600

I just showed it to you on my Prius, I will show you another one. How about that?

Blackbook listed my Lexus as such, KBB has it listed at $1K+ lower. How is that higher?

Black Book Trade-In as of 10/29/2012
Clean Average Rough
Base $39,570 $37,110 $31,105
Options $750 $750 $750
Mileage ($2,250) ($1,600) ($1,075)
Total $38,070 $36,260 $30,780

Excellent
$36,510
Very Good
$35,710
Good
$34,410
Fair
$30,610

Are you aware that the online black book site isn't black book value?

Hbomb · 10-30-2012, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Go ahead and show me the post where I claim that.

Btw, comparing the 370z to the Japanese cars of the 90s is laughable.

Wait, a semi affordable well built car that competes with cars that cost more? Yep. They definetely didnt set the bar at the cayman when they were building the 370z. /sarcasm.

SS_Firehawk · 10-30-2012, 01:15 PM

Here Red_Zed, used your source. I used competing 2011 models as this is what we both have been referring to. I loaded all models with options to guarantee they are in a similar price range when new. Please explain why my results are different than yours using two different tools. And yes, those are straight from their site and printed to PDF, go ahead and check if I manipulated the numbers. You don't have to reply after reading unless you want to add to your posting numbers.

Oh and it was post 103 where I claimed the 370Z resale value was good and you refuted, then proceeded to paste unsourced information.

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS_Firehawk

Here Red_Zed, used your source. I used competing 2011 models as this is what we both have been referring to. I loaded all models with options to guarantee they are in a similar price range when new. Please explain why my results are different than yours using two different tools. And yes, those are straight from their site and printed to PDF, go ahead and check if I manipulated the numbers. You don't have to reply after reading unless you want to add to your posting numbers.

Include Msrp so I know what options you are including.

Broadly speaking, the numbers are different because you outfitted the cars differently than I did, and you failed to include the Msrp numbers to obscure that

Of course, your post does nothing but prove me right. The z is on par with competitors, not "possessing the highest residual value in the industry" as you claim.

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 01:26 PM

Haha, yes, you included the glass roof. Options are an instant devalue.

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS_Firehawk

The Z has some the highest residual value in the market. They only sell 10k per year. There aren't very many. Snakes, you just got taken to the cleaners. Cosmetic damage or not, you ate $20,000 and don't car is stupid. Regardless if you liked the car or not, you let your emotions devalue what you were selling to the dealer. It's not one sale, but two, because you did not see it as such, I would estimate your eating $100 every month you make a payment on your Evo that could have been put back into your car.

Refuting this != saying resale sucks

SS_Firehawk · 10-30-2012, 01:56 PM

Couldn't figure out how to include MSRP for that year as an inclusion to the data.. No amount of options would close that gap anyways. You run the numbers yourself. All I did was highlight everything except certified preowned. Even if I had chosen a base Z with no options, it would have still been the same as the Mustangs. Frankly, I would pay $35,000 for a fully loaded SP Touring Z if it were something I wanted. I didn't play with the numbers. There weren't very many options. And FYI, that glass roof added $1,000, it did not devalue it. I'm not posting this out of bias, but I'll be damned if you come out of left field to tell me I'm wrong when everything says I'm not. Now why is it that I can answer you in one post, but it took three for you? You can multi quote within one message.

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS_Firehawk

Couldn't figure out how to include MSRP for that year as an inclusion to the data.. No amount of options would close that gap anyways. You run the numbers yourself. All I did was highlight everything except certified preowned. Even if I had chosen a base Z with no options, it would have still been the same as the Mustangs. Frankly, I would pay $35,000 for a fully loaded SP Touring Z if it were something I wanted. I didn't play with the numbers. There weren't very many options. And FYI, that glass roof added $1,000, it did not devalue it. I'm not posting this out of bias, but I'll be damned if you come out of left field to tell me I'm wrong when everything says I'm not. Now why is it that I can answer you in one post, but it took three for you? You can multi quote within one message.

No, it adds to Msrp but adds little if anything to resale. You have to compare equal options sets. Adding touring to the z dramatically decreases residual in the same way.

I'm not going to waste my time on this anymore. You clearly don't understand how to compare resale prices, and it doesn't bother me if you don't get it.

SS_Firehawk · 10-30-2012, 02:10 PM

So we can agree to disagree

I do understand what you are saying. A base model of the same vehicle will hold it's value better than a loaded one. I only used the numbers to get the measuring points for each vehicle within the same ballpark. If I used all bone stock of each vehicle, the numbers wouldn't compare well without knowing it's original purchase price.

cossie1600 · 10-30-2012, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Are you aware that the online black book site isn't black book value?

Perhaps, but it is good enough to be used by banks on loans

Red__Zed · 10-30-2012, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cossie1600

Perhaps, but it is good enough to be used by banks on loans

Yes, but it is completely irrelevant to this discussion. It uses the same type of naive value formula that KBB now uses.

cossie1600 · 10-30-2012, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Yes, but it is completely irrelevant to this discussion. It uses the same type of naive value formula that KBB now uses.

It's deemed good enough to use by the bank, that matters. Regardless, most banks use blackbook and NADA, not KBB. I was simply saying KBB has lower their numbers in order to possibly scam consumers since most people use that as a reference.

Juice14 · 11-02-2012, 10:34 AM

I would imagine, as far as performance, the Evo would do better times at the track. I think the chassis is firmer and a little more performance oriented. I like the Z better, front engine RWD is my fav combo. also just looks better. The Exo X has skinny tires and the wheels are ok. The Z wheels are one of the coolers wheels out there.

cossie1600 · 11-02-2012, 11:27 AM

It's a toss up. I have lapped them both. Stock to stock the EVO wins purely because the EVO has better tires. With some non R comps, I was already faster than the EVO X on RA1. YOu will notice the EVO has much better jump off the slow corners due to the gears and turbo and awd, but the top end on the Z was a good 4-5 mph faster. I don't think you lose either way, both are great cars with different needs

10-30-2012, 01:56 PM	#143 (permalink)
SS_Firehawk Premium Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Tampa Posts: 4,142 Drives: 13' Magma Red Nismo Rep Power: 7335	Couldn't figure out how to include MSRP for that year as an inclusion to the data.. No amount of options would close that gap anyways. You run the numbers yourself. All I did was highlight everything except certified preowned. Even if I had chosen a base Z with no options, it would have still been the same as the Mustangs. Frankly, I would pay $35,000 for a fully loaded SP Touring Z if it were something I wanted. I didn't play with the numbers. There weren't very many options. And FYI, that glass roof added $1,000, it did not devalue it. I'm not posting this out of bias, but I'll be damned if you come out of left field to tell me I'm wrong when everything says I'm not. Now why is it that I can answer you in one post, but it took three for you? You can multi quote within one message. __________________ Old Car:GTM TSC'd 550whp / 410lbft tq @ 11.88PSI New Car: Under Construction

10-30-2012, 02:10 PM	#145 (permalink)
SS_Firehawk Premium Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Tampa Posts: 4,142 Drives: 13' Magma Red Nismo Rep Power: 7335	So we can agree to disagree I do understand what you are saying. A base model of the same vehicle will hold it's value better than a loaded one. I only used the numbers to get the measuring points for each vehicle within the same ballpark. If I used all bone stock of each vehicle, the numbers wouldn't compare well without knowing it's original purchase price. __________________ Old Car:GTM TSC'd 550whp / 410lbft tq @ 11.88PSI New Car: Under Construction

10-30-2012, 01:26 PM	#141 (permalink)
Red__Zed A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: window seat Posts: 28,940 Drives: Mostly on two wheels Rep Power: 120	Haha, yes, you included the glass roof. Options are an instant devalue.

11-02-2012, 10:34 AM	#149 (permalink)
Juice14 Base Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: International Posts: 132 Drives: Red 370Z Rep Power: 14	I would imagine, as far as performance, the Evo would do better times at the track. I think the chassis is firmer and a little more performance oriented. I like the Z better, front engine RWD is my fav combo. also just looks better. The Exo X has skinny tires and the wheels are ok. The Z wheels are one of the coolers wheels out there.

11-02-2012, 11:27 AM	#150 (permalink)
cossie1600 A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: californee way Posts: 5,380 Drives: 370, Leaf Rep Power: 30	It's a toss up. I have lapped them both. Stock to stock the EVO wins purely because the EVO has better tires. With some non R comps, I was already faster than the EVO X on RA1. YOu will notice the EVO has much better jump off the slow corners due to the gears and turbo and awd, but the top end on the Z was a good 4-5 mph faster. I don't think you lose either way, both are great cars with different needs