E85 values - bottomed out, peaked or something else…?

[deltasierra]

Above is my opinion of Porsche expensive it buy, very expensive to maintain and you cant DIY anything however old the car is you have to use specialists. The same would apply to Aston’s, Bentley, Ferrari and others in the super car league. The long bonnet RWD soft top is what everyone recognizes as a “sports” car, the G89 is on my list for the future.

[coldel]

The reason a 987 is so cheap, is because on the whole, its so expensive to own. The car itself (not owned one but driven one) is fantastic to drive, supremely engineered and brought the 911 to the masses in effect. A masterclass by Porsche. But it can very easily throw four figure bills at you at the drop of a hat. Thats why they are cheap.

I wanted a weekend car, that had a drop top two seats and a bit of grunt, but also one that I can work on and one that doesn't have a huge tax on parts associated with it. Some chap on PH just bought a 10k 987 and has already paid out £1500+ for cross over pipes, coil packs and a wheel alignment (as it was miles off).

The chap that bought my E86 was moving from a NC MX5 and said he was fed up with the cramped cabin and low power, said he never really got to use the chassis any more and the aforementioned were making it a boring car for him.

I think we all know the 3.0si isn't the quickest out the box, nor is it the most dynamic, but its purchased for a particular reason in mind and that is something that has aged well, creature comforts, a load of power on tap, drop top etc.

[DaveP]

All of the above notwithstanding, really good examples of late 3.0Si E85s, with low miles, will still have some appeal to buyers who want and are willing to pay a premium for 'the best' of Z4s. The downside is that this isn't a huge pool of buyers based on everything I've written above, so these cars are likely to hang around for a while relative to things like S2000s and Boxsters. Someone paying £10k for a 3.0Si when the equivalent 987S Boxster is a fundamentally better car in almost every way would really need to want the Z4 to be in the market for one.

The difference with the 987 is because its based on the 911 platform its pretty much 80% a 911 so cost to look after is high. Like Z4s buying a Porsche product is a nightmare in this kind of price bracket you might see two 987 same year milage and spec but one might be 5k more. Similar to my point on the M they need maintenance and it's far more costly than a 3.0SI.

Its also really hard to find a well serviced 987 as they are seen as 'basic Porsches' but again they are based on the same platform, same engines just different bore.

I bought a 987 3.2 after I sold my Z4M coupe, I went traveling for a year and spent the money and wanted to buy something cheap to get back into a sports car.

It was a lovely spec car 70k extended leather, Bose, chrono, elec memory seats, manwell etc etc it was £10250 back in 2018, test drive it drove really well no signs of anything. Drove it home and I did 1000 miles in the first weekend and it started making some odd noises... I took it to a Porsche specialist and I knew it needed a bit of maintenance as it was cheap back then. It needed discs and pads all round, the air con condensers needed replacing. Then there are the bits you can't see, the clutch was a little sloppy and it turned out the IMS had gone and oil was leaking though and onto the clutch plate. So just to do these items was going to be 5k as it needed a new clutch and flywheel too. Then onto the noise... they put a camera down to check bore score and what do you know... it wasn't too bad but there was something else causing the noise. At this point it needed a full rebuild and the cost to repair exceeded the cost of the car. I took it back to the company I bought it from and got my money back under consumer law.

The 3.2 is meant to be the safe option too... honestly I thought the 987 was really boring to drive the 3.2 had no power compared to the M and I just didnt get on with it at all so I was kind go glad that it went. I love the axe murder nature of the Z4 and the Boxster is pedestrian in comparison as it just hits every apex does everything you tell it super clinical. To most that is perfect but to me it just had no personality I like a car you can catch on the edge and the Boxster you couldn't get it near the edge it just stuck like glue. Like I say I know im weird but I got my first Z4M at 23 and just learned how to drive quickly in that car.

They came out in 2005 54/05 so you're talking a 20 year old car. Same things apply like the M the suspension will be ready for an overhaul and the cost to replace is a bit more than the Z, discs are big and ventilated and cost similar to the M to replace, similar to the 911 brake lines replacement means steering rack/front subframe out to replace the front lines and engine/gearbox out to replace the rear.. Honestly I could go on but like I mentioned above you could be 10k in and wouldn't know as most of these things you can't see which is why getting an inspection before buying is vital on any Porsche product.

You wouldn't have any bills like that on a Z4 3.0 everything is cheap compared to the M or any Porsche product.

It's a false economy buying a cheap 987 as I learned. If you bought one that had everything done your in much higher price bracket than 10k and then your not far off a 997 but again same principle. You can find early 997s for 20k or up to 40k big price differences and you have to be super careful as I was very lucky being within that 2 week return window.

The 996 that I bought was the opposite as I learned my lesson! It had everything done to it previous to us buying it, some other poor guy had spent nearly 15k on it in the last 2 years and it needed the suspension doing as the 4s vert is a really heavy car its quite noticeable. It was a late 54 and it had over 35ks worth of paper work with it

Like I say completely different proposition.

Sort of agree, but also don't. You're buying a much more driver-focused car, which comes with higher bills as a consequence. Complete Vanos failure in an N52 engine would probably cost a significant proportion of the value of the 3.0Si too, and although it's rare it's certainly not unheard of.

[plenty]

E85/86s share many components with cooking E46 models and therefore parts are easy to source and cheap compared with the Cayster. The Cayster is also a more tricky DIY proposition due to limited engine access.

Also while the likes of VANOS and water pumps are well-known failure points on the E85/86, they're nothing like as catastrophic as scored bores or IMS failure.

Having said that, I'd always choose a 986/987 over a non-M E85-86 personally.

[tomscott]

It’s all relevant. Vanos is so easy to sort compared to an engine rebuild and those engines suffer far more. A lot of those cars suffer from the block cracking too.

I also think the 2.7 variants are more a comparison the 3.2 and 3.4 more like the M but like I say the 2.7 again is the same car just a smaller bore engine all the same issues so you can find yourself in the same hot water.

Depends what you want I suppose. That whole generation was underpowered because they were scared of it taking over the 911. The newer gen with the gt4 and 4.0 gts are a different proposition. It’s just a big increase from 14.5k for the M to 70k.

“The driver focused car element” I think is subjective. They only say that because anyone can drive them quick. The engineering has enabled the car to make you feel like you’re a driving god. In my opinion it takes the fun out of it and I found it boring but that’s why there is choice on the market.

The 911 on the other hand epic and has a lot of the characteristics I like.engine out back makes the car tail happy like the M.

I test drove the 3.0si coupe back in 2011 and decided to get an M instead as it felt more special to drive. The boxster in the 3.2 form was underpowered and not that much fun to drive imo.

Like I mentioned my dad has a 981 GTS and I have to say after spending quite a bit of time behind the wheel that still feels like I could do with more power think that has 325hp. Just one of those the car just doesn’t do what I like so that’s probably why I don’t get on with it. That’s a me issue really again probably because I’ve had M cars for so long.

Looks wise and the interior is stunning it’s miles ahead of the Z but it was 3x more than my M being 55k at the time so it should be.

[STC_Zed]

It’s all relevant. Vanos is so easy to sort compared to an engine rebuild and those engines suffer far more. A lot of those cars suffer from the block cracking too.

I also think the 2.7 variants are more a comparison the 3.2 and 3.4 more like the M but like I say the 2.7 again is the same car just a smaller bore engine all the same issues so you can find yourself in the same hot water.

Depends what you want I suppose. That whole generation was underpowered because they were scared of it taking over the 911. The newer gen with the gt4 and 4.0 gts are a different proposition. It’s just a big increase from 14.5k for the M to 70k.

“The driver focused car element” I think is subjective. They only say that because anyone can drive them quick. The engineering has enabled the car to make you feel like you’re a driving god. In my opinion it takes the fun out of it and I found it boring but that’s why there is choice on the market.

The 911 on the other hand epic and has a lot of the characteristics I like.engine out back makes the car tail happy like the M.

I test drove the 3.0si coupe back in 2011 and decided to get an M instead as it felt more special to drive. The boxster in the 3.2 form was underpowered and not that much fun to drive imo.

Like I mentioned my dad has a 981 GTS and I have to say after spending quite a bit of time behind the wheel that still feels like I could do with more power think that has 325hp. Just one of those the car just doesn’t do what I like so that’s probably why I don’t get on with it. That’s a me issue really again probably because I’ve had M cars for so long.

Looks wise and the interior is stunning it’s miles ahead of the Z but it was 3x more than my M being 55k at the time so it should be.

The 981 interior should be loads nicer because it’s much newer car. Compared with to an early Boxster or Cayman I think the Z interior is much nicer and has aged better.

The 981 is a great looking car. The GTS is one that I particularly like, but it’s a very different price point to a Z.

[coldel]

Have to say, the E85 interior has aged incredibly well, not many cars of that era nailed the contemporary look as good as an E85.

I had a similar age 350z and the interior is miles worse, it even had a tape deck

[tomscott]

Agreed I love the Zs interior and it still stand up well.

The appointment on the Porsches is another level the extended leather, seats etc lovely place to be.

[thecremeegg]

As someone who is trying to sell a high-miler at the moment it's definitely a dead market. Mine's on 150k but the engine runs perfectly, it's had polybushes, steering upgrade, new starter etc etc and I can't even get a sniff of interest at £4k. I'm slowly starting to think that I might have to go down the route of parting it out which is a shame.
I did however just buy a Z4M for £10k that needs probably £2-3k of work on it but that I can do at my leisure.

[plenty]

I'd prefer a good 987.2 over a 981. Don't care too much about interiors, care a lot about steering feel

Although I did read that the 981 steering can be updated with 718 software to improve it.

[coldel]

Having been in a few 1990s Jap cars and two VX220s I for one am very happy to have a great interior and forego the steering feel

BTW, if you want proper proper steering feel everyone should try an Elise chassis car at some point in their lives, its a whole different level, makes a Porsche feel like a van

[plenty]

Having been in a few 1990s Jap cars and two VX220s I for one am very happy to have a great interior and forego the steering feel

BTW, if you want proper proper steering feel everyone should try an Elise chassis car at some point in their lives, its a whole different level, makes a Porsche feel like a van

Yes, my Evora had otherworldly steering and brakes although my Porsche 968 ran it close.

Currently my other fun cars include a 1997 Japanese car and a stripped out 2005 Clio, which illustrates my priorities I guess. My Z4M is a plush luxury limo by comparison.

[coldel]

My brother is a biker, and he loved the VX220. Said it was as close to the visceral experience of a bike he has ever had in a car.
They used to be bargains, but seem to be chasing Elise values now.

[Fred Smith]

As someone who is trying to sell a high-miler at the moment it's definitely a dead market. Mine's on 150k but the engine runs perfectly, it's had polybushes, steering upgrade, new starter etc etc and I can't even get a sniff of interest at £4k. I'm slowly starting to think that I might have to go down the route of parting it out which is a shame.
I did however just buy a Z4M for £10k that needs probably £2-3k of work on it but that I can do at my leisure.

High milers are not popular! (Saying as someone who has just bought one... I only looked at two, both 3.0, both 125k miles or more, and both had engines that sounded smooth as hell and like they'll run forever.)

People don't seem to appreciate that loads of the lower mileage Z4s have plenty of issues as well (pretty sure half the "immaculate" facelift ones on the market have knackered foglights, find me a 20 year old car without the odd ding and scratch, or one that wouldn't benefit some rust treatment to the underside.) And then you have the issue that things are replaced on the higher mileage ones that might not have been on a lower mileage one.

What is holding your car's value down?

(1) Most people can't afford any sort of "fun car"

(2) Most people who can afford a fun car can afford one better than a £4k Z4.

(3) It's nice to think you have half a chance of getting your money back when you resell your fun car... and buying high miles is always scary in terms of knowing how much other brits like their low milers! (History has to be at least as important as miles IMHO... and to some extent I bought on history as much as I did on what I saw when I viewed).

(4) I think the early noughties are a wonderful compromise between modern comfort and old school driveability... but on the other hand a 20 year old car isn't old enough to be a classic, nor is it new enough to be consider a new-ish car... it's old, high mileage and not classic! I have no regrets, but since buying my E86 I've been looking at other cars and thinking "I could have got a Triumph Spitfire or similar / nicer". Maybe you're not competing with cheap 60s and 70s sports cars, but maybe you are.

I am not far from you and in the next few months... or now if the price were superb .... I'm going to look out for a 3.0 E85... but I will be looking for something as cheap as possible to experience a convertible for the first time with the idea that I can sell on without much of a loss. The difference between the price a car is worth on a good day and the price you'd want to pay to give yourself a damn good chance of getting your money back easily might be 50% IMHO. And I'm guessing there's a lot more people out there with my kind of attitude than there are saying "I really want a decent E85, not overly bothered about the price as I'll be owning it for 3 or 4 years minimum".

[thecremeegg]

As someone who is trying to sell a high-miler at the moment it's definitely a dead market. Mine's on 150k but the engine runs perfectly, it's had polybushes, steering upgrade, new starter etc etc and I can't even get a sniff of interest at £4k. I'm slowly starting to think that I might have to go down the route of parting it out which is a shame.
I did however just buy a Z4M for £10k that needs probably £2-3k of work on it but that I can do at my leisure.

High milers are not popular! (Saying as someone who has just bought one... I only looked at two, both 3.0, both 125k miles or more, and both had engines that sounded smooth as hell and like they'll run forever.)

People don't seem to appreciate that loads of the lower mileage Z4s have plenty of issues as well (pretty sure half the "immaculate" facelift ones on the market have knackered foglights, find me a 20 year old car without the odd ding and scratch, or one that wouldn't benefit some rust treatment to the underside.) And then you have the issue that things are replaced on the higher mileage ones that might not have been on a lower mileage one.

What is holding your car's value down?

(1) Most people can't afford any sort of "fun car"

(2) Most people who can afford a fun car can afford one better than a £4k Z4.

(3) It's nice to think you have half a chance of getting your money back when you resell your fun car... and buying high miles is always scary in terms of knowing how much other brits like their low milers! (History has to be at least as important as miles IMHO... and to some extent I bought on history as much as I did on what I saw when I viewed).

(4) I think the early noughties are a wonderful compromise between modern comfort and old school driveability... but on the other hand a 20 year old car isn't old enough to be a classic, nor is it new enough to be consider a new-ish car... it's old, high mileage and not classic! I have no regrets, but since buying my E86 I've been looking at other cars and thinking "I could have got a Triumph Spitfire or similar / nicer". Maybe you're not competing with cheap 60s and 70s sports cars, but maybe you are.

I am not far from you and in the next few months... or now if the price were superb .... I'm going to look out for a 3.0 E85... but I will be looking for something as cheap as possible to experience a convertible for the first time with the idea that I can sell on without much of a loss. The difference between the price a car is worth on a good day and the price you'd want to pay to give yourself a damn good chance of getting your money back easily might be 50% IMHO. And I'm guessing there's a lot more people out there with my kind of attitude than there are saying "I really want a decent E85, not overly bothered about the price as I'll be owning it for 3 or 4 years minimum".

Oh I definitely won't be getting my money back on it hah!
I do also appreciate your points, it's had all the expensive stuff done, all the stuff a low miles car will need doing in the near future. I'm happy to buy high-milers but I know a lot of people aren't which is fair enough.