KooLaid said:
I'm big pimpin but I choose the NA1 NSX because it takes alot of money to keep my groupies and slutty ladies nice and drunk all the time.
NICE!!!!!!
----------------
Besides that....
I dont think the NSX is out of reach for anyone any more, even people that need financing the reality of it is, that most people out there buying cars, are buying cars new for 30k plus than adding another 3-4k in mods over 3-4years ownership in my opinion thats not every one but most likley the people/group also considering 91-94 NSX
Im not supprorting financing at all there are cheaper cars that are better moves for people reaching for financial independance but if you really are gonna finance 35k new car and you compare it to the NSX here are my calculations.
Warranty vs. no warranty vs. financing new or used
The NSX warranty or no warranty considering most likley no depreciation over the next (forever) years, will offset even the worst of maintenance.
Any car even remotely less comparable lets take a 40k 2003 M3 just for example since anything new and comparable will run you 70k plus.
M3 within another year or two will be out of warranty as well and the depreciation over the next 3-4 years will be 10k or so.
NSX probably $0 depreciation. If any thing it will keep up with inflation and worth another 10% or so within 3-4. Maybe 4-6k in maintenance. over 3-4yrs / 30-40k miles it defiantly costs less than buying anything new.
In case you dont remember around 98-99 I remember seeing Clean NSXs 91-92 for 22-25K with 60k miles. Like 80s 911s you sell them for the same price you bought them for, or more.
People buy new cars because they think they save with manufacturers warranty’s, when in reality they pay for it in rapid depreciation and trade in values, the average 40k+ new car buyer loses around 10-15k every 3yrs not including finance charges or regular maintenance. They go from $700 payment to $700 payment usually rolling in more debt into each car unless they put 2-3k down at each purchase. $700 x 36 months = $25,000 including finance charges and you still owe more than trade in. Dont know how I got into doing math right now but I guess ill just leave on here since I already typed it. :biggrin: Its cheaper in the long run to buy a used 911 maintenance hog and replacing the whole engine for 10k than buying any new 40k+ car on the planet. Isn’t it funny that most of the country, thanks to marketing and not enough finance education in high school, still thinks that new cars and leases are a better investment? While on the other hand people that are generally more inapt to make better financial decisions chose old cars? I think it because people have trouble controlling there finances and can not control there own finances by keeping an emergency fund and maintenance fund. therefore rather pay $700mth and know thats the most there going to need any given month during there ownership. Oh well, it fuels the economy let people waste their money. Never mind.:biggrin:
On my Daily Driver I feel bad for the guy who bought my X5 originally for 50k than traded it in for 18k 4 years later so I could buy it for 21k plus $1500 for a extended warranty for 4yrs unlimited miles just like the one he had and cost him a 30k loss over 4yrs. Just like people that buy cars that are worth as much as they make per year its ridiculous and a sure way to make getting ahead in life more difficult.
And then on top of that the IRS promotes it of course by adding tax incentives that really dont pay off for instance 70% of your payments on lease are tax deductible so therefore if you make 65k year (example) your in 27% tax bracket so quick math says average lease for income bracket =
$700 x 12mths = $8400yr so you dont have to pay income tax on 70% of that. 70% deduction = $5880 yr that you dont pay tax on so --
$5880 x 27%tax $1587 is how much you actually save at end of year.
Thank you so much feds for convincing me to spend $8400 yr and give me back $1587 for contributing to your economy.
Convincing people to waste $6813yr NET after tax benefit
$20439 over 3 years. instead of buying a good ol nice 3-4 year old same model car and only losing 5-7k over the same 3yr period get a decent warranty for another 1-2k and now your net 3yr loss is 7-9k How many people in this country could benefit from an extra 10k every 3 years?
I know for some people on this forum and myself 10k doesent pay my monthly bills, but if I dident think this way years ago, I would still be dreaming and not living. So many people could be a different situation over a 6-9yr period. Its a shame how the government actually promotes extravagant spending, which of course is good for the economy but its interesting to analyze.
