Rossi:
palenimbus:

2. The Turbo S now is about the same base price as the 458 and the MP4-12C, but with Porsche's extensive options list I wouldn't be suprised if you could option a TurboS higher than the Ferrari or Mclaren.


The Turbo S is not only the same base price as a 458, these cars cost the same in reality. Yes, the options are a lot more expensive in Maranello, but basically we have two well equipped cars with the same price.

If you order a 458 stock it  won't cost you much more than a 991 Turbo S stock. Of course, if you want the last corner of the cabin clad with leather and all the plastic/alminium items replaced by ridiculously expensive CF, this will cost you a fortune in Maranello, but if you don't go mad with the options, you won't pay much more in Maranello. Same goes for the MP4-12C, but its base price is a bit higher.

Now the big, big question is, can you justify such a price for "only" a Turbo, a car that used to have the same (or slightly better) performance than its exotic rivals, but also was a decent amount cheaper in the past. Even more, if you think about depreciation. You lose some money with a McLaren, you lose quite a lot with a 458, but the Turbo will top that in a negative way.

I would ask why should a Turbo S cost less than the two other cars if it can offer more, for longer time at less maintenance and fuel cost with impeccable overall engineering ? These cars appeal to different type of buyers with different attitude. A Ferrari person would not even glance at Porsche twice and a Turbo driver likes the silent power that gets the job done rather than the glitz and glamour of exotics. In reality these two cars are so removed that they compete only in magazines and on the internet.

Depreciation? This is not something that manufacturers determine (although volumes are important) but the market forces. No one should buy a Turbo S for a couple of years and expect not to lose. Such person should better lease.

OTOH the low depreciation on Ferrari is theoretical because it emanates greatly from the fact that most used examples have minimal mileage because owners don't use them enough, fearing depreciation and the huge maintenance bills. In the case of most Porsches depreciation reflects their real world mileage. So we are not comparing like with like. I wonder what depreciation a 458 with 100.000+ km would suffer and how the cost of ownership would escalate as mileage piles up and the gargantuan bills have to be met?

 

 


--

"Form follows function"