IS-F Depreciation After 3IS Release
11-28-12, 10:10 PM
#16
Pretty sure you just made this up, save for the last one (more expensive), but that's obvious to anyone and has nothing to do with a "nanny state" (whatever that means).
Traction control and backup cameras have never been high priorities of the government, so again you're just making stuff up.
If anything, you might expect automakers to go with lighter, more fuel efficient cars in the future with lower displacement forced induction engines or otherwise (either with turbos or full battery/hybrid systems) due to increasing CAFE standards and penalties for not reaching average MPG milestones.
You are correct to cite CAFE standards as having an impact on cars, but the rest of your concerns (traction control? backup camera? heavier cars?) have little to nothing to do with governmental pressure.
Traction control and backup cameras have never been high priorities of the government, so again you're just making stuff up.
If anything, you might expect automakers to go with lighter, more fuel efficient cars in the future with lower displacement forced induction engines or otherwise (either with turbos or full battery/hybrid systems) due to increasing CAFE standards and penalties for not reaching average MPG milestones.
You are correct to cite CAFE standards as having an impact on cars, but the rest of your concerns (traction control? backup camera? heavier cars?) have little to nothing to do with governmental pressure.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...2014_Vehicles/
11-29-12, 04:26 AM
#17
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
Traction control - government mandated - Check
Backup cameras - government mandated - Check
Airbags all around - government mandated - Check
On board diagnostics - government mandated - Check
Electronic data recorders - government mandated - Check
All add weight. Why do you think so many cars (not even SUVs) are weighing in at 4,000 lbs these days? It's not for lack of engineering effort. What does all this really mean? All the mandatory tech means cars are going to cost more no matter what.
Backup cameras - government mandated - Check
Airbags all around - government mandated - Check
On board diagnostics - government mandated - Check
Electronic data recorders - government mandated - Check
All add weight. Why do you think so many cars (not even SUVs) are weighing in at 4,000 lbs these days? It's not for lack of engineering effort. What does all this really mean? All the mandatory tech means cars are going to cost more no matter what.
11-29-12, 04:51 AM
#18
It's funny how a simple question about depreciation has spun off into a referendum on government interference with safety regulations and claims of "nanny states" in one short page. Is this the Tea Party Forum? The Libertarian Lounge? Haha!
Yes, some safety standards, such as airbags and backup sensors have now become official government regulations. Some see this as unnecessary interference with their lives, others see this as the right thing to do for safety purposes. Still others see it as the result of a successful manufacturing lobby (let's face it, if you make the back up camera technology and it becomes a gov't mandated item, you stand to make a lot of profit). I tend to take the position that if something can be made safer, it should be. If that means extra weight and extra cost, so be it. Collectively, cars have gotten faster, not slower. Your average Honda Civic is now as fast as some cars that would have been labeled "performance" 20 years ago, and virtually all cars can easily go over 100mph without much effort. I don't see there being a huge problem here with extra weight, nor do I see the extra expense being prohibitive. More people than ever have cars today.
But I digress.
Yes, some safety standards, such as airbags and backup sensors have now become official government regulations. Some see this as unnecessary interference with their lives, others see this as the right thing to do for safety purposes. Still others see it as the result of a successful manufacturing lobby (let's face it, if you make the back up camera technology and it becomes a gov't mandated item, you stand to make a lot of profit). I tend to take the position that if something can be made safer, it should be. If that means extra weight and extra cost, so be it. Collectively, cars have gotten faster, not slower. Your average Honda Civic is now as fast as some cars that would have been labeled "performance" 20 years ago, and virtually all cars can easily go over 100mph without much effort. I don't see there being a huge problem here with extra weight, nor do I see the extra expense being prohibitive. More people than ever have cars today.
But I digress.
11-29-12, 07:16 AM
#19
Like I already said, I'm planning to own my next car for only 2-4 years, which is why I'm asking about depreciation since a new generation will hit during that time frame. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one on earth who cares about making relatively smart financial decisions. 
11-29-12, 12:01 PM
#20
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-29-12, 08:01 PM
#21
Keep your IS350 and wait for the next generation IS-F coming out to get one, i think the depreciation just happens on your IS350 one time and you 'll get the car you want . Good luck with your decision.
11-30-12, 07:55 PM
#22
Pole Position
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-30-12, 11:01 PM
#23
Driver
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ca
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backstory: I'm looking to sell my IS350 before year end primarily because my warranty just ran out, but also because I'd like to avoid the depreciation hit when the 3IS is released early next year. So, I'm looking for a new car and the IS-F, M3, and E63 AMG are at the top of my list. I'd like to stay in the Lexus family, so I'd say the IS-F is the one I'm most interested in.
I'm wondering what you guys think will happen to the value of the IS-F once the 3rd generation IS is released early next year (with the next gen IS-F presumably to follow in 2014 or 2015). Do you guys think the depreciation hit will be larger on a percentage basis with the IS-F vs. the 2IS?
If I do go with the IS-F, I'd like either a CPO, or 2011 model year (which would still be under the factory warranty for a year or two). Thoughts?
I'm wondering what you guys think will happen to the value of the IS-F once the 3rd generation IS is released early next year (with the next gen IS-F presumably to follow in 2014 or 2015). Do you guys think the depreciation hit will be larger on a percentage basis with the IS-F vs. the 2IS?
If I do go with the IS-F, I'd like either a CPO, or 2011 model year (which would still be under the factory warranty for a year or two). Thoughts?
12-04-12, 05:35 PM
#25
looks like I might have been right...watch them not even make an is f
http://www.autoguide.com/manufacture...ideo-2312.html
http://www.autoguide.com/manufacture...ideo-2312.html
Last edited by MisterSkiz; 12-05-12 at 04:44 AM.
12-04-12, 05:39 PM
#26
ooks like I might have been right...watch them not eve make an is f
http://www.autoguide.com/manufacture...ideo-2312.html
http://www.autoguide.com/manufacture...ideo-2312.html
12-04-12, 06:54 PM
#27
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
The odds of this happening twice in my life are too small for it to be real. I managed to buy my Supra just before F&F came out, so I got a smokin' deal on a '93 hardtop TT with 32,000 miles on it. Imagine trying to find something like that for $28.5k now.
If the F turned out to be the only real sport sedan Lexus ever builds, it would be no different than what happened to the Supra. So my prediction is, the F is not ready for a reviewer yet, and we'll see the new one when they're ready. Probably 6 - 9 months after the 3IS comes out.
If the F turned out to be the only real sport sedan Lexus ever builds, it would be no different than what happened to the Supra. So my prediction is, the F is not ready for a reviewer yet, and we'll see the new one when they're ready. Probably 6 - 9 months after the 3IS comes out.
12-04-12, 08:10 PM
#28
Toyota recently acknowledged that a new Supra is finally a go. But it's years away for sure and given that the MKIV TT was $50k 20 years ago, it should be well into the $100k range when it finally comes out. So, once again, my Supra dreams are out of reach. :-(
I think the ISF will hit a plateau for resale prices. I don't think they'll ever drop below $20k at worst (crazy high mileage for an 08). 400+hp with Toyota/Lexus quality is similar to the NSX with Honda/Acura quality IMO.
I think the ISF will hit a plateau for resale prices. I don't think they'll ever drop below $20k at worst (crazy high mileage for an 08). 400+hp with Toyota/Lexus quality is similar to the NSX with Honda/Acura quality IMO.
12-05-12, 05:36 PM
#29
Toyota recently acknowledged that a new Supra is finally a go. But it's years away for sure and given that the MKIV TT was $50k 20 years ago, it should be well into the $100k range when it finally comes out. So, once again, my Supra dreams are out of reach. :-(
I think the ISF will hit a plateau for resale prices. I don't think they'll ever drop below $20k at worst (crazy high mileage for an 08). 400+hp with Toyota/Lexus quality is similar to the NSX with Honda/Acura quality IMO.
I think the ISF will hit a plateau for resale prices. I don't think they'll ever drop below $20k at worst (crazy high mileage for an 08). 400+hp with Toyota/Lexus quality is similar to the NSX with Honda/Acura quality IMO.
The new model will most likely be $5-10k more-- approaching $80k as the ceiling price for the loaded vehicle. Today, priced at $70k for the loaded vehicle, there is a substantially reduced buyer population. CPO cars will continue to fetch great prices if the cars are in outstanding condition.
There is not a huge demand for any cars in the $60-$100k range--even in affluent areas.
