Something just doesn't make sense to me.

How come the Used STI from Subaru is holding up the Value so well ? while people complains about it Ringland issue, or Piston rings ?

If it is that bad in reliability, why does it hold the value so so well ? I don't get it...it is like 85% of a new vehicle on a 2 years old STI

 

I would assume this has a lot to do with supply and demand. These cars have a well earned reputation for fun, so the demand is there, but they're not like Civics or Corollas, with one on every corner, so the supply is fairly weak.

 

Perfect example is the Jeep Wrangler.

It does it's job very well as an off-road truck.

Resale value is bonkers.

Reliability is also bonkers.

 

I mean you can pretty much say that about any top teir car really. STi, IS-F, M3, M5 S5

reminds me of the most recent top gear episode when they test drove the Zenvo St1. An $800k car that caught on fire twice during testing. lol

 

and the Mini Cooper

 

A large part of the used-Wrangler market, though, deals with VERY old models....even going back to the CJ-5/CJ-7 versions. Though covered with rust and having open-tops or leaky side-curtains at best to keep out the elements, traditional Jeep-Junkies just keep buying, driving, and re-selling them, refusing to scrap or junk them unless they are physically totalled.

 

Yup it sure does

 

STi is just that. Reliability is crap but it's in high demand. Tbh the interior is garbage too and all plastic

 

Agreed that the overly-plastic interior was not very nice, but that was characteristic of all 3Gen Imprezas.

The WRX, STi, and BR-Z are the only American-market Subarus with reliability below average (per Consumer Reports) probably because of the way many of them are driven hard and abused. Other Subarus are, in general, substantially more reliable.

That, to an extent, is also the case with other automakers. Their sport-oriented models and sports cars are often driven harder (with predictable results in the reliability department), though the excellent reliability of the Madzda Miata seems to be an exception.

 

Now, that is where it get even weirder. The Miata is so Reliable, yet the re-sale value is like....way down. So, it is safe to say that if I buy the STI, and may be sell it later in 3-4 years, I won't lose that much money.

That is where it gets even ways weird. Say the STI can get abused, driven really harsh, and or wrongly modified. Still, the Used one can cost up to 75-80% of the Brand-new on a couple years old model.

Why do people buy those used one 2 years old, and save only 20-25% off of the brand new. Why don't they buy Brand new ?

 

Well, a number of males won't consider a Miata, new or used, simply because of the stereotypical nonsense that it is considered a "Chick" ladies' car. Never mind the fact that Car and Driver magazine (whose testers and editors are almost exclusively male) have given the Miata a Ten-Best award fourteen times. Other organizations with a lot of males in them have also ranked the Miata at or near the top in affordable sports cars.

 

So true. A coworker of mine recently said that that he would never own a Miata because it's a chick's car. I told him he would feel differently if he'd ever auto crossed one, which is, for me, where the real Miata appeal resides.

 

I've seen a couple of TV shows where one of the main male characters buys a Miata and is ridiculed by his co stars on the chick car thing.

 

Like Marshall stated, many men think the Miata is a girl's car. Also the S2000 is better than the Miata. The S2000 holds it value very well. 13 year old cars with 90k-100k+ miles still sell for $12k-13k.

 

The S2000 doesn't have the 'chick car' thing at least in my area.At least that I know of.