A 1970 Z car approaches $30 grand!

[zpizzaman20]

Guy,

You are correct it quickly adds up and I totally agree. Doing it yourself means you will keep it since you have your blood, sweat and tears all over it!

[Poindexter]

Does anyone have an answer to my question from Post # 30, regarding what constitutes "original paint"- and just how much spot touch-up work can be done before it's considered truly altered, in case I ever want to show it in the future?

I'll never put it up against a 1 or 2 car- I just can't justify the expenditure, and besides, I still want to drive it a great deal more, but I am still very aware- and proud- of its current state of originality.

I just keep hearing "a car can be restored over and over again, but it's only considered original once" and I certainly don't want to make improper claims. But then again can't most judges notice spot touch-ups in the first place, or can they be done essentially invisibly and without ruining a car's value as "original"?

What are the rules and precedents? Thanks.

It can't be thread-jacking if I began the thread hoping for a wide-ranging discussion- such as this, can it?

[Carl Beck]

The value of "original factory paint" could fall into a couple of different categories.

a) The added value when selling the car

The added value of having a perfect original car

Most buyers that are looking for clean, well maintained 240-Z's - that they intend to refresh or restore themselves - will pick a car with its original paint over one that has been repainted poorly, repainted to cover previous damage etc etc. Nothing turns serious and knowledgeable buyers off faster than a slick, shinny and cheap repaint - on a car that otherwise is a questionable driver.

In these cases a car with its original paint in decent shape will bring a thousand to fifteen hundred dollars more, and it will sell more quickly. Pay $1200.00 for Maco to paint it - and you'll actually make it harder to resell, and it will usually bring a grand or two less money.

The value of having the original paint on a #1 or #2 example is certainly there - IF (big "I", big "F").. IF it is near PERFECT. Few things sadden the true Collector's heart more than to see an exceptionally low mileage (15K miles or less) example - that has otherwise been well cared for - having two or three door dings, or a couple of major scratches...

These obvious FLAWS drive the perfectionists crazy!! Serious Collectors will simply take a pass... they do not buy cars to restore, they don't want to screw with the hassles of body shops and paint work - - they just keep looking for perfection. They will pay for it when they find it. Those very minor flaws can reduce an otherwise #1 or #2 condition car - to selling for $10,000.00 less money. (because it takes a year and an $8,000.00 paint job to correct)

The value of the original paint on your car at present - in addition to that stated above (faster resale in a competitive market, plus a grand or more over other examples in otherwise like condition) - would be in terms of talking points as people admire it.

My 510 SW has about 75% of its original paint - the hood and left front fender having been repainted after a minor fender bender (before I owned it). I am always quick to point out to people that most of the paint is original - on car that's 36 years old with 303,000 miles... It's fun and of other than monetary value to me.... How much value do you put on a fun factor...

FWIW,

Carl B.

[Oiluj]

Carl's comments are all "right on". It is supply & demand, as well as car condition.

After 17 years, I sold my 1960 MGA for just a couple thousand more than she cost to purchase and restore. Even though it was a nice restoration, MGA's were never a well recognized collector car compared to some of it's contemporaries. This was reflected in it's market value.

A "driver" quality Z in "used" condition will probably not increase much in value outside of inflation because it won't attract a collector.

However, I do think that a very nice 240Z restoration w/ excellent paint, pristine interior and in mostly "stock" or "era correct" configuration will represent an attractive, high value buy for collectors in the next 5 to 10 years.

Articles on 240Z's have begun appeaing in car collector publications which helps to create demand. While there are a lot of Z's around, attrition means there are fewer and fewer nice examples in existence every year.

Lastly, we need remember it's a Global, (with a big G), marketplace. Collectors in other areas of the world often spend more than US collectors for cars that are considered more desirable or are harder to find in their part of the world. Case in point, my MGA went to Holland and I got a couple thousand more than I could have gotten in the US market.

While I do look forward to my 1972 240Z gaining more recognition and "value" in the collector car market, I don't think of her as an investment. I have no intention of selling her unless my situation changes and I am forced to do so...

[26th-Z]

A #1 or #2 example car WOULD have perfect paint, wouldn't it? If it didn't, it wouldn't be a #1 or #2 quality example. Poindexter, just have your problem areas repaired. A good painter can match your repair areas so that no one will be able to notice. And don't worry about the judging thing.

[fixitman]

Let's try this questions again. Do you think the insured value in an agreed value type policy is an indication of market price?

Thanks,

Fixitman

[sblake01]

In my case, the agreed value policies I have on my 320 pickup and my Z represent what I have invested in them plus maybe a little more but it wouldn't be enough to duplicate either of them today. Kind of a 'cut your losses' type thing. The market price is such a speculative thing and I don't consider mysely any kind of 'collector' anyway.

[psdenno]

Let's try this questions again. Do you think the insured value in an agreed value type policy is an indication of market price?

Thanks,

Fixitman

No.

Dennis

[sblake01]

No.

Well put. That's basically what I said but the one word does cover it.

[Arne]

Let's try this questions again. Do you think the insured value in an agreed value type policy is an indication of market price?

Thanks,

Fixitman

Nope, it's just an agreement between the insurer and the insured. Has no direct connection with the market price, unless the insured uses his/her estimate of market value in coming to the agreement..

[Poindexter]

I guess I may paranoid, but I think that the primary reason for having agreed-upon coverage is to provide for replacing my car with another of equal rarity should it unfortunately ever come to a total loss. This certainly has precious little bearing on the current worth, market value, etc. of this particular car- but my concern is being made whole if I'd ever have to replace her. That means being able to bid up to whatever it would take to put me in *another* of equal quality.

I had a loss a few months ago (hotel break-in) and had my insurance company depreciate a simple gold bracelet that was worth almost 10 times what I paid for it on gold value alone. They paid a fraction of the replacement cost. I swore that would never happen to me again- on anything.

Bids are almost always lower than offers anyway, it appears. While I'm certainly not a bona-fide collector, I do feel a responsibility to maintain something that is considered very rare- an original, unmolested car nearly 40 years old. And the best way to do that, IMO, is to have full agreed-value replacement coverage. The next best way is to "train" the next generation of collectors. My stepson happens to *love* many of the things from the 70's and 8-'s too. This is very gratifying, and will insure that our special vehicles- among other things- will always have a generation of custodians.

[Carl Beck]

I guess I may paranoid, but I think that the primary reason for having agreed-upon coverage is to provide for replacing my car with another of equal rarity should it unfortunately ever come to a total loss.

Hi Poindexter (everyone)

I can't argue with your primary reason - as it is yours. Mine is perhaps a little different. (just to continue this discsussion a bit).

The primary reason that I have, for purchasing an Agreed Value Classic Car policy is to assure that the value of the car that is agreed to, is high enough to assure the car would be properly repaired, in case of an accident; without the major hassles presented by regular auto insurance with ACV coverage and Claims Adjustors.

I can not stress emphatically enough - "properly repaired". Anyone that has dealt with a regular automobile insurance company Claims Adjustor - when attempting to get an 8+ year old car "properly repaired" rather than totalled - will know exactly what I'm talking about.

My secondary reason would be to cover at least 80% of its replacement cost.

I use an 80% factor because there is relatively low risk of it being lost/totalled - and I can afford to take a small loss if necessary. On the up side it keeps my premiums low. Simply a risk/reward trade-off.

I believe we all have to keep in mind that there can be a significant difference between the current or future "market values" of these cars and their "replacement cost". To be made whole again - it is the replacement cost that must be recovered.

Market Values vary greatly between the various geographic areas of the US. Clean 240-Z's on the West Coast and in many of the Western States are significantly lower than they are in the Eastern States. Mostly this is due to supply/demand in the local markets. Lots more were sold in the Western States to begin with, and a higher percentage survived.

Let's say that your present 71 240-Z has a market value in the range of $12K to $14K in N.J.. As we can see - if we are following another thread at present - a $12K 240-Z located in California will cost one about $16K+ in N.J., once transportation costs are included.($4K enclosed transport) Add 7% sales tax here in Florida.(how much is it in N.J.). How about the cost of having the car inspected when you can't fly out to inspect it personally? Or the cost of your travel to inspect any prospective replacement?

FWIW,

Carl B.