Discussing 240Z values, especially Low VIN

[Carl Beck]

There was nothing special about the F500 other than they were the first 500 delivered and because of the fact that they were only numbered sequentialy and not actually delivered in the same manner, then who can say with any accurracy that a particular number under 500 was in fact on that first boat load.

What is "special" about the first 500 or 1000 (depending), is the fact that they contained many preproduction or prototype parts - not found on later cars (as mentioned earlier). It simply makes them more interesting to serious Collectors. What is "special" about the 69 production year Datsun 240-Z's is the fact that only a known very limited number of them were built. Again making them special to serious collectors. 535 mol vs 20,000, 32,000, 52,000 etc.

Who the car is "special" too does matter as it relates directly to the market value of the car. Serious Collectors want the first year of production, and they really like owning one of the first few produced.

To a growing number of Serious Collectors, a #1 Condition, 1969 production year, $40K 240-Z is a bargain today. Much the same as when they were cherry picking the 63-67 Corvettes and paying between $12K and $18K twenty years ago for #1 and #2 condition examples. Or buying Classic Ferraris in the $40K to $60K range 30 year ago.

Enthusiasts, as much as they love the cars - really never do comprehend "Collecting" nor "Collectors". Not to many of us have 10 or 20 Classic Ferraris, Jag.'s, Porsches or BMW's in our collections. But that doesn't mean these people aren't out there, and in great numbers today. The sharpest Collectors today realize that no Classic Sports Car collection is complete without a Datsun 240-Z.

Serious Collectors love Classic Sports Cars. It isn't about the money (they are for the most part loaded with money).. it really is about their love for beautiful lines, competition history, significant design. They buy these cars to KEEP. Don't confuse Serious Collectors, with Speculators that flip cars in a year or two. Speculators buy low and sell high if they can.

BTW - No one really said the first 500 came over on a single boat. R&T reported that the first boat to arrive in L.A. with 240-Z's, carried only 20 Z's. As that ship arrived the first part of Jan. 1970 - and BRE got one of them - we can only guess what other cars were on it.

Bottom line is - if you care about the future value of a 240-Z, that you plan to spend $25K to $35K or far more, restoring to a #1 Condition. Then the 240-Z's with the lowest VIN's and 1969 Production Dates make the most common sense to start with. They will always bring a premium over the later production cars and they will usually sell more quickly. That is already true today and it will most likely be true tomorrow.

FWIW,

Carl B.

[Carl Beck]

The low number thing has also made me wonder. In the world of artwork limited-edition prints or cast sculptures are numbered. Smaller runs are worth more and lower numbers are worth more because the quality goes down as more and more copies are produced. That may be the reasoning used for lower VINS being better but the quality of cars is likely just the opposite. Early cars might have had hand welding later to be replaced by higher quality machine welding.

Low number in the world of artwork = higher quality.

Low number in Z's = higher value because of rarity and/or interesting build process - ie. an interesting story about that car that very few others can tell.

Hand welds vs machine welds = higher value because of rarity - and/or something additional of interest.

A few coins minted by the U.S. Mint are worth serious bucks because they got out into circulation with a "flaw"... super rare and additional intersting story to tell.

FWIW,

Carl B.

[Arne]

I split this discussion out of the one on the particular car, guys and gals. It's grown far larger than that one car.

[moonpup]

Carl, I see very few examples out there in the "collector world" where the early vin/serial # (other than the first handfull made) has much of an influence on it's price or it's desirability.

Take the 64 1/2 Mustang for example. Unless you have #1 (or possibly some other extremely low number), there are far more desirable Mustangs for the collector to go after and I doubt that #464 is going to attract anyone's attention.

The reason a low vin attracts the attention it does in the "Datsun 240Z" market is because that's about all it has that "collectors" put an added value on. It's not a convertable, doesn't have a hi-po engine that most buyers passed on, no limited production run and nothing "major" in terms of body changes from the 70-73 model that would attract more interest.

So where does one draw the line for "vin" desirability? Is it up to #50, 100, 500 or 1000 and higher?

Edited September 11, 2008 by moonpup

[xray]

So where does one draw the line for "vin" desirability? Is it up to #50, 100, 500 or 1000 and higher?

Right between 81166 and 81168.

Sorry to be glib about it, but there's no real break point. We don't know exactly how many were on the first boat, whether they were in sequential order etc. Is it the first 100? 500? Only those in 1969? It's not like a flatfloor 3.8 S1 XKE or a 64 1/2 Mustang. Part of the problem is the absence of an endpoint. Numbered paintings have value because they are 1 of X, not the 25th or 100th of a long open-ended series.

IMO, VIN's an interesting aspect of the car but not worth that much. It might be worth a 10% premium to me, but that's about it unless it's got real provenance (owned/raced by someone important etc)

Edited September 11, 2008 by xray

[Arne]

The reason a low vin attracts the attention it does in the "Datsun 240Z" market is because that's about all it has that "collectors" put an added value on. It's not a convertable, doesn't have a hi-po engine that most buyers passed on, no limited production run and nothing "major" in terms of body changes from the 70-73 model that would attract more interest.

Bingo. The 240Z for the US market was a mass produced car. Very mass produced. There were no 'Z-28' or 'Boss 302' equivalents. They were all the same. Sure, the earliest cars had different (often pre-production) parts, but those parts were just unusual, and sometimes just a stopgap, not 'special'.

But collectors want 'special'. The early cars with odd parts are all they can find on 240Zs here in the US, so those are pronounced 'rare' and 'collectible'. Once so identified, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. A few people determine that the low-VIN are THE collectible 240Zs, and pay more than normal people would pay. Others see that and jump on the band wagon. Soon, the first boatload isn't enough, the 'collectible' tag spreads to the '1969-built' cars, and then spills over to the 'clear-glass' cars (#14xx or so). The collector wannabe's can't (or won't) pay the big prices for a 69-built car, so they focus on the rest of the Series 1 cars, driving those prices up above a similar Series 2 or '72 car.

No offense to those of you who are into this, but to me it just looks like a fetish for the low-VIN cars. If I was a serious collector (and I'm not), I'd be after the cars with true history. Like Carl's rally car, for example. There's a true 'collectible'.

Worse, people continue to wonder and complain about the low prices on 'normal' 240Zs. Well, I figure part of that is because the impression given by the Z community in general and especially the low-VIN fetishists is that only the low-VIN are worth big money. In other words, the obsession with low-VIN is holding down the prices on otherwise nice 240Zs.

My opinion only. Probably means nothing.

[xray]

Worse, people continue to wonder and complain about the low prices on 'normal' 240Zs. Well, I figure part of that is because the impression that serious Z collectors give is that only the low-VIN are worth big money. In other words, the obsession with low-VIN is holding down the prices on otherwise nice 240Zs.

I disagree. If that were true why does NADA show 1972MY 240Z in excellent condition being valued at $19,800? Random guess? Picked it out of the blue? Doubtful. Why is my car insured for $24,000 agreed value? If Hagerty didn't think it's worth that, they wouldn't accept that as an agreed value. Not sure what you call "normal," but most of the Zs I've seen called normal are fair to average in condition which represents a wide swath of pricing from 3-12k.

Classic cars are not liquid assets. If you try to sell it on EBay, you'll not get its true value because it'll be seen as a "quick" sale. Wrong audience as most folks are looking for a steal/bargain. Like trying to sell your classic on Craigslist--bad marketing will get the seller a bad deal

[Arne]

I disagree. If that were true why does NADA show 1972MY 240Z in excellent condition being valued at $19,800? Random guess? Picked it out of the blue? Doubtful. Why is my car insured for $24,000 agreed value? If Hagerty didn't think it's worth that, they wouldn't accept that as an agreed value. Not sure what you call "normal," but most of the Zs I've seen called normal are fair to average in condition which represents a wide swath of pricing from 3-12k.

Steve, neither you or I own a 'typical' 240Z. So looked at from our perspective, the perception may be different.

On the other hand, how much more would a sub-500 car in condition equal to your car be worth? More than $24k, I'd bet.

Go back to the other thread that started this. We're talking about a fairly beat looking car that will need extensive restoration. Because it is a '69-built car, the $5k+ price is considered to be reasonable. That same car as a mid-70-built car (VIN in the 6-9xxx range) might go for half of that. As a late '71 or '72, it's a $500 car out west, maybe $1500-2000 in the rest of the country.

Consider all the buyers' guides over the past years (even decades) proclaiming 240Zs to be great buys. "Buy yours now before the price skyrockets!" Hasn't happened yet, not for the 'normal' cars. Sure, some of the collector cars change hands for big bucks, but that hasn't spilled over to the really nice #3 cars. And I don't think it will, as long as it's 'common knowledge' that the low-VIN cars are the ones with value.

[geezer]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but your not looking at this in the same light that a true collector would. A true collector does not consider resale value or practicality. They are focused on aquiring the best example they can find and will continue buying better examples as they present themselves. Different collectors have their own way of seeing things and set precedence among their fellow collectors. With Zs, it is the quest for a low VIN and the full compliment of rare early production parts. Other marques have different criteria for collectability. Do a search for the last 1967 Corvette. What makes the last one more collectable in this case? I think it is just the hype generated by the collectors themselves. Market value is set if enough people buy into any particular line of thinking and there are only X number of cars on the market that fit the criteria.

[AZ-240z]

Moonpup,

I suggest you re-read Carl's post #25. No one is asking you to understand the attraction many have with cars that have developmental parts incorporated in

early examples first offered to the public, and the value attributed to their uniqueness. Just understand the fact that this attraction does exist, in not only collectors, but in those of us who strive to strive for total originality in our early cars. Mine is not early, but one of the very last series 1 cars. Seems to me that I saw the last production number 1967 Corvette auctioned at Barrett-Jackson last year for a premium price because it was the last of the Stingray line.

I am afraid that I, too, am aflicted with this attraction, and have been known to buy over-valued parts for my car, just because that was original in March, 1971 when it was first registered.

Dan

[moonpup]

AZ-240z, While I "understand" that a number of individuals have an attraction to those "Series 1" bits, I just don't happen to agree that they are "special" enough to put a premium on.

It's not like they're a shaker hood scoop for a 71 Cuda or Shelby mags. They're just parts that are different for that particular year/run and all those cars had them.

Now don't get me wrong, I had a 70 (#3549 I think) that was to be my next resto before it burned up in a garage fire and I was hot on the trail for most of the same parts we are now talking about but only because they would make it "original" not "special".

Edited September 11, 2008 by moonpup

[Poindexter]

AZ-240z, While I "understand" that a number of individuals have an attraction to those "Series 1" bits, I just don't happen to agree that they are "special" enough to put a premium on.

It's not like they're a shaker hood scoop for a 71 Cuda or Shelby mags. They're just parts that are different for that particular year/run and all those cars had them.*snip*

You were saying?

I still suggest that in a 30+ year old "Z universe" of restored and repainted, or rusted, ruined and crushed cars, "original" AND in great condition, has (or should have) a greater value than a restored car in *equal* condition...but then again I would, since it's one of those adjectives I value as it directly applies to my car. Doesn't seem to be happening though. :disappoin

To paraphrase Uncle Junior on Sopranos- "I wanted to *date* Angie ****enson too, but nobody cared what I wanted!" (You're kidding me on that system edit?)

What we want and hope for is seemingly not connected to market value. Does the "collector" looking for perceived value in his definition of rare, in an otherwise "crowded" market, thereby depress the rest of the market if our cars are outside that range? Does a rising tide not lift all boats? Who decides on the market?

Edited September 11, 2008 by Poindexter