Tibo

iTrader: (15)

I've wondered, for a long while, if car values exhibit a bell curve or maybe a double hump. Cars start out life brand new at one price and then will depreciate slowly over the next 20-30 years until they reach rock bottom at which time they begin to appreciate. The cars as we've seen will hit an apex but after that do they decrease in value?

My thought behind this has long been that my friends in my generation (I'm smack dab in the middle of the Millennials) aren't looking at these cars from the 40s/50s/60s and saying "I'd love to buy that car when I have the money." Late 60's sports cars, Corvettes and T-buckets aside, we aren't willing to pay what they are currently worth. I have friends or at least acquaintances in their sixth and seventh decades of life who own these cars and aging will eventually force them to sell the cars. So, since a car is only really worth what it will sell for it makes me think there may be a second depreciation.

Is anybody else like me in thinking that there will be a depreciation of the 20s-early 60s era cars while the appreciation of the late 60s-80s cars is occurring?

pwessels

I have thought that myself - I am late 40's for example and model A's and T's and the like hold zero interest for me at just about any price - especially stock. I am also fairly sure that 18-25 year olds today will not place the same ridiculous values on late 60's early 70's muscle cars.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

You're right to say there are multiple directions pulling on prices of different vehicle genres.

When the guys who wanted 60s cars in their teens reached a higher age, higher income with more discretionary cash to go with it, their kids left the house etc., the 60/ stuff went up big time. It didn't hurt the era was thought of as high horsepower. As to a drop off, anything that has reached an unnatural plateau is going to drop, though it could stay up, if few examples existed or remain; buyers versus examples plays a role here.

The 80s is on the way up, but the base models will still far more likely follow the KBB curve, rather than skyrocket up. They also won't quite do a massive climb because they were still shadowed by a healthy rate of power train improvements for 25 years after. In comparison, the 60s were followed by very slow progress in power trains, lots of stopgap crap, and tech. implementation that was, well, slow. It doesn't matter that you and I could make a slow 70s car fly, it's that most people view them as slow and undesirable. That drove 60s values.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

It's already happening - the late 60's very early 70's "Muscle Cars" have softened slightly in the last year or two as more guys like myself find they don't have the time, energy or willingness to deal with their upkeep etc. any more.

Run of the mill cars are down overall with project cars leading the way due to simple economics - it costs more to restore one today than it would be to buy it. Rare/desirable cars however are still holding their value & always will.

My advice - buy now, buy the best car you can and the rarest one you can find!

1992 Trans Am

iTrader: (2)

I think the answer is...it depends. For a lot of the earlier cars from the 20's-40's, I think as few people from those eras are around and want to buy those cars, the prices may drop some. But for something like a first gen Camaro, or 60's mopar muscle, both of which have been the inspiration for the current Camaro and Challenger etc models, those will hold high value for an indefinite period of time, because a lot of people will always want the first or most vintage example of something.

92GTA

iTrader: (11)

I still think it has to do with what people remember from their childhood and their financial ability as they get older to buy those vehicles. A good example is my 17-year-old wants a car that looks just like my 92 GTA but has a V6 for costs.

The thing tho about muscle cars which is different from all others before them (1967 onwards), they are still considered by most standards, a modern car that could be driven daily. A/C, power windows, normal size interior with normal size seats etc. I think that will contribute to them being worth more longer than cars from the 50s and older (super rare examples aside).

I also find that as I get older, my tastes grow vastly. Early on I was into sports cars like Porsche, then into 3rd gens, then 50s Corvettes, now muscle cars, and I'm wanting an old 20/30s car now for a ratty hot rod project.

jharrison5

I hope the prices of 2nd gen f-bodies drops, because I still want one!

I have had this same discussion with my car buddies and we all agree that the prices will come down, but it is all ultimately about supply and demand. I bought my first 2nd gen for $1700 ('81 firebird in '94) and sold it for $2500 two years later ('96). That same car sold three years ago (2014) for $6000, had been sitting in a barn since 2006, and was in worse shape then when I sold it. Why? There just aren't that many examples on the road and therefore people will spend the money for those cars.

I have two younger brothers, one 28, and the other 24. The 28yo appreciates cars, but drives a lancer and likes to poke fun at me about my obsession with f-bodies. He has no desire to own or restore a classic car. He has done well for himself and could afford a classic, but chooses to go to car shows and just appreciate the beauty of it all.

The 24yo knows nothing about cars and doesn't care to know even the basic stuff. He only knows to call me when his car is "making a noise" and dad won't answer.

We all grew up in the same house and nothing changed over the years. Hell we all learned to drive in the same 1974 chevy pickup! Some people get the car bug and some don't. The people that get the bug will keep the classics alive and the prices will be dictated by what people think they're worth.

RedLeader289

iTrader: (2)

This. There will always be more car people who love the classics than there are of the classics themselves, by simple supply and demand that keeps the costs up. 1st gen camaro shells are getting to be almost non-existant. That leaves us with survivors and restored models. Each command a premium for there own reasons.

Tibo

iTrader: (15)

Yes, currently the demand for the first gen Camaro is huge. I think you're mistaken about demand continually outpacing supply. Each generation seems to have less and less car guys. We can already see that drivers license tests and car ownership among high schoolers has dropped, markedly in some areas. Aside from that, tastes seem to be changing. I don't know anyone under 40 that is interested in buying vehicles from the years I originally mentioned. Even the older guys I know that own 40s to 60s cars are at the age where they just want to finish their project car and if they buy another "hot rod" it was or will be a newer corvette or Mustang. Something that requires no work and has AC. So I don't even see the guys that are interested in these cars wanting to buy them.

VTSummit

Cars haven't been around long enough to really figure out what happens, I think. In the big scheme of things, we're only talking about 100 years. I just saw a running driving Model T for $12K... to me, that seems really cheap. My XKE goes up 7% to 10% in value every year while the same year MGB I've had has been worth the same for ten years.
As more older cars are junked, wrecked, recycled and rust away- there will be a point where they become worth more. Hell, people are looking for pacers and gremlins now. People pine for a damned Chevette now, too. It's bizarro world to me. Back in the day 240SX's were only driven by college girls and universally hated, slow turds- now people fight over those old sh*tboxes.
Will the "old car" hobby slowly die off? Nobody really knows- but one day, most likely, it will become more trouble than its worth or be outlawed "for the environment."
Nobody gives my GTA a second look- it's just an old car to most. Even my XKE doesn't draw the attention it used to- and it's an icon of motoring history. Recently, some kid said it was a 280Z to another guy at a gas station and that he had three of them in his barn. Ugh...

RedLeader289

iTrader: (2)

It's definitely a possibility. I think VT has a good point as well in that cars haven't really been around long enough to say what values will do. Heck, with driverless tech and alternate drivetrains coming up I have no doubt that.

BUT, if those late 60's muscle cars do plummet in value, I know this 28 yr old will gladly ****** a couple up

Honestly I always have trouble putting value on cars though, because if I have a car that I like it's value doesn't factor into that liking (if that makes sense). If it did I probably wouldn't have gotten into thirdgens haha.

vinny R

I believe he is right about it being the car itself and what car is desirable at that time. I have always thought that a model T that old, all original, would be worth a heck of a lot more, It is funny now how the Pacers are starting to be bought, albeit at a low price. I saw an episode of wheeler dealers were they bought a pacer and fixed it up and They took a bath! They ended up donating it to charity as no one would by it. It seems that if the car was popular once for whatever reason it will make a "comeback" so to speak. There are exceptions to this of course. So I do believe in the curve you just have to know what vehicle will be included. A couple examples of popular cars that I think will never hit that curve. The Pinto and the Mustang II. I not only had a crush on Farrah but also that white with blue stripe GT she drove! looking back now, what a POS that thing was!

pwessels

Another thing to consider is the message in this recent Lexus ad - I think this may have an impact on the future value of cars at some point too. Not that I am a lexus fan but the message certainly rang true for me.

Tibo

iTrader: (15)

Article in Wall Street Journal today about aging adults or the children of them selling off their ranches that they do not want to keep. Another illustration about how younger generations have different tastes than their parents. Some of the YouTube channels I follow in the past few years have also talked about having their dad's car but it ends up just sitting in the garage or they sell it. I've also noticed older cars for sale at car shows with the for sale sign that have the priced lowered multiple times.

KMK454

I think the T-Bucket market is going to crater or transform into a parts market. Does anybody under 70 like T-Buckets? All of those period-cool hot rods or modification trends have a shelf life tied to the generation that thought they were cool.

Tibo

iTrader: (15)

I'd buy a T bucket that had four normal sized wheels, a convertible top and a roll bar. I've seen the price dropping on those. $10-12K for a show ready example, price will probably drop on those also with less and less people knowing how to work on and care for a carb. I think one of those would be great for a transplant with drivetrain from a RWD Cadillac with an Aluminum V6 and paddle shifters and then throw a turbo on it.

Badass69

I think as time rolls on the collector car thing will taper off drastically. The new generation and subsequents are going to hit a point soon where owning a car in an urban setting will be pointless. It's already starting with all the ride sharing apps where you can rent one very cheaply and drop it when its no longer required. Even the price of new vehicles is getting to the point individuals aren't going to just buy them to have one.. Yes people will still buy cars, rural will always have them but it's a trend heading that direction. Now bring on autonomous cars and if driving isn't part of your daily life... you don't need a drivers license. There always will be enthusiasts and people that have to have but as the older generations die off the car is going to be less and less of the individual.

86FyrBrd

iTrader: (1)

I agree they'll have two bottoms to their value but the second will never be as low as the first. For the second dip the only buyers are people that know what they are looking for and the supply is much less. 3rd gens are no where near their second dip, they're actually on the rise right now but when they dip again supply will be limited. Especially for desirable models. I am currently buying one now that I have no other option currently on the market. But this mode of thinking will change too because nearly everything after the mid 90's was produced on a much larger scale than prior. "Rare" isn't what it used to be.

Aviator857

Cars like fashion follow a cycle as people age and different groups go through the earning cycle and power cycle. First you are a teenager and you buy 10 year old cars and drool over newer ones. Then hopefully you reach a point where you have some play money and you try to buy back memories pushing up the cost of things like cars (and retro video games it seems) then a few years later your age bracket is now running the design teams and cars look like they did in your teen years again this will soften prices of the old cars slightly as a block of buyers are pulled away... or something like that.

88IROCvertZ

iTrader: (1)

I don’t think we will ever see the appreciation of the 60s-70s muscle cars that go for 20-40 times their original purchase price. Yeah, they’re going to drop as the general interest/ nostalgia and generations change..

Thats like saying an IROC will be worth $300,000-$400,000 someday. I don’t think that’s going to happen.

But yes, typically cars depreciate after initial purchase and if kept in mint condition with limited mileage they can go up after hitting a price bottom of depreciation. If it is a car that was remembered and holds value in nostalgia people who have aged and have extra income start looking to see if any of those cool cars they remember are still around. People figure out what they’re willing to pay for good examples but as the trend gets noticed dealers start raising prices and looking for good examples to flip. Collectors take notice and you start seeing prime examples going through auctions for inflated prices. Dealers get excited and inflate their prices which then starts a trend of classified prices becoming inflated. At some point the inventory will stop selling and prices will come back down again.

My guess for Thirdgens is that prices are already inflated. I think you can get one cheaper than the asking prices if someone wants to sell. I think the good examples will get into $30k-40k but it will take more time and we’ll have to see what inventory is left. I think it’s possible we could see one of those cars with a few hundred miles hit $100k in 10-20 more years depending on the inventory.

Once people born in the late 1980s get way up in age (2030-2040) There may not be much interest in 80s cars, or cars in general at that point..

KyleF

Inverted bell curve yes, but that is value in strict dollars. You have to take in to account inflation and what your dollar is actually buying. Additionally, your general cars will taper off as the generation gets older. There will always be unique and special collector cars that will hold value and drive the market. It is hard to say apples to apples when comparing a 67 Biscayne to a 67 Corvette 427 tri-power 4-speed car. In general, I don't think many Gen X'ers would have any interest in the Biscayne beyond it being cool because it's old, there is no real significance to it, but that Vette... well It continues to rise.

Underlying it all is desirability. Above rarity, above original price, even above performance numbers. What makes people actually want the car. No matter how rare an 82 4-speed 4cylinder Camaro without A/C is, nobody wants it. No matter how expensive a Bentley was when it was purchased, you can pick a 30 year old one up for less than a 30 year old Vette in most cases. While performance certainly factors into creating a desire and dreams, there is more to it. Just look at the Japanese muscle cars from the 90's. 300ZX Turbo, 3000GT VR4, and a Supra Turbo.... all roughly 300 Hp cars, all roughly priced the same originally, and the AWD 3000GT is the fastest in a drag race, but the Supra far surpasses the others in value today. Some of this is due to long term reliability but mainly, the Supra is famous from a Movie and people just want one.

Many points have been touched on in this thread about a demographics and disposable income, and I wholly agree - there is just a bit more complicated than that. Buying a collector car is like any other investment. Some will win and some will lose. It's hard to predict which ones the big winners will be and picking one that has already soared is unlikely to continue to rise at the same rate. I believe a 70 Hemi 'Cuda will always be a big dollar car, but I doubt when adjusted for inflation you will see that value go much higher, and maybe even soften a little with time. To be conservative, stick with a high performance, low production number car that has some significance to it and it will at least hold it's value long term. Nobody can guarantee ongoing value increase beyond generally keeping up with inflation.

WildCard600

The bold part here is especially true when talking about third gen values at the present time. I've seen a lot of talk the past year or so that third gens are "increasing" in value, most of the examples given are extremely low mileage that are basically "new" cars. Once you adjust the current selling prices for inflation, they are essentially clearing the auction block for the same price they did brand new 30+ years ago.

KyleF

Agreed, but that would be an appreciation from what that would have sold for in 2005, even adjusted for inflation. Buying and holding a car is a long term bet. Some will yield faster than others... a GNX for example.

88IROCvertZ

iTrader: (1)

All true and interesting to discuss..

Inventory has something to do with it too... The C4 Corvette was a great car and was pretty ahead of its time. They were all bought by mostly older guys that were financially secure since they were much pricier than a Camaro. Many of them were just used as weekend sports cars or treated like garage queens as opposed to the IROCs that were modded, raced, totaled and driven into the ground. All these older guys want to trade their mint condition C4s for C6, C7 or something else, but there’s too many available and it’s a buyer’s market on those. It’s easier to haggle down a C4 price than an IROC or Monte SS...

Monte SS’s probably go for more than IROCs now and they are definitely not beacons of performance. A mint 80s Monte SS with low miles is close to Grand National money. It seems that with those cars, so many were daily drivers and racked up miles, turned into rust buckets or were totalled. It’s a sellers market with those..

I am starting to see some Grand National owners having a hard time selling their cars for asking price, but they really stick to what they think it’s worth.. It’ll be interesting to see what happens with those prices. The GNX is in another league of very low inventory and a special car. Turbo Trans Ams have held value pretty well but I’m surprised they aren’t priced higher. I know a couple guys that have mint, low mile examples and basically sat on them since the 90s thinking they’d be hugely collectable. I think in their minds they would be $100k cars by now.

I guess if we’re back to the original MSRP selling price we should be happy with that.

KMK454

The problem with the TTA is there's such a large inventory of barely used, low-mile examples around. It's perhaps the most preserved iteration of the thirdgen f-body.

KyleF

Yes, by 89 people knew to lock some of these special cars away. I think this is true for a lot of cars now. If you wanted a new 03/04 Cobra... they are still out there, same for 30th Anniversary T/A's, GT500s, etc.

I believe another issue with the TTA is the departure from the main clientele attracted to these cars. I speak from experience as a previous owner. Growing up in the 80s, I remember wanting a TTA back in the day. When I had the chance I jumped on it.
It was fast but... it still sounded like a V6, it was an odd color of white with Gold, and an automatics available. I honestly believe (and this is all speculation and some bias) if the car had been made with a Turbo TPI, available with a 5-speed (Or a 6-speed), and was done in the Normal White/Blue anniversary colors or a Black and Gold, they would be more highly sought after. It is and odd car being the only Trans Am with a V6, no matter how bad a$$ said V6 is. It is the only Anniversary car to be white and gold, and another GM Performance car that didn't look any different from the main stream car to a passing eye just like the C4 ZR1. Which too, I think struggles to build value because even to this day you have to explain what it actually is to people and why it is special. I was happy to have owned one, enjoyed it, and moved on from it. I still like them, but I am much happier having a Supercharged L98 Iroc in black. Even if it is not necessarily faster.

Thirdgen89GTA

iTrader: (5)

Can't really agree with that. The GNX is a prime example of people looking past the V6.

The TTA is one of the most desirable Firebird/TA's ever built and the prices reflect that.

Sadly when it comes to driving? All those millennials who aren't buying cars, or even bothering to get a license? All I can remember growing up was having a good/fast thing. Before my license, it was bikes, but I longed for a car or motorcycle. I couldn't wait to get my license. A license and a car is freedom to go where you want, when you want.

Today's kids on the whole don't care nearly as much about wheels. It's alien to me to think of not wanting a license.

KyleF

The GNX is very rare and an ultimate performer from a generation. Almost a crown jewl of a collection. Discussing what the GNX does compared to the TTA is exactly my point because

The GNX has soared in value and the TTA has been almost stagnant for the better part of a decade at this point. I watch regularly. It seems over the past 10-20 years, a low mile TTA has hovered in the $20Ks. For such a similar powertrain sitting in two different chassis, That is exactly my point. The TTAs value sits far below a GNX and below a regular GN at this point. It does however bring more money than a Turbo T.



TTA's also do not bring the money such a rare example of the TA should. For as special and rare as it was, it does not bring the money of other limited high performance Firebirds. You can still purchase a low mile, all stock, excellent condition TTA for below original MSRP.

While I disagree with your evaluation, I do agree... the Price reflects where it sits in the market. Only desirable to a select few. Low mile IROCs are starting to nip at the heels of low mile TTA's. TTAs can't touch an SD455 Car, barely brings more money than 78/79 SE's now, sits behind 92 Firehawks, the 30th Anniversary cars that have little to low miles have almost already got into TTA territory and the Convertible 6-speed examples are already bringing mid 20's. A TTA price is below that of Gen 1 Firebird 400s, certainly below 74 and earlier T/As and etc. You say it's price reflects it's desirability, but it's value is pretty poor in comparison to other low production high performance birds - some not even really special editions.

If anything, I find the desire a TTA brings to be sadly disappointing. I actually owned one, it is not speculation. It's the straight scoop. It was purchased from me by a Turbo Buick guy, not a Thirdgen or Firebird guy BTW. When I listed it for sale, I had 5 people contact me, 3 come look at it, and finally sold it after 6 months. 42K Mile T-Top Leather Car. Not a one of the people came talking about all the F-Bodies they owned. It was a different set of people than the ones I had sold other Camaro/Firebirds to.

Don't take this as a knock on the car its self. I still think they are great cars. Just one additional point to TTA's. I think they suffer in value for the same reason C4 ZR1's do. GM didn't do much to differentiate the appaerance much from the more common example of the car.

Tibo

iTrader: (15)

The drop in Driver's Licensure rates is being overhyped, misquoted and misunderstood. I believe it was a University of Michigan study that said that amongst 19 year olds a drop from 87% licensure rate in 1983 to a 69% rate in 2009. For reference, the licensure rate of 16 year olds in 1960 was 61%. So this isn't about Millennials since the study saw it solidly began with Gen X'ers but it's still above the rate that Baby Boomers set. The study also seemed to show that there was an inverse relationship with an increase of driver's licenses for those >50 by 12%. The US has seen in increase in Driver's license nearly every year. I think there was a recent dip of 1.x% but who cares when you have 225 million licensed drivers in the US. Compare that to 112 million in 1970. The US Dept of Transportation says that 87% of the US population age 16+ has a driver's license.

KyleF

Drivers License numbers is one thing, but as the study shows obviously licensure rates are dropping. You trying to explain it away is funny. It is basic knowledge about society, the young people of today care less about cars in general, they care less about driving, and they care less about ownership that previous generations. They are also the first generation to move back to Urban areas, which reduces the overall need for a car. It also adds complications and cost to owning a second hobby car. You still need a license to rent a car, to do some pick up and drop apps, or enter into shared ownership programs. They won't be able to get around needing a license to legally operate a vehicle on the road. Plus, in general(doesn't matter if you agree with their reason or not) they are a generation that sees it as "cool" to have a reduced carbon footprint.

Tibo

iTrader: (15)

You are wrong because you are either relying on old or anecdotal evidence or you haven't actually read any of the articles. You can disagree with me and say I'm being funny but the facts don't support you.
Here is a recent article in Bloomberg that discussed how drivers licensure rates bottomed out in 2014 (the UM study was still prior to that) and have seen an upward trend again. The Bloomberg article also discussed how you can't blame the decline in licensure rates on ride sharing services:
"...Uber first began offering rides outside San Francisco in 2011 but really only began to achieve critical mass nationally in 2014. So it can’t have played a role in the teen driving decline, and its continued growth since 2014 happens to have coincided with a rise in teen licensing. Maybe things have changed since 2016, as competitor Lyft has gained ground and several startups have taken aim at the under-18 market (you have to be at least 18 to establish your own Uber or Lyft account), but I wouldn’t bet on it...."

Again, the UM study clearly shows that the decline in licensure rates began in the early 80s and has since continued. It started lomg before anybody was talking about it being cool to have a reduced carbon footprint (and long before the Millenial generation was everybody's punching bag). Also if the new generation thought that it was cool to have a little carbon footprint then why is there now an upward trend in licensure rates?

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

What you're describing isn't really a "bell curve" at all. The "bell curve" is the normal distribution, kind of like the distribution of tire tracks down a lane on the freeway; the majority of the tire tracks are in the center-ish area, and as you get farther and farther out toward the edge, there are fewer and fewer. The kind of curve you're talking about is something else altogether different.

Cars in general depreciate. They do nothing else. They never regain value. They get old, wear out, become obsolete, rust out, etc. etc. etc.

"Collector" cars on the other hand, which are NOT the same as cars in general, DO seem to regain value; due to a totally non-related factor, not present in older cars in general. Namely, "collector" interest and demand. Furthermore, the cars most subject to this, are NOT, in general, the worn-out, depreciated, rusted, etc. examples of their kind; instead, they are generally the relatively uncommon examples of the particular model that have suffered less from the things that doom most cars to the scrapyard. Whether any given model of car EVER "regains value" to the point that it re-attains its inflation-adjusted initial purchase price is another matter entirely... VERY FEW, it seems, ever do that. Even the MOST DESIRABLE cars are NOT an "investment" in that sense, where you buy something, and as time goes on, its "value" - what you could sell it for in the open marketplace to an arm's-length buyer - increases faster than the "value" of something else such as a simple financial instrument that you could have bought instead.

I don't think it's possible to apply any kind of a "curve" to the value of any particular car, or series, or make, or model, or anything else. Although in general, the ones whose value have become affected by the current "collector" phenomenon that seems so attractive yet misplaced to younger people who don't have long-term experience with it, have tended to be ones that excited particular feelings or passions when new. There are exceptions, of course; for example today, just about ANY car in anything resembling operable condition from, say, before WW2, is "collectible" and "valuable" to at least some extent, even if it was the humblest and plainest and most commonplace kind in its own day. But in general, the cars that are generally the ones that the general public wants to "collect", and that there is therefore a high general demand for, are generally the ones that got that same sort of general attention when they were new. The ones that the general public were excited about, that got them to empty their wallets, that got songs written about them that you heard on the radio every day, that people in general really got emotionally plugged into.

Cars built since the Arab oil embargo lack that cultural "spark". No matter what WE, as enthusiasts, might think about our cars, "value" in the big picture (TV show car auctions for example) is driven by DEMAND on the part of THE GENERAL PUBLIC, not our own feelings or wishes. In fact I suspect that that's one of the reasons that many of use here are interested in these particular cars in the first place, whether we admit it or not: there is generally VERY LITTLE "demand" on the part of the general public, which means we can generally buy them CHEEEEEEEEEP to have our fun with. Looking at the trajectory of other cars built since that particular political incident, I do not believe that these cars will EVER attain the kind of "value" that, say, 1st gen F bodies have; not because those cars are "better" than ours, or because they "deserve" it in any sort of objective way related to the "car" itself, but because they were born into an era when cars were a more important part of the CULTURAL fabric of society. They were evidence of the industrial might of America. They represented freedom, coming of age, were symbols of personal wealth and style (although that is still around, just devoted to a different kind of car altogether nowadays), excitement in the next year's models, engineering accomplishment, and a whole bunch of other CULTURAL things that had NOTHING to do with the cars THEMSELVES. All that DISAPPEARED OVERNIGHT when the price of gasoline tripled and it became scarce. Instead, the very cars that people loved to drool over in 1969, became hot potatoes that those same people COULD NOT GET RID OF FAST ENOUGH in 1975. That kind of CULTURAL attitude toward cars WENT AWAY and will NEVER come back. Nothing that we as enthusiasts can ever do, will change that. Anyone who did not live through that is probably unable to understand how profound an effect it had on the "car" culture. That effect has lasted, and will continue to last, FOREVER. The era of "car as culture" that died in that moment is OVER.

The talk about licensing rates points up another factor... the very idea of the personally-owned car as an essential symbolic item of adulthood is crumbling. As younger people move back to center city areas where there's reliable and useful public transportation, that will only increase. Cars even as we know them today are becoming less of a personal symbol and more of a mere transportation commodity. The days of fossil-fueled personal transportation are likely numbered with an ever-shrinking number, again, not because of people like us, but because of factors far outside of our control. At some point, "cars" will become something like elaborate telegraph keys, or gold-plated wall telephones, or gilded horse-drawn carriages; a relic of a day gone by. It's already starting to happen. All it will take is some random geopolitical event to bring on the sunset; a war in the Middle East, a rise in sea level that overwhelms some large or significant city, a shift in "fashion", some technological change such as self-driving mass- or near-mass-transit vehicles, or some other thing maybe TOTALLY UNRELATED in its own way to "cars" as such. Obviously there will ALWAYS be people who need some form of "iron horse" (source of power and traction) to make their living, for example those who farm or build, but as far as "cars" being a CULTURALLY DOMINANT phenomenon like they were in the mid 50s through the early 70s, that will NEVER AGAIN be the case.

I'd say, let's enjoy our cars while we have them and can keep on buying parts and fuel and whatnot for them, and not concern ourselves with "collector" "value". In fact IMO that's something we DON'T want, because if it ever happened, all it will do to people like us, is raise our costs. Because of the CULTURAL elements that drive "collectible" cars, I'm pretty sure that as people affected by the CULTURAL aura that those cars had when new die off, their value will generally reach a peak and then decrease over time into the future. I don't think that there is a historical precedent that will allow us to predict when, where, which ones, how much, etc. with any degree of accuracy. I also don't think that it applies to our cars; that is, we CAN'T look at the "curve" that the "value" of those cars has followed, and extrapolate it to these cars. They're just not subject to the same forces of demand. Which of course is where "collector" "value" comes from; not the passion of a few hobbyists, not the "quality" of the cars themselves, but rather, DEMAND from the general public.

KyleF

Let me be a bit more clear on the facts, then re-read what I posted.

Average age getting a license is increasing.

% of new drivers has been decreasing while population has been increasing for a long time. A few years of change in trend not much to merit much of a discussion point over decades of decline.

Obtaining a license does not mean you actually own a car.

Overall interest in owning a second hobby car is decreasing with the new generation.


I did not directly say last year less people got licenses. Apparently, more did. Probably because Milleneals are finally climbing out of their mother's basement and deciding to start participating in the real world at 30.


Also, regardless of your political view, some states are giving Drivers License to un Documented folks here in the US (Use what term you choose to describe them).

Pretty much what I am getting at. Interest in cars is just dropping. Just to use the term "cars" a little more directly, Ford will only be producing one car soon - The Mustang. The Camaro is getting killed off again, and everyone wants an AWD X-Over or Sport Utility. I just don't see many people fawning over a 2007 Edge in another 10 years.

To sum it all up, it is laughable to think because the Drivers License rate pokes back up for a few years it means anything overall to the landscape of hobby car values and the hobby in general when it has been in decline for decades. Which has not been much of an impact to purchasing of new vehicles which has continued to trend up outside of some poor economic years.

It will never die off, but I don't see cars from the 80s/90s/00s every doing what the late 60s muscle did and the trends in the industry don't support that it will.I don't have a crystal ball to predict what will happen in 20-40 years, or I would be a much richer person today from using it before. I can tell you as someone who has work in the industry for 15+ years, the industry is adapting to lower rates of private ownership, not much discussion on what to do based off how many young people are getting licenses at what age... but how they choose to consume. that has what has really changed and what I am pointing at. A drop in interest in cars in general and the attraction to OWNERSHIP.