No. IMO a 30K miler 'out of the box' car, like this one was, is worth more than the same car that has been painted. Not sayin that I would not have a car painted or buy a car that has been painted, as mine has, but 'out of the box original' alway fetched a premium in my book.
An original unpainted Ferrari Daytona Spider recently made over £1M while a resprayed one made £538K - the difference being down to the cheaper one being resprayed and not in the original colour.
As I think some have been hinting at in here - so what if a car is in show quality? Doesn't mean if you strip it right back to the shell that there aren't some evil truths lurking away. Even if it has been stripped back and repaired at some point during its life, doesn't mean it can't come back to haunt you; even if it has been garaged and pampered.
OK, but what if it has been garaged and pampered WITH POOFIES ?? (now watch someone ask what poofies are ).
imo.the more people expect to get top money for their cars the better it is for everybody here.a friend of mine bought a 40000mile 964rs about a year ago ,who would of thought that the price of these cars for example would have sky rocketed like they have.my point being that if that were to happen with our m3's would'nt we all be happy indeed!!!i know i would anyway! before we know it you can probably buy an e46 m3 for the price of an average condition e30 m3.
I did question the seller with regards to the respray, his reply was that the paintwork was very poor quality, with mis-matching panels. I then asked wether the respray was documented, pictures taken etc (as you would with a 5k respray) and the answer was no. Make of that what you will...
I painted my car inside and out using standox paint and that cost roughly 7-8k euro. I did not make a lot of pictures. Just because someone doesnt make pictures doesnt mean its a bad job... I do have some pictures of course, but you can not tell quality from pictures. FWIW, if the car was only 32k, im suprised that it got a repaint, original paint is much better than anything they do nowadays. You should always try to hang on to your original paint as long as possible. John
Hmmm, to some extent the low mileage does suggest that the car has been less susceptible to scratches, small dings and stone chips etc. (general wear and tear) but that isn't the full storey. It doesn't matter how low a car's mileage is if it hasn't been properly taken care of. I don't know about over your way but in NZ the sun's uv rays can wreck havoc over time with a car's paint job. Reds especially fade quite badly. Also, leaving a car outside doesn't do it any favours in the war against rust. A bit OT but that reminds me of a big block Shelby Mustang when I was around 16 years old that had been left for several years outside on a piece of land here with weeds growing up all around the car. Can you believe that ????!!!! Even back then when the car was probably only worth about 12k our money (say 6k Euro), it seemed like sacrilege for the owner to just leave it there rotting away.
Simon says.... the car had miss-matching panels, so there is the possibility that the car was in an accident and the work performed was done poorly. I would have painted the car too if that was the case. You can't ask for top $$$$ if the paint or finish has a bunch of flaws. Thomas
exactly Thomas Each car has to be examined / interpreted on its own merits. Hell...it could be a 1000 mile car that had been in an unfortunate and serious accident earlier in its life. The lesson here imho is that we should never assume anything. Mileage, age, purported pedigree etc. etc.
I think you guys are missing the point here... Long and short of it is, the car was a very well known dead straight and perfect car that was sold, and the current owner is trying a quick buck by claiming a 5k respray, and trying to make 7k in the process. Just my opinion of course...
Guys, I am looking for an M3 hence being on this forum,,although I haven't asked the seller about the car, I do know him and have bought a car from him previously....he is a serious enthusiast and collector,,,if he states it has had a respray I am quite sure it has had one.
I'm with Simon on this one. This car is/was very well known, and was about as 'perfect' as you get. If it had mismatching panels, and poor quality paint, then it is all something that has happened in the months since it was last sold. If it really has had a respray (which personally I doubt..but that's just my opinion), then I'd be checking very closely for accident damage (or whatever else happened that made someone paint a concouors car).
I second that jpboost! This car was the closest thing to an original, just out of the show room car I've ever seen. I looked at that car and I swear I could of been in 1988.
Well then...maybe someone could ask him WHO did the purported paint job and then see whether that was a bonafide paint shop then ask all the usual questions. If there's any bollocks going on then the truth will soon surface. Shouldn't be hard to get to the bottom of this at all. Something does not make sense though. Too many folk have said it WAS a minter yet the seller is stating that the paint was mismatched. Maybe all you guys that thought it was a minter need your eyes tested ? :51:
you should trust your fellow board members. This car has won the UK bimmerfest concours (I was there). This matter is also discussed on E30 UK forum and people have asked the seller about the re-spray and didn't get any answers back or pictures. If you would have seen the car, your credit card would have poppped out of your wallet in a nanosecond!
Oh...my last post was tongue in cheek and not at all implying any derogatory thoughts or feelings towards the guys here Uwe. Didn't it come across as a bit of a joke ? Damn, the English language can be a bitch sometimes. If you look carefully at what I am saying there...I am actually implying that the current owner is telling a bit of a storey that seems to be outweighed by another storey from the members comments here. Then I'm being a little bit sarcastic about the seller when I make the comment that ALL the other well informed people must be blind. Does that make better sense now ?
