|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 23, 2017 9:20:53 GMT
Latest CAR mag, Merc C63 AMG vs Audi RS5.
The Audi list is £63k. Price as tested is £92k.
The only extras noted in the text are a carbon roof for £3.5k, 20 inch wheels (for some rip-off price I can't remember) and a carbon pack for £5k. As the car tested is pale grey (a free colour apparently) I can't really see where the latter has been applied, maybe something on the front bumper and on the side but close inspection of the photos still reveals plenty of black plastic.
God knows what the remaining £20k ish has been spent on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2017 9:38:04 GMT
There's a hell of a lot that's gone from standard to the options list in the last decade, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Aug 23, 2017 9:53:55 GMT
There's a hell of a lot that's gone from standard to the options list in the last decade, too. It does depend on the model and the manufacturer. I bet much of the extras on that Audi are decidedly on the F end of FG - nobody needs cosmetic carbon twiddly bits on their fatso fast Audi. But cars from VAG brands do still seem quite miserly equipped.
I thought my GC came pretty well-equipped as standard - xenons, the top Nav system, electric heated leather seats and even metallic paint were all standard.
Likewise my wife's Lounge-spec Fiat 500 - it's bog-standard about from a £50 integral dock for a Blue&Me TomTom. But bog standard on a car that cost us £11k new included digital climate control, a fixed glass roof, electric windows and mirrors, Bluetooth, a perfectly adequate sound system with iPod connectivity and alloys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 23, 2017 9:56:50 GMT
I presume the alloys upgrade on the RS5 is from 19 as standard to 20 options. They're charging nearly £3k for that minor upgrade.
I'm always astounded at the vast option lists that make zero change to the performance of the car, surely the main reason for buying the RS version instead of something lesser?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2017 10:54:06 GMT
There's a hell of a lot that's gone from standard to the options list in the last decade, too. It does depend on the model and the manufacturer. I bet much of the extras on that Audi are decidedly on the F end of FG - nobody needs cosmetic carbon twiddly bits on their fatso fast Audi. But cars from VAG brands do still seem quite miserly equipped.
I thought my GC came pretty well-equipped as standard - xenons, the top Nav system, electric heated leather seats and even metallic paint were all standard.
Likewise my wife's Lounge-spec Fiat 500 - it's bog-standard about from a £50 integral dock for a Blue&Me TomTom. But bog standard on a car that cost us £11k new included digital climate control, a fixed glass roof, electric windows and mirrors, Bluetooth, a perfectly adequate sound system with iPod connectivity and alloys.
I can only speak by direct personal experience, but when the last RS4 was launched there was around £8k of stuff that had become a cost option. I guess they'd twigged that they were having no difficulty shifting them, so it was time to start shafting them... |
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Aug 23, 2017 11:14:03 GMT
Well, like I say, VAG brands seem to be particular culprits. Especially Audi who, on their more interesting models, seem to have a policy of "Sir can have it painted black, silver, one of 8 different shades of grey or a token lurid shade, all of which will cost Sir £500+ anyway, and with a black or paedo grey interior, but of course if Sir would like a normal tasteful shade of non-grey paint with another interior colour, Sir is welcome to partake of our Exclusive colour palette, priced at merely half the annual GDP of Huddersfield"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2017 11:33:46 GMT
That said, Nick bought his M3 because it wasn't much dearer than a 330i when extra kit was factored in. I doubt that's anywhere near true of the current M3 and 335i (or 340i, 365i or whatever it's called now). But yes, they all do that, sir...
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Aug 23, 2017 11:35:49 GMT
There are some rediculously priced options, some of which should be standard e.g. sports exhaust on an E63/RS5/M5 etc.
However, most cars generally do have a much higher level of std equipment. Taking the 5 Series as an example, the new model has standard leather, Sat Nav, Bluetooth and a number of other things that were all expensive options when I got the 520d 7 years ago.
Some models are better equipped as you go up the range, the monthly cost of a Macan S diesel isn't all that different to a GTS when you equlise the spec.
There was an interesting comparison in Evo recently, I think the 911 Turbo was a very similar price to the inflation adjusted cost of one back in the 80s, but the latest one had a lot more kit and performance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 23, 2017 12:14:51 GMT
There are also a lot more toys available now than even just a few years ago due to the apparent explosion in electrickery.
I know that whoever originally paid £60k for my M5 didn't tick any boxes which is why it doesn't have satnav, a phone or a leather dash but then these are things I wouldn't care about anyway.
However there was no choice of wheel design/size, suspension type or auto gearbox either.
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Aug 23, 2017 13:08:54 GMT
That said, Nick bought his M3 because it wasn't much dearer than a 330i when extra kit was factored in. I doubt that's anywhere near true of the current M3 and 335i (or 340i, 365i or whatever it's called now). But yes, they all do that, sir... Well that's why on paper a 440i GC is nearly £4k more expensive than a 340i saloon but the difference drops to about £1.4k when you equalise the spec.
As for M4 vs 440i, BMW have put clear blue water between those two...a boggo manual M4 coupe lists at £59k. A boggo manual 440i coupe lists at £44k. There's practically no difference in equipment levels (at most £1-2k) between the two models - it's mostly the mechanical differences.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2017 15:53:01 GMT
One of those chappies that made a fortune just filming folk in their cars in London (like that Schmee twat, but without the annoying voice and face) test drove the same car. The 20" wheels are machined after painting and are lighter than the 19s by a considerable amount apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Aug 23, 2017 16:41:19 GMT
The manufacturers have lost the plot with that kind of pricing. An RS5 would never be a common car but at those prices it would be madness to buy one. However that £92K car will probably be a £60K one within 6 months.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 7:35:56 GMT
And a £25k one after three years?
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Aug 24, 2017 8:25:30 GMT
Maybe not that much (3 yr old RS5s are £35k+), but still a whole lot of money to lose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 8:35:55 GMT
Even at that, this particular one still costs its owner as near as dammit £60k over 3 years, or nearly £1,700 p.m. before running costs. I know most will be 'rented' rather than bought, but that's crazy. Or rather, it seems that way to me, at least.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Aug 24, 2017 8:46:22 GMT
Sounds about right, but it's likely there will be a discount which will help a bit and I bet more cost £60-65k than £90k. Can't be that many people who think spending £90k on a mid range Audi is a good idea!
That's the really good thing about PCP finance, everyone goes into the deal knowing exactly how much it will cost (at most).
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 24, 2017 10:16:44 GMT
I doubt that a private buyer would go that mad with the options - even on a PCP - it was more a comment originally on how you could spec up a top of the range car by so much yet add nothing to the performance level, which is surely why you're picking an RS5 rather than, say a 3.0TDI.
I don't think that car even has the (allegedly essential on performance cars nowadays, according to the mags!) carbon-ceramic brakes and clearly they've spent zero on the paint so I wonder just how they've spent so much
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2017 14:23:56 GMT
Watched a vid earlier where they drove an RS6 with every possible option on it. €200,000!
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Sept 11, 2017 10:13:06 GMT
For a guy who doesn't like these vloggers you watch an awful lot of their content.  That RS6 was pretty spectacular though. Went in my bosses the other day, no idea what they're like from the drivers seat but from the passenger side I couldn't imagine them ever running out of grip. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 13:11:14 GMT
Can't be helped, though, can it? Wherever there is a professionally made car video on YouTube there is always a dozen more made by a privileged rich kid lined up in the playlist on the right. I just avoid the Schmee ones because he makes me want to punch myself in the testicles!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2017 9:45:26 GMT
I couldn't help but raise an eyebrow at two of the Loutuses (Loti?) in evo's notoriously 'Money Money Money' classifieds, an Exige Cup 380 starting at just under £92k, and an Evora Sport 410 starting at a sniff over £93k. Is it just me or does that seem daft?
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Sept 20, 2017 12:02:25 GMT
Expensive for sure but a similarly priced GT4 probably wouldn't see which way they went. I think they're both bloody awesome. Lotus seems to be in a good place and can't wait to see what they can come up with in their new models
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2017 13:08:14 GMT
I agree with how wonderful they are - but they're not in the necessary position of strength to charge like that, to my mind at least. Saw an Exige go full circle around a roundabout near me the other day - to say it looked planted would be a masterpiece of understatement.
|
|
|
|
Post by franki68 on Sept 20, 2017 14:54:02 GMT
talking of shmee ,either him or one of his fellow youtubers had an Audi tt rs which was specced up to £105k.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2017 8:58:44 GMT
VW Arteon, 2.0d - £40k without options (at least with R-Line and 4wd, as per this week's Autocar). Even in basic spec it nudges £35k.
Eek.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2017 11:19:50 GMT
If someone buys a £40K+ car, then trades it in quickly for whatever reason and you then buy it lightly used for £34K, do you still get lumbered with the big VED bills, or do they only apply to the first owner?
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Sept 27, 2017 11:25:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Sept 27, 2017 16:14:47 GMT
If someone buys a £40K+ car, then trades it in quickly for whatever reason and you then buy it lightly used for £34K, do you still get lumbered with the big VED bills, or do they only apply to the first owner? You get lumbered, it's time not owner related. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Sept 28, 2017 7:54:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 8:14:53 GMT
The price of the first is chortlesome. I should be able to retire now if only I'd kept my Rover 100...
Cropley says this week that in recent times, half of all cars going through high-priced classic car sales have not been sold, and that he thinks the bubble's bursting - overoptimistic sellers and increasingly cautious buyers. Though of course those who're looking to buy, hoping to turn a profit from what they have bought or looking to sell know differently...
You'd have to remove the pony from the second!
|
|
