When you have a car with 346hp stock there is no need for more. I have no place to use it. When you have a car as beautiful as the crossfire, in particular the RED roadster. I can't stop personalizing it. All reversible unlike racing and engine mods. which damage the car. gary

 

Hi All

The Xfire makes me think back to the 60's & the Sunbeam Tiger , That was a Sunbeam Alpine with a ford v8 shoe-horned in , So thats a Sunbeam with Ford running gear , it looked better than the same type of cars around at that time sounds great but will never sell for as much as a E-type ,Damiler Dart or an MG & that the draw back a two company car . The Xfire is a keeper but not a investment .


Cheers

Andy

 

I think the Chrysler 300 might rival it. Check out their forum for proof! Yeow! Just sayin'

 

I never said I expect it to sell for 150K one day at an auction. I simply wanted to know if it would become a collectible. See one driving down the street and someone says "wow... look at that". I think it already looks different and unique. I am hoping 30 years from now it may still look different and unique.

I don't own it as an investment. I own it to drive once in a while. I take good care of it and hope to have it 30 years from now.... so I can enjoy it now and in the future.

For someone to say it will never fetch high dollar... I think you are wrong to make that assumption. That is the same attitude that will cause it to fetch high dollar. I think it will hold its value and raise with inflation (as new cars become more expensive to purchase). There are tons of old sports cars and trucks that kids today will pay what I consider a high price for old beat up vehicles. I think at the very least the Crossfire will fall into that category.

Using the analogy of "if it didn't sell well the first time, it won't the second time around" is pure BS. That has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of 25+ year old sports cars that sold like hot cakes and are not selling at auction for extreme prices. Look at the Trans Ams of the 80's. Tons on the streets and everyone had them. Very popular when they first came out and you couldn't find one because everytime one appeared on a lot it was sold (thanks to Knight Rider). They are not selling for high dollar today but you may get 6K for a good one in mint condition.

 

Please, do yourself a favor and do not put dates on this because after reading previous posts, from early 2008, that said you would have a turbo XF within months.

You say you have all the money you could want, hell, you could buy 10 XFs, so why do you not step up to the plate? You have been talking about it for years.

I am not trying to be personal, but as I have stated before after hearing 12 months of "the XF sucks, it has no aftermarket support, I am going to buy a porsche, an M5, a vette, etc." Now you are back on board with the XF but saying no one is stepping to the plate.

Please, before you post anything else about your intentions with the XF, actually accomplish something.

 

High sales is not the ONLY factor---never said it was. Not all high sales cars are collectible, or the Ford Taurus or Toyota Camry would be king. I should have said "high demand" at the time---demand that even out strip sales---waiting list. Our cars did not have demand---you can still get a "new" 2008---forget high demand. Then like Vegaslegal said the got to have factor---what I call the wow factor---if you have a better term, I'll use it.

But lets take the 80's T/As. Detuned to 160hp or so, very litttle race record---avg car---and the ONLY wow factor is your Night Rider example. Now go back a little over ten years to a 1970 455 Super Duty T/A, or the T/As the actually raced Trans Am and you have something---AAR Cudas and 302 Bosses. Cars that do not have that high demand rarely take off the second time. The examples of the Superbird and AMX show that just that part does not hold true by itself, but their race history and LOW LOW production make them bring the money today---again the wow factor---won races/ set records---Huge motors for the day----something special!!! Now the car that was "IN" Night Rider should bring more than 6k---something special.

My point is that our car is in the middle. Production at 76k or so is low but not rare. Performance is average for the day---not the muscle of the day (except the SRT). Good looks, but not designed by Betone or one of the other houses---Shelby did not touch it---was not raced to several victories. Demand was low but 76k worth of cars---not 2k or 5k. The fact that Vegaslegal made that the trend of older people bought them first and now the younger crowd is coming in is backwards to all the muscle car examples that have been given. For the most part the younger crowd bought muscle---and MANY more wanted them, and today they are older and have the money to get them and PAY to fix them up. Exotics were bought by the older/ richer crowd, but the 16 years old did not move in---there has been two in the last month or so just on here. Everything just stated, I believe is true, and it does not sound like money in the bank to me.


It boils down to your definition of collectible. I agree with above about keeping up with inflation or close if we stay down here---probably, more like dead money. I was basing my points on MAKING MONEY over the inflation rate. And with show car looks there will always be a buyer for a running car. There is somebody collecting---EVERYTHING. So yes, I see clubs in 30 years---for sure. NOT all will go to the crusher!!! The definition that I had in my head was "HIGHLY" collectible to the point that someone would spend big money on a purchase, and big money on a restoration, and with all the electronics these days, it will make all of today's car harder to restore---and more costly---if not cost prohibitive. And ones that had low demand or lack a race history or that did not change the automotive world will just be even lower on the list, if it makes the list at all.

I think they are drivers---best bang for the buck on the road, but not a money making investment like a Hemi Cuda, etc from back in the day. More like the Sunbeam Tiger from "Get Smart"---great for its time, but not the best car to put away---that was the only point I was making.

 

The 390 AMX H.P. rating was nearly identical to that of an NA Crossfire.
It's 1/4 mile times listed in Magazine Roadtests of that era coinside exactly with those of a NA Crossfire.
As for "WOW" factor, most people at the time couldn't tell the difference between an AMX and a Javelin, and many still don't know there was any difference today. Even though it was a two seater, that was smaller, and lighter than a Vette.
If WOW factor=Shock value, then along with the Superbird, I should have mentioned the 1969 red/white & blue Rambler SCrambler. Another car hardly anyone wanted to be seen in, (and even harder to sell) with the identical 390 engine of the AMX. It brings $50k at the auctions now. Even the 1970 red, white, and blue Rebel Machine is considered a collectable today. Nobody wanted them either back then.
Sorry you don't get my sense of humor James.

Anger Management Directory of Tennessee

 

Your points are well taken, but you still feel the need to make a personal jab---wow! I have shown zero anger---I am not mad at all. Your sense of humor is based on cutting people and putting them down. I have never found that to be funny---if it was directed at me or toward others. The only thing that I have done to you is disagree---that is it.

But to your point, The 390 motors were muscle for their day---well from AMC. The average V6 sedan today can out do a zero to 60 and quarter mile compared to 40 year old cars---even muscle---NOT all but most. The N/A are great cars---I have owned them since 05, but high 6's low 7's to 60 is not that special compared to the cars of today---great compared to cars of the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's....etc, but not today.

So hard to impossible to compare performance out of the same time period!!! If you are going to take the TOP from the 60's and 70's---you need to take top performers from today. That's my point and only way to truly compare---the Crossfire can not be compared to a car that won on the NASCAR tracks driven by Petty. 510's driven by the Brock team are worth money---avg 510's? Find an avg performer with good looks that had low demand, but 76k made. That's what we have---not the muscle of the day! I am not "trying" to turn things around. You said that you sell cars---dad in the business forever; I have seen very very few cars that even hold their value. Just trying to understand if I may be missing something.

The other cars that you listed have road the "muscle tide" up and with their big motors---for the day. You have heard that saying---a rising tide lifts ALL boats. The fact that muscle got hot sent ALL "muscle" cars higher---the great main stream like the LS6 Chevelles, to your examples---even the ones that did not sell the first time. My point is ALL muscle era cars went up. The era from 2004 to 2008 will lift the Crossfire? The Crossfire does not have an oversize motor shoved in it and a time period to hold on to other winners that will pull Rebels up with 429 'stangs---it just does not.

You stated that the AMX was tearing up drag strips--- High performance---for the day. If they were avg for the day in performance, they did not do as well. What is a 6 cyl Ramber worth? Way less than the same car with a matching 390. That's why I said the SRT 6 has a chance. The 80's T/As---avg performance for the day---if that, so low value. 1969/ 70 455 SD---high performance, higher value. N/A Crossfires---avg performance for the day. SRTs---higher up the food chain.

I stated above, but I will restate for you what I think our problem is:

My point is that our car is in the middle. Production at 76k or so is low but not rare. Performance is average for the day---not the muscle of the day (except the SRT). Good looks, but not designed by Bertone or one of the other houses---Shelby did not touch it---was not raced to several victories. Demand was low but 76k worth of cars---not 2k or 5k. The fact that Vegaslegal made that the trend of older people bought them first and now the younger crowd is coming in is backwards to all the muscle car examples that have been given. For the most part the younger crowd bought muscle---and MANY more wanted them, and today they are older and have the money to get them and PAY to fix them up. Exotics were bought by the older/ richer crowd, but the 16 years old did not move in---there has been two in the last month or so just on here. Everything just stated, I believe is true, and it does not sound like money in the bank to me.

It boils down to your definition of collectible. I agree with above about keeping up with inflation or close if we stay down here--probably, more like dead money. I was basing my points on MAKING MONEY over the inflation rate. And with show car looks there will always be a buyer for a running car. There is somebody collecting---EVERYTHING. So yes, I see clubs in 30 years---for sure. NOT all will go to the crusher!!! The definition that I had in my head was "HIGHLY" collectible to the point that someone would spend big money on a purchase, and big money on a restoration, and with all the electronics these days, it will make all of today's car harder to restore---and more costly---if not cost prohibitive. And ones that had low demand or lack a race history or that did not change the automotive world will just be even lower on the list, if it makes the list at all.

I think they are drivers---best bang for the buck on the road, but not a money making investment like a Hemi Cuda, etc from back in the day. More like the Sunbeam Tiger from "Get Smart"---great for its time, but not the best car to put away---that was the only point I was making.

 

Any conjecture as to what affect that OEM right-hand steering configuration might have upon future values?

 

If rare over there---maybe some real money. How many came with right-hand? Do you have a number? A Cloud III here in states with right-hand drive is less than half the left-hand drive. My partner has a 1965 Cloud III drophead coupe---SC427(?)---one of 24 or so left-hands that were dropheads---good money!!!!!

 

To my knowledge, there are seventy-seven countries (mostly former British ruled, from Anguilla to Zimbabwe) that drive on the left side of the road. As to how many Crossfires are right-handed is a good question, and worthy of study.

But I doubt if there are too many of them in either hand in the South African Republic of Bophuthatswana.

 

Yes---if it's just a couple of thousand---even a few thousand, then with that would change things---how was the reception across the pond? It was "cold" here to say the least. Still trying to sell 76k cars 3 years after production stopped---WOW!!!!

Now I love them; I sell cars on the side and have bought 6 and sold 5; keeping my SRT for at least the next 5 years---I bought a five year warranty. I think they are great, but I never sold one "fast"---a lot of "lookers" most were over 100 days before a sale, where as, I could sell a Camry priced right in under 45 or so---twice as fast. But really did not care because I was driving it!!!

 

2 seaters just never sell fast.... I don't care what kind of car it is. You can't compare a Camry that is practical family car to a non practical car like a Crossfire, Corvette, 350Z....etc.

I was looking at 350Z's a while back. Everybody told me "I would rather get the g35 because it has a back seat". Even when I bought my Camaro people used to say they preferred the SS because it had the back seat and power but the Corvette was only a 2 seater.

2 seaters are simply slow movers off the lot.

 

Good point, but the Vette is a little different---They sell okay for me, under 60 days and descent money---longer but not by much. The others---you are dead on---60+ at times. I was thinking about speed and mixed apples with oranges---actually more like corn!!!

 

Now that I am thinking more about it.... you are right. Vettes are a different story. I have a family member that has sold chevy cars for decades. I remember him telling me about 8 years ago how the vettes sold real well. For whatever reason at the time he was selling a lot of them. I know that because he was bragging.....

 

I don't know either, maybe American icon?---the bad thing, well for me is that they sell well at the auction too. Hard to find a clean one that has NOT been wrecked at a good price---you make your money on the "buy" not the "sell."

 

here's the deal on what I think will make this car a collectible. It's basically a great car, 2 seaters never sell really well to the masses early on because they're 2 seaters, but as folks approach middle age then the kids are gone and you know the rest. But what keeps me thinking this will be a collectible is look at how young kids, teens look at the car now. I don't know how many of them have said sweet ride and the head turning routine. Now those kids will grow up too, and guess what they'll be thinking of when they see this car show up when they're 45. Yep. I still have nostalgia for that first 65 TBird I saw, and my head turns every time I see one. By the time they're 45, you'll sell that 14K XF you've owned and kept up for about 30-40K. You'll have made some money on it and have driven it for yourself all those years. That's my bet!

 

OK.... How many of you are always saying how someone has noticed your car and never knew it existed until they saw yours? Does this reveal anything about the poor marketing of Chrysler on the car? I have to say I never saw a commercial for it. People are always commenting on them. Been out for 8 years now, and people still say "I never knew they made 'em". I agree that as paeople learn about them, they become more desireable. But even I doubt they will ever be worth a whole lot. Kinda like my first car, a FIAT spyder 850. Didn't pay much for the car when it was 15 years old, but I got twice as much for it when it was 35 years old.

-Dave

 

I have to say... saw a Porsche this morning. The curves of the rear of that car looked very similar to ours. I am not saying it was identical.... but it was similar.

The way I figure it.... 20 years from now if given a choice between German sports cars, why would I want to drive a Porsche or even an SLK when there are tons on the road. I would rather drive a Crossfire because they are less common and they will attract more attention. Everybody knows a Porsche, Audi and Mercedes when they see one. I would rather get the kind of attention when people say "what kind of car is that".... rather than a "look at that old porsche". Nobody wants a tour of the interior and engine of an old Porsche. They already know what it is. Everybody seems to want a tour of the Crossfire.

 

One difference between the Crossfire and the Fiero was the perception at the time. I bought one new and loved the car. If you remember back to '84-'88, the uniform scuttlebutt was that this was the best and only future collectable for that time frame. If you could look at an R&T, Motor Trend, etc of 1989, my recollection is that they all advised to get a low mileage Fiero V-6 and stick it in a garage and see what happens in 20 years. Twenty years was four years ago, and adjusting for inflation, everyone that followed this advise lost money. That's on a car "destined" for future collectability. That's not the Crossfire.