According to a press release on today's Autowired (www.autowired.com), Mazda are rattling on about how much cheaper to run/better residuals their new RX8 is compared to the STI 8.

"... the range-topping Mazda RX-8 will lose £11,215 over 3-years/60,000 miles, which is significantly less than rivals such as the £26,595 BMW 325i Sport, which will lose £15,325 of its cost new over the same period, the £27,005 Honda S2000 GT, which will lose £12,473 and the £26,000 Subaru Impreza 2.0 WRX STi, which will drop £16,800.

Emmox Carcost says that the 192ps model will cost 34.08p per mile to run over 3-years/60,000 miles taking into account depreciation, service maintenance and repair costs and fuel. That's almost 6p a mile less than the equivalent Subaru Impreza, which over the same period would cost £3,540 more to run."

Makes you think, but only for about 30 secs.... I'll stick to the Scoob, thanks!

 

Looking on the upside..... Its going to be great when i want to buy a three year old STI8

 

Now there's a thought! Especially when the owner's fed up with the cost of running it, and can't wait to get a Mazda RX8....

 

Mazda should stick to making lightbulbs.

Who cares about a few measly quid

 

They would have to build up residuals on the RX8, bearing in mind how horrendous they've been on previous rotary engined cars... Besides, a bit early to tell isn't it?

Cheers

 

Hi Toonman. Apparently is Glass's guide that have estimated the residuals. Hopefully they (and CAP) know what they're doing.....

 

Top Gear Mag has bit about Scoobies in the used car section. It says to avoid WRX's and that my 52 plate is worth 10K!!

So if anyone finds a 52 plate for 10k let me know cause i'll buy the ******!!

 

That cheap? I'll get one for my mum

 

Hi Harry

I'm aware Glass's Guide estimated the figures - it's in the Thread title.

I still say it's too early to say. Besides, as someone who used to see the books on a regular basis (my ex Wife used to buy and sell all the company vehicles for her company), their figures often don't reflect (or didn't), what cars are actually worth, and the deals that can be done out there in the real world. They also don't reflect (or didn't!), local and regional variations.

So what do we end up with here? Yet another Thread with people harping on about how poor Subaru residuals are... Having just recently been looking for a newish WRX Sportswagon for my Wife, I can say they're pretty strong. I was offered a decent amount for my 02 WRX PPP in p/ex for a new 03 saloon too!

Cheers





[Edited by Toonman1 - 8/15/2003 5:50:54 PM]

 

In %age terms the RX8 doesn't look as good (not worked them out yet)

In the example above is misleading & I've no idea where they get these figures from.

For example, the S2000 loses 12743 to give a value of £14,532 on a 3 year old model. Dealers are still buying/trading in S2000's at the best part of £16,000 on 4 year olds so I'd like to know where they get their figures from. I'll wager that they're 'worked out' using some formula rather than looking at what actually happens in the market.

BTW What Car this month has different figures. Bizarre.

[Edited by Dracoro - 8/15/2003 5:57:56 PM]

 

It's called Glass's Guide, with the emphasis on the word,
Guide. It's nothing more. Some Dealers stick to it religiously, and if that's the case, move on, as plenty know the score and are willing to use real world values.

Cheers