One ultra expensive car or a fleet of cheaper ones?

My buddy owns a 1966 Porsche 911 which he purchased before the prices went nutzo on those cars. They seem to be fetching $80-100 K or so nowadays and his is a very good example.

It got my wondering, assuming garage space wasn't an issue - would you rather have that one ultra expensive classic or instead purchase a fleet of less expensive classics for the same money.

For me, I's sell the 911 and stack up on a bunch of less expensive classic Brits - maybe a GT6+, Mini S, and some of the TR's. I figure I could get a half dozen really nice cars for the price of the 911.

What would you rather have - that one exotic or the fleet?

I'd rather have three or four "practical" classics for different occasions than one exotic, even if the exotic had some practical uses. Shop truck/van, sporty sedan and a roadster would do fine.

Although cool and important cars, I think early 911 prices have gone totally bonkers for what the cars are. There are so many cars that perform better for far, far less money. For instance, you can buy 3 or 4 Ferrari 308s, or two Testarossas for what one early 911 is bringing. That's just nuts!

I'd sell while the market is high, and buy a few really nice $20K classics that I could drive the wheels off of.

that's just me YMMV

Three TR8 coupes, soon to be four, three TR8 verts, a BMW 2002 , and an MGB. Sometimes I wish I just had one Pantera or one Noble M400 instead. At least everything I owned would fit in one garage instead of spread all over the place.

If I had the garage space, I would have every cool late 80s and 90s GM product on the planet.

Turbo Sunbird
94 Z24 Cavalier with the 3.1 and 5 Speed
Beretta GTZ
Beretta GTU
Beretta Indy
Beretta Z26
Syclone
Typhoon
Sonoma GT
C1500 454SS
91 or 92 Camaro Z28 convertible
92 Pontiac Firehawk
Trans AM GTA
Grand National
1989 Turbo T/A
McLaren Turbo Grand Prix
Z34 Lumina (5 speed!)
Euro 3.4 Lumina Sedan
1995 Grand Prix GTP
90s Monte Carlo pace car
early 90s Callaway Corvette
Corvette ZR1

Man, thats a host of awesomeness that could be had for less than the price of a new fully optioned Mercedes.

I don't get the old Porsche thing either. Great cars but they're not worth that much. I used to own 356's. Sold my last one in the mid 80's for $6500 which was a going price for a driver at the time. Now the prices are absurd for a car with Kia looks and VW super bug performance. I bought a beater Tiger with original 260 for the money I received from the Porsche. I guess Tiger prices have gone way up as well.

Fill the garage, the more the merrier.....Experience the diversity of all the marques.

The fewer the better, but I prefer driving to maintaining. I don't want a shipload of possessions holding me back from uprooting for greener pastures.

Damn good question... and right now with our fleet of 8 broken cars (plus my crusty 1800ES project) I'd lean towards having one good one. My problem with this idea is my desire for cars to be more specialized for specific uses.

My current fleet would be easier to live with if I had more space to store and work on them. Instead, I have to play an annoying game of musical cars when I want to drive something.

I don't think I would have the desire to own more then three classics at one time, a racecar, a car for the road and a classic truck.

In a perfect world I would want a few inexpensive vehicles.....one tow vehicle, one beater/track rat, one for sunday drives and car shows, a gas-sipping commuter, and maybe even a rally cross car. None of them would be so nice that I would be afraid to drive them.

I guess I have both, with a fleet that is far too large (according to my wife) as well as an expensive super car sort of vehicle.

Beware getting a fleet so large that you only have time to drive a given car every 2-3 years (that's where I'm at - I have 2 normal and 3 collector type cars licensed right now and there's no point trying to run any more as I just don't have time to drive them).

To my mind, every car must have a purpose; the value of a car lies in how well it fits that purpose.

So, I guess I don't see the need for many cars. At this stage of my life, I have the need for two cars: something to drive around the city when I'm not on the subway; a vintage racer for track weekends. I have one car that fullfills each role, and I don't really want any more.

If I only had all the classics I've sold over the years, I'd have several garage fulls. That said, there are only a few I truly miss. As far as a hyper-expensive ride, I want nothing I'm afraid to drive and enjoy.

I love art work & hang it on the walls. I love clocks and have several of them as well. But my cars and bikes have always been my rides. I'm not into static rides or even "trailer queens," regardless of what some might think they are worth.

I agree with a recent commenter. If a ride isn't driven to an event, it shouldn't be allowed to show. And I don't mean "driven" at walking speed with people running along with mats and such to make sure the tires never touch the grass or pavement either.

Hands down... a bunch of cool cheap cars instead of one expensive car.

I am a sucker for a cheap, cool, unique, obscure car. I promise... if you pull up to a club in a Lambo, you will lose to the guy with a highly modified Opel GT. Girls have seen flash before. If they're impressed by doors that go "up", then they'll be suckered by a Civic with a "lambo" door kit. Put them in a well-sorted, unique, classic car they they've never seen, and you'll have to have one of these:

I have one 79 Fiat and drive it a lot. It would not preclude an expensive showcar but this is not a fleet. I also have a 93 Miata that my wife likes to zip around town in. My buddy had a fleet of 15 cars in various stages of restoration. As they aged from inexpensive into collectibility, he would work on them and win a prize and then sell it for break even dollars. It was his hobby. Time and space were his constant issues. You might get 10 to 20 percent value increase in one decent $100k collectible or fleet of 10 70's sports cars. One takes a lot less work/time and space. Cheers Ron

More>1

Must be a phase in my life because chasing 2 classics is getting a little out of hand.

Still I enjoy both cars.

I have a garage full, barn full, carport full, and several sitting outside now, so count me in the more the merrier category. However, I've got to admit my life would be MUCH simpler if I sold them all and stuck with a couple of highend bikes and cars. Currently, just keeping up with repairs, while keeping projects on track, is pretty much impossible.....and forget trying to stay on top of all shceduled maintenance.

I don't think it as simple as lets just go get a bunch of cars instead of one. Don't get me wrong I see your point, I however am not sure. I really really like 911's. If I had one I would be hard pressed to sell it.

We also need to separate cars between investment grade ones (like the OP's friends car) and run of the mill hobbyist cars (like what I would own). If the OP was to sell that car and go get more investment grade cars that would probably mean only 1 or may be 2 cars. I on the other hand would take that 80K and be looking in the 5-10K price range. Look for good deals and not a specific want of mine. Get 4-5 of them to spread out my risk of investment and take the remainder and put it away to fund the restoration, repair and maintenance and cover losses on my investments because after all I would fully expect not to make money on all my cars.

I tend to be a person that will turn cars after a relatively short period of time. I usually know when I am purchasing a car if it is a keeper or if it is something I am going to sell again in a short period of time. When I got the 924s I fully expected to have it for ever. (I am going on 20 years with it) On the other hand I have had so many "project" cars in between I have lost count.

So to sum up all the rambling of mine. The answer to the OP's original question is not a simple one. It really depends on what the 911 owner is thinking of doing with the money they get from ti and do they want toys or are they going to continue to invest in cars and try and make money at it..

Having driven early 911'I like them..., but would never part with that kind of money for one.

To the original question.I'd rather have a couple of cheaper cars. My record is 8 at one time....all Italian....4 Fiats and 4 Alfa Romeos. That's a bit much. The '61 600D was the most reliable by the way.

a Pantera would also be my choice for a single expensive car as well.

I would rather have a fleet of cheaper cars than one expensive cars. That way I could have my bucket list cars. Majority of the cars on my bucket list aren't the real expensive, ultra-rare one. Guess I just have simple tastes. Although maintaining a fleet would be close to having one expensive car. Then the decision would be which one to drive. Oh but to only have that choice.

I can't have more cars than I can drive consistently, nor can I have cars that are too valuable for me to drive consistently. If I wanted to collect motorized objects of art, I'd be buying vintage race motorcycles and putting them in my living room. That's actually something I want to do.

Great thread. Of course the answer would be both. As a guy who has taken the car thing perhaps a bit too far, I do have some, hopefully valuable, input.

I think collection management is the key. Depending on your time, talent, dedication, storage space and money, what is a reasonable number of cars to own is variable. Obviously your wife and/or family's patience can be a major factor too.

If I had 10 cars (and I have more than that), I would want to have 7-8 running and driving and the other 2-3 would be projects in waiting. If you have 10 cars and none run, you are not managing your collection correctly and have too many cars.

I think collecting what you like (and obviously like is important) I like mostly cheap cars and except for an occasional exception, like the Shelby, stick with them. A lot of common cars are common because they were good and a lot of people wanted to buy them.

You know, I think I will steal this idea for my next column and finish my thoughts up there. Thanks guys.

I want to chime in with Tim here as well. I have done it both ways. At one point my only car was a Ferrari Daytona Coupe. It was a car that I had always wanted until I owned it. I sold it a number of years ago and bought a lot(10) of cheaper cars.

There are two basic problems with more cars. The first is more expenses and more upkeep. The second is that it is difficult to actually find time to drive them. Since I am first and foremost an end user, this is a drag.

I think in an ideal world that the key is to have a car for every occasion. My list would probably be a Aston of some kind, a 911 of some kind, a roadster of some kind and a Bentley, Rolls Royce or series 1 XJ6. That way I would have a touring car, a 911, a roadster and a 4 door British classic. That would be a manageable set of cars that fit each category.

I will say though if I could get my hands on a nice DB5 that I think I would be satisfied with a single car. I think if a single car is that car that you have always dreamed of owning and it is a good car, then one car can work.