Is it true that Ferrari Daytonas used to be worth a lot more then they are?

In the late '80s, a real Daytona Spyder could easily fetch seven figures. But back then, the Testarossa was brand new and some people were paying a quarter mil after market. Prices fluctuate. Ten years ago, no one thought the Lusso was an investment. But anyone who bought in 2002 could've made quite a profit selling it a few years ago. Daytonas will probably go back up; and then they might go down again.

 

in 1989/90 my daytona was listed in the fml for $495K. i bought it in 2004 for a lot less. it has since appreciated, but not to those levels. other more rare ferraris have surpassed even the 1989 levels.
ed

 

In nominal dollars, of course, not taking into account inflation.

 

ok, but i will still take $495k of todays less valuable dollars......

 

It works out great if you buy low and sell high.

 

Once upon a time in the 50's people of means bought a Ferrari. Some people owned more than one Ferrari and were quite happy with two their cars. There was a problem however when they broke down. Few people knew how to fix them; properly at least. The race cars especially were simply cast aside as they had outlived their usefulness. In the 60's and even more so in the 70's Ferrari automobiles became much more common. Ferrari even went 'down market' with the little Dino. The number of Ferrari automobile continued to grow. Through all this time the economy went from boom to bust many times. The oil embargo had it's own role to play as well in Ferrari prices. Clubs and private sport events gave owner a place to play with their Ferrari automobiles. The old race cars became 'useful' again and prices soared.
How useful the automobile is plays a key role in the current and potential value. Some cars became too valuable to just flog around a race track. Again the 'usefulness' factor appears. Then they became 'lawn ornaments' to be judged against other examples for how original they are. Certainly the lawn was more safe than the race track but potentially no less expensive. The cost to restore a Ferrari became extreme. For the lesser models the restoration cost was greater than the value of the model. This also represents the problem with the Daytona that you mention that is now more than 30 years old. By now most of these Daytona models need restoration work and when that is done the history of the model is sometimes altered with a different paint color or interior color from what the factory did. For a time it was popular to cut the roof off to make a rare spider version when the original factory version were too expensive for what they represented. Cutting off the roof and different colors from original were all things the marketplace dislikes based on the low price return for all that restoration expense. If you buy a Daytona or any old Ferrari you have to decide how it will be used. If it's a show car then everything has to be perfect. If it's a 'driver' then the cosmetics may suffer a bit but the mechanical side better be 'right' or else...
Each car stands on the merits of it's current condition but some with broad appeal are seldom lacking for buyers. The Daytona spider is a good example with the small number built. The Daytona coupe by comparison suffered from the large number of cars built (available) and that led to the fall in prices along with the high cost of restoring the body and motor properly as the car aged. Also later improved models like the GTO and F40 became the goal of some owners who found the Daytona lacking by comparison.
While money has been made on old cars there are a great many 'traps' just waiting to suck in the unwary.
CH

 

While you make some valid points overall, you may want to do your model-specific homework again....

Tritone

 

Expand on how the Daytona, a car designed in the 60's might be superior to one designed in the 80's please?
The challenge of finding a good one that hasn't been crashed? I know of one example that got rear ended and re-appeared in another country with a different color exterior and interior but it was still the same hit car. The more natural steering feel from no power steering? A/C that is about as efficient as 4 mice blowing on an ice cube? Scarce replacement parts? A body designed to rust? Brakes that don't like a race track? XWX tires? That little charmer the Dino-plex? The knowledge to fix it yourself when something breaks or finding someone who does know what they are doing when they work on it?
Credit for a V-12 (with real carbs and not FI) in front of you and a nice appearance built on a more useful size chassis than say a Testarossa but little else of practical merit compared to a more modern Ferrari. Almost forgot one more item that will stop you dead in your tracks at the most inappropriate moment ... the 40 year old electrical system.
CH

 

I remember 6 years ago, back in 2004, when 365 GTB/4 Daytona coupes were selling for $150k or so.
I didn't know it at the time, but what a deal they were!

Maybe I'll feel the same way 6 years from now when they have gone much higher in price.
Something like "Remember back in 2010 when nice Daytonas were only $325k!".

Here is an interesting article from May 2004 by Michael Sheehan on how the American Muscle Car prices had gone past the Daytona prices at the time:
http://www.ferraris-online.com/pages/article.php?reqart=SCM_200405_SS

The bottom line is, IMHO, you need to know what you want and why you want it and then, buy it when you see it.

.

 

In 1972 a 365 GTC/4 sold alongside a Daytona, cost about $3,000 more. The C/4 listed @ $27,500, the Daytona about $24,000, both a LOT of $$ when you consider it cost about $4,500 for a Mustang...........my how times change. The Daytona is now $300K, the C/4 $100k, and there were almost 3 times as many Daytonas made as C/4's. I'll keep the rarer C/4.

 

Sam......

And in my city back in 1972, a new 3 bedroom 1,200' house with a garage, was $12,000........aaahhhh perspective.

 

This Design, is the ultimate gentlemans GT. That is its specification. Objective met.


I mean what car could make you feel more like an Italian Count!

How does an 80's car do that better........Maybe a Boxer..........

But, no nothing like that big v12, barely fits under the giant hood, balanced by the transaxle. Room inside, like a modern italian living room.

That sweet song

 

The F40 was built in roughly the same numbers as the Daytona, but I don't think there are too many owners who would look to trade directly between the cars as they are completely different. If any older model has suffered value wise because of the F40 it is the Boxer, both offering the Sunday blast of a supercar while the Daytona is more a Super Grand Tourer.

 

Any modern Ferrari is technically far superior to the Daytona. But technical stats, or even lap times, are not what vintage cars are all about.

 

Back in the early 80's, I found a Daytona and a MB Gullwing in the same Houston dealer's showroom for $50K each. I was a starving college student at the time and couldn't afford either of them.

 

You're right about the difficulty of finding older cars that haven't been crashed or, worse, badly restored. I think that situation enhances the value of really good classic cars, and makes restoration worthwhile (and often necessary to know what you've really bought).

The Daytona is superior in style, presence, historical significance and sound. It certainly won't outperform a modern 599, Corvette, 997 Turbo, etc.

But almost any Ferrari from the '60s is going to be more sought after than any Ferrari from the '80s, '90s and newer. You just can't buy coach-built, handmade, smog-free cars anymore. I would also say the Daytona (and 246) was the last gasp of the really beautiful supercar interiors. The whole thing drips class (and maybe oil) the way the new stuff just can't.

There's no way I would consider plunking down $200K on a 599 GTB, which is a bunch of plastic and computers destined for the recycle heap. For a Daytona, I think you can spend your $300K comfortably -- it's a forever kind of a car, and should hold value well over the long term.

 

Well said,

 

To each his own- strictly on the interior, I would take my 612 over any Daytona. I think the 365 California had the most beautiful vintage interior, but the new interiors are awfully nice. The Daytona, IMO, is just average on interior.

The exterior is another matter...

 

The Daytona (and 246) instrument binnacle is a masterpiece, and the so called Daytona seat sets the style of many modern Ferrari seats, the rest of the interior is a little variable

 

I saw outright price manipulation at Barrett Jackson Scottsdale in the 80's. I went 4 years in a row. This red Daytona with something 500 miles would come off a trailer every year. The same two guys would buy it from each other. I think the last year was something like 500K one bought it from the other. Then, each year, it went back in the same trailer just to be brought out the next year.

There was a lot of shilling and funny business going on then in the collector market. I don't view that period as a true reflection of the market.

 

Maybe so but there's no denying that the best details of the modern interiors are the bits that pay "homage" to the Daytona and other, older Ferraris.

 

When you look at the Airco controls, it would seem that it was thought of when the car was
between the factory and the boat...Regards, Alberto

 

Perhaps Luigi Chinetti knew of this. He ordered a Ferrari Daytona spider for the New York auto show without air conditioning. The spider did have one unusual feature; a wood steering wheel seldom seen on USA market Daytona models.
CH

 

The Daytona is a Ferrari.