Record price for 124 Spider in US?

[CoupeFan]

I looked for a duplicate of this post, but found none, but excuse the repeat if I missed it. Get this: Looking at my latest issue of Classic Motorsports, a 1969 Spider was recently auctioned during a Bonhams event in Scottsdale, AZ for the sum of

$48,300

The details are on page 111 of the May 2013 edition.

[baltobernie]

http://www.fiatspider.com/f08/viewtopic ... 9&p=171173

Did you happen to notice another Spider on p.68?

[ga.spyder]

At Barrett-Jackson on Friday ,a beautiful Fiat Dino Spider went for 24000!!! It was the announcers choice for the ''best bought'' car of the day.What a fantastic deal for the lucky buyer.
http://www.barrett-jackson.com/applicat ... =85&aid=52

[SeldomSeen]

This is an example of the best cars getting more attention. Hagerty's valuation list shows that condition one and two spiders have increased in value over the last few months while threes and fours have actually decreased. I am now encouraged to put a nicer paint job, new highest quality top and refreshed chrome on my '69 spider. It never ceases to amaze me that 124 spiders have been traditionally so undervalued. The only thing I can see is that the car was underpowered initially. Had Fiat installed a dual Weber, two-liter engine in the earliest U.S. models the car would have gotten far more respect then and now. First impressions are the strongest. The sticker price would have been higher but sales volume would not have suffered. A more powerful 124 spider would simply have cut deeper into the Alfa spider, TR6, MGB and later even the 240Z markets.

[baltobernie]

When Road & Track compared the 1438cc Spider against the MGB, TR6, and 914, it found the Spider only fractionally slower than the 2.5L Triumph, and quicker than the MG and Porsche. The 1608 engine, introduced later, was more than a match for its competitors. (the Spider was judged best overall in this comparison, BTW)

No, I think the reason for the low resale, both then and now, can be attributed solely to the dealer network in place at the time. Unwanted, unloved and unsupported by the Oldsmobile dealers (where I bought mine) and other castoffs. I think you'd find that in US cities where Fiats were sold by enthusiastic imported car dealers, the brand sold well, both in the new and used marketplace. The perception of a brand's Quality, Mistique, etc. is a fragile thing, and B.I. (before Internet), the dealer played a huge part in creating or ruining a brand reputation.

Fast-forward to the 21st century, and you can see why I'm skeptical of Fiat's US return.

[SeldomSeen]

When Road & Track compared the 1438cc Spider against the MGB, TR6, and 914, it found the Spider only fractionally slower than the 2.5L Triumph, and quicker than the MG and Porsche. The 1608 engine, introduced later, was more than a match for its competitors. (the Spider was judged best overall in this comparison, BTW)

No, I think the reason for the low resale, both then and now, can be attributed solely to the dealer network in place at the time. Unwanted, unloved and unsupported by the Oldsmobile dealers (where I bought mine) and other castoffs. I think you'd find that in US cities where Fiats were sold by enthusiastic imported car dealers, the brand sold well, both in the new and used marketplace. The perception of a brand's Quality, Mistique, etc. is a fragile thing, and B.I. (before Internet), the dealer played a huge part in creating or ruining a brand reputation.

Fast-forward to the 21st century, and you can see why I'm skeptical of Fiat's US return.

That may only explain why 124 spiders were not highly valued initially and for the first few years. Lack of adequate service was not the cars' fault. Now we know through the test of time and the relevant comparisions that you made, that the 124 spider was in fact a superior product. Following your argument to it's logical conclusion, the 124 spider would currently be more highly valued than the MGB, Triumph and Porsche 914. Since this is not the case there must be some other reason(s) for the lack of respect. I still like my theory. Both arguments are somewhat correct but the answer is more likely a combination of several factors.

[RedWolf]

When Road & Track compared the 1438cc Spider against the MGB, TR6, and 914, it found the Spider only fractionally slower than the 2.5L Triumph, and quicker than the MG and Porsche. The 1608 engine, introduced later, was more than a match for its competitors. (the Spider was judged best overall in this comparison, BTW)

No, I think the reason for the low resale, both then and now, can be attributed solely to the dealer network in place at the time. Unwanted, unloved and unsupported by the Oldsmobile dealers (where I bought mine) and other castoffs. I think you'd find that in US cities where Fiats were sold by enthusiastic imported car dealers, the brand sold well, both in the new and used marketplace. The perception of a brand's Quality, Mistique, etc. is a fragile thing, and B.I. (before Internet), the dealer played a huge part in creating or ruining a brand reputation.

Fast-forward to the 21st century, and you can see why I'm skeptical of Fiat's US return.

That may only explain why 124 spiders were not highly valued initially and for the first few years. Lack of adequate service was not the cars' fault. Now we know through the test of time and the relevant comparisions that you made, that the 124 spider was in fact a superior product. Following your argument to it's logical conclusion, the 124 spider would currently be more highly valued than the MGB, Triumph and Porsche 914. Since this is not the case there must be some other reason(s) for the lack of respect. I still like my theory.

I've always thought 124s were undervalued compared to their British cousins. In 1976 - R&T did a comparison between these cars - Spider, X 1/9, MGB, MG Midget, Triumph Spitfire, and TR7. The X 1/9 scored the highest at 1371 pts, TR7 next at 1247, and our beloved Spider next at 1214. After that there was a huge drop off to the MGB at 940. The only relatively "old" car at the time to compete with the much newer X 1/9 and TR7 was the Spider - the British cars were not aging well at all. This only confirmed what was obvious to me after driving several of these cars before deciding on the Spider.

From a "reliability" stand point - I don't think the Fiat or the British cars are held in very high esteem; we have to put up with the Fix it Again Tony saying; they have "Lucas Prince of Darkness" or one of my faves, "the parts falling off this car are of the highest British manufacture".

For whatever reason - the British cars, especially MGs seem to be more well known and I'm often asked if my car is an MG. A while back, on my alma mater's general discussion board - an individual was asking for experience with old convertibles and mentioned looking at MGs, Triumphs, and if I remember correctly, Alfas to purchase. I made the case for Fiat Spiders as he wasn't aware of them - I'd like to think I did my part to sell someone's Spider

[baltobernie]

Following your argument to it's logical conclusion, the 124 spider would currently be more highly valued than the MGB, Triumph and Porsche 914. Since this is not the case there must be some other reason(s) for the lack of respect. I still like my theory. Both arguments are somewhat correct but the answer is more likely a combination of several factors.

It's tough to overcome a bad reputation, and maybe what we're seeing now is a younger generation of enthusiasts who lack the "Tony" prejudice, and are seeing a beautiful, civilized (R&T's word) roadster.