Hi guys

I have been a long time fan of the AMG GTS and now that there is an AMG GTC I was thinking about ordering one.

Assuming a base price of 160, I think reasonably optioned AMG GTC will run me around 180.

I found a few 2016 ferrari california t cars for around 185. Initial MSRP 250s.

I have never bought a used car and I don't know the right answer here and would love to hear peoples thoughts. If someone owns a california T I'd like to hear your thoughts too.

Thinking about it though, I figure since all cars depreciate would I be able to get ahead of the depreciation curve by purchasing the ferrari?

Any thoughts, comparisons, and insight would be much appreciated.

Many Thanks.

Careful with Ferrari's rolling back the odometers

The Californias do depreciate faster than any Ferarri. if you want to get into a non depreciating Ferarri you would have to buy a higher up Ferarri. If you're going to buy a used California, buy from a ferarri dealer. Then after you have established that relationship, get on the list to buy a brand new 488 for 250ish. Now you are in the game. As long as you don't drive it too much, you can sell it and get most of your money back.

just want to add: the special edition Ferraris are the best buy (least depreciation). Even a 488 can depreciate. unfortunately you have to go to a Ferrari dealer and buy used Ferrari or new California > then order new 488 or similar > then order a special edition / limited car. it may take 2-3 purchases to truly get into something that will keep going up in value.

however, Ferrari doesn't like dealers to mark cars up over msrp. so once you have established some purchase history and you are on the list, at least you wont have to overpay to get it.

I'd buy a used GTs, put 11k into better turbos and beat the crap out of it. You'll have 50k left over for a "beater" Cayenne to run errands with.

I dont have enough experience with the Cali T to give a real perspective but Ill say that it is a strong improvement over the previous generation in performance and arguable in looks and its still Ferrari in nature but not so much vs the likes of the other models. It does have terrible depreciation so grabbing a used one is your best bet; but its not the worst depreciation F car, that would be the first generation FF.

F cars are event cars so they are more "look at me" vs functional in nature and also carry 3 year warranties so after that expires costs are very high on repairs not to mention servicing. I would find the GTC to be more reliable with a longer term warranty and just a car you can drive and put more miles on vs the Cali T. Its a more usable car so it really all depends on your intent and your appetite for monies spent. Friends that have owned the Cali's have sworn by them up front (gen 1 and gen 2) but then it grew a little long in the tooth for them and they moved on rather quickly. But it was never their first or even 2nd car but more along the lines of 4th and beyond in the lineup. My 2014 458 was my 5th car in the lineup and I just didnt use it all too much but I think I would use the Cali T more often.

I have owned 4 Ferrari's and just about everything that can be said about Ferrari's and ownership have already been said. www.ferrarichat.com I personally don't like the look of the California T, I feel it is too much of a "chick" car and frankly is based on an old platform and will be replaced in the next 2 years. For my money, I'd buy a GTC or lease it and drive the crap out of.

Good luck,

MB

I have a family member that has a '16 California T that I've driven on several occasions. And I have seat time in a GTS at an ADA track event at COTA last year.

To compare each, the Ferrari definitely feels more spacious inside. Part of it might be the lower window sills that bring in more light, but it doesn't feel as closed in as the GT does. Removing the top with the GTC might help that out, I don't know.

As for performance, the power/acceleration numbers don't lie, but both cars bring on the power in different ways. The GT does have a beefier mid-range (especially the lower portion), but the California T has significantly more mid-range that what most would be used to with previous non-turbo Ferrari engines. The California T does seem to pull harder toward redline than the GTS did. Can't go wrong with either.

For handling, the California T for whatever reason feels lighter on it's feet and has more steering feedback that what I remember the GTS having. My only complaint with the California T is that it feels a bit too light at slow speed around town than I'd personally like it to feel. I wouldn't fault either car though, just slightly different feel.

One place that I do think the California T is above the GTS is the brakes. When run in anger, the California T brakes feels quite a bit better to me and seem much easier to modulate than what the GTS I drove felt like. Granted the GTS was an ADA car, so who knows how much abuse it had seen.