Re: 200 vs. M5

[MSV96@aol.com]

In a note dated 6/3/97 Sargent Schutt <sargent@symposiafoundation.org>
writes:

<<My perspective is from Southern California where older (91 down) Audis are
particularly undervalued, and Bimmers are (in my mind) over-valued largely
for the status merits of that silly little propeller on the hood. (propellers
belong on boats, not cars).>>

Excellent points!!! Here in Northern CA. the situation is the same though the
real high ticket "propeller cars" have horrendous resale value too. How a
325ix can still pull over 10k and a 4kq can be had for less than 2k blows my
mind. Same goes for a 91 200q vs. an (early) M3 or M5. Only minor correction
to Sarge's excellent post is the prop is for an airplane. I also firmly
believe that cost of quattro ownership is lower than the propeller
cars...this is spoken from personal experience.

Mike Veglia
85 4ksq (no propeller-that is on the outboard for my sailboat ;)