For These 6 Classics, a Little Better Costs a Lot More
When shopping for a car that is anything older than brand new, condition is important. We’re not just talking about shiny paint and un-scratched wheels, either. There are mechanical considerations. That cheap convertible from Facebook Marketplace isn’t going to be quite so cheap if it needs a new clutch and a head gasket in a few months.
That’s why, when it comes to classic and collector cars, we differentiate between several condition grades when we put together the Hagerty Price Guide, and when we review and rate cars at auction. Obviously, a car in really great condition is worth more than one that is just OK. But while the gap between #3 (good) and #2 (excellent) values is sizable for all collector cars, it’s a gaping chasm for some.
The valuation gap between “good” and “excellent” in these six classics is bigger than for any other vehicles we price. The cars themselves don’t have much in common, but they’re all relatively widespread and affordable vehicles that are easy to find with high miles and flaws, and rarely were babied in somebody’s garage.
1978–85 Mercedes-Benz 300D
Condition #2 value: $40,700
Condition #3 value: $11,700
Difference: 248%
Mercedes-Benz built its W123 generation of executive sedans from late 1975 to early 1986, and over roughly a decade the combined sales of coupes, sedans, wagons, and limousines totaled nearly 2.7 million. That made it the best-selling Benz to date. It also hails from a time when Mercedes nomenclature actually made sense, so a model name’s number (200, 220, 280, 300) signified displacement in liters (2.0, 2.2, 2.8, 3.0), and letters signified body style or engine. So, a 280CE is a 2.8-liter (280) coupe (C) with fuel injection (E). A 300D is a standard four-door with a 3.0-liter (300) diesel (D) engine.
W123s were an ’80s yuppie favorite, but these are also remarkably robust cars in that classic German over-engineered sense. This is especially true of the diesel models, which have been known to eat up miles and ask for seconds. Diesel W123s have been popular as taxis in Europe and all over the developing world. Because Mercedes-Benz cranked out so many of these cars, because they’re so solid, and because they’re straightforward to maintain, there are still a lot of them on the road. But there aren’t a lot of pristine, low-mile examples to choose from. That’s why the gap here is so huge. Finding a running, driving 300D isn’t that hard. Finding a perfect one is.
1981–93 Volvo 240 GL Wagon
Condition #2 value: $29,700
Condition #3 value: $12,400
Difference: 140%
Much of what is true about the Mercedes is also true about the 200 Series Volvo. Both cars were built during the same time (though the Volvo lasted longer). They were both massive sellers with similar production numbers. They are both famously overbuilt cars for which 100,000 miles is barely broken in.
The Volvo 240 was a big seller in this country, including the wagon version. Once they veered into used-car territory in the 1990s, they got cheap and stayed that way. They’re still not particularly expensive, but the appeal of these unburstable Swedish bricks is definitely there for nostalgic millennials and really anyone looking for an interesting but easy-to-live-with old car. Again, like the Mercedes, the reason for the big gap between #2 and #3 values is that scruffy 240s are all over the place, while perfect, low-mile ones are unicorns.
1953–67 Volkswagen Beetle Convertible
Condition #2 value: $71,400
Condition #3 value: $23,300
Difference: 206%
The first Beetles were sensible two-door sedans, but by the early 1950s there was clear demand for a fair-weather Bug, and Volkswagen sold a convertible version all the way up until 1980. Generally, the soft-tops are worth significantly more than the standard car.
All things air-cooled, including Volkswagens, have soared in value over the past 10 years, even though Beetles were always cheap classics before the mid-2010s. But growth for the cleanest examples has seriously outpaced that of rougher, driver-quality cars. For example, a ’66 Beetle convertible in #3 condition has appreciated 108 percent over the last 10 years, but the same car in #2 condition has appreciated 155 percent.
1979–83 Datsun 280ZX Coupe
Condition #2 value: $36,000
Condition #3 value: $12,100
Difference: 198%
Datsun brought its Z-car into the disco era with a model that was bigger, heavier, and softer than the original 240Z that so thoroughly disrupted the sports car market a decade earlier. “What was once an appealingly lean sportster has been transformed into a plush boulevardier,” said Car and Driver. The new 280ZX was more grand tourer than all-out performer, but that meant a nicer interior and a more comfortable ride. There were also T-tops for when the sun was out.
The buying public didn’t complain much, and Datsun sold nearly 332,000 examples in five years in the U.S., including a four-seater 2+2 version and a turbocharged model. It then quickly became one of those cheap and fairly reliable sporty used cars that very few people bothered to pamper and preserve. That’s why, when it comes to the non-Turbo versions, a condition #3 example is essentially worth one-third of what a condition #2 example is.
1984–2001 Jeep Cherokee XJ
Condition #2 value: $18,700
Condition #3 value: $8300
Difference: 125%
Jeep’s second-generation Cherokee (aka the XJ) was the company’s first all-new design since 1963, the first with unibody construction, and the last produced under the direction of longtime American Motors design chief Dick Teague. The boxy proto-SUV lasted through the AMC, Chrysler, and DaimlerChrysler eras and sold 2.5 million copies. The new-for-1993 Grand Cherokee was actually supposed to replace the Cherokee, but the original was so popular that it lasted for another eight model years.
People have always liked the XJ Cherokee, then, but it’s never been expensive, and their values only started growing in an appreciable way during the 2020s. An XJ that hasn’t rusted or been wrecked or rolled over isn’t easy to find, so clean ones have appreciated at a faster clip.
1980–86 Ford F-250
Condition #2 value: $45,300
Condition #3 value: $16,600
Difference: 173%
The seventh generation Ford F-Series marked the first full redesign of the ever-popular pickup since 1965, and its basic platform underpinned the eighth and ninth generation F-Series as well. Pickups of this period were bigger on work and lower on luxury than the glitzier trucks of today, and many were driven to death long ago. People were even less likely to keep clean a heavier-duty model like an F-250, so excellent examples of these 40-year-old workhorses are hard to find, and therefore way more valuable than one with bumps and bruises.
Interesting but I’m not sure how useful this data is. I owned 7 300Ds (ok, 5 turbo sedans and two TD wagons). From real $700 rats to a really nice one in Astral Silver over Henna. That one was I’d like to think a 2 condition, but probably a high 3. A really great one in #1 condition might well be worth into the six figures. OK. Is there such a car? i don’t think new in the wrapper Volvo 240s, 300Ds, or Jeep XJs are really a thing. Like, look all you want, you’re not going to find one with delivery mileage. They’re not C4 ZR-1s or 560SLs. One of the buyers of my 300TD wagons paid $1500 for a car I paid $1000 for then drove hard for a decade. He put $80k into restoration then got, IIRC, $47k. The numbers don’t work out to restore workday classics like these.
I think you are confusing grades. You are describing #1 grade cars and this article is talking about the difference between #2 and #3 grade cars.
https://www.hagerty.com/valuation-tools/about-our-conditions#condition-definitions
There is a 3800 original mile 240D on BaT right now. It should be interesting.
A friend of mine bought a new 240d on a Saturday morning and traded it in on a 300d the following Monday morning. He took it back because he thought there must be something wrong with it as it wouldn’t pull the skin off a rice pudding, but the salesman said that they are all like that! He was very happy with the 300d and kept it for many years.
My mom had a 240D new in 1979. While it was bullet proof, it was dog slow. Not only that, when you sat at a stop light it vibrated so much my mom used to call it ‘Magic Fingers’ after the motel bed vibrators. She always said it was like driving a Zamboni. If you were not stopped, you had your foot planted to go at all. And she was a little old lady.
In the Pacific Northwest 70s academia, like the Subaru and Prius today, Volvos were everywhere. Before the 240 wagon, we had a ‘73 wagon / tank but, importantly, my Dad spec’d a stick. What comes to mind as a description is that is wasn’t THAT different from my 996 short throw shifter! It was tight. As a high schooler I could surprise basically anyone with the unassuming presentation. Meanwhile, I did ride in other families AT cars…a joke.
If you think a 240D was slow…my Dad bought a ’65 190D in 1967 with less than 15k miles–for $2200! New it was over $4500.
No one wanted diesels back then, especially something as slow as a 190…and it had A/C to slow it even further! Thank goodness it was stick. While 0-60 time was measured with a sundial, once up to speed it was happy on the highway–as long as no 2 lane road passing was involved. They drove that car from Orlando to Austin TX on 17 cents/gallon diesel for less than $20!
I’ll take the Volvo wagon with a V8 swap. That’s a different game altogether.
Probably would be easier and cheaper to find a turbo 244/245 in good condition and just de-badge it. If the idea is a sleeper wagon, a V8 swap isn’t going to fool anyone when it’s running! 😆
Oh, you can fool a LOT of people with a swap. The trick is to keep the exhaust as quiet as possible at low RPM. In High School, I drove my dads truck now and then. 1953 IH with a 445 Wildcat running gear, dual exhaust with two glass packs on each pipe. Low RPM and it was quiet, open it up, and it was gone.
Nobody will know i’s a V8 swap with cats, mufflers and resonators. Just because someone does a V8 swap, doesn’t mean it has to have cherry bombs, or wide open exhaust. The best sleepers have a quiet exhaust.
I had a Mercedes 300TD wagon with a tired motor. I was set up to swap in a SBC. I thought that would be a great set up. A lady t-boned me and totaled it so that project never happened.
Owned a few Volvo wagons after that. I’m partial to the 7 series because you can get a sunroof and they easier to live with.
Perhaps not, but all the extra money in the bank is comforting. You could probably buy numerous mufflers as well.
Another option was the 265 V6 wagon. It was considerably quicker than the 4 cylinder and most other cars of that time (1976). However, my Volvo mechanic would curse when I brought it in for service. It was not easy to work on.
I still have trouble accepting the term “classic” when referring to cars like 1990’s Volvo and Jeep stationwagons. I can accept the 280ZX and maybe the VW…….but the rest?……not for me.
If you think a Beetle ‘vert, or any air-cooled Bug isn’t a classic, you must have been sleeping for the last 30 years.
Totally agree with you on that one Doug
Maybe Hagerty can start looking at a wider rating spread … perhaps 1 to 10 … or A to J….. or add a “+” or “-” to the existing ratings. Four to five categories in a field where there is never a “one-size-fits-all” may not be workeing as well as we’d like it to.
Some of this is due to cost and difficulty of getting parts. On the Truck and VW not sure what is going on.
do not like foreign vehicles
And a lot of people wouldn’t be seen dead in an American car. It’s all “horses for courses”.
so basically all cars are out.
But many do….
I had a ‘67 convertible bug. White with a black top and black interior. Still can’t explain why I got rid of it.
I think the difference might be due to rust. Even a little bit can cost a lot to fix when there aren’t panels available. Plastic parts is another killer when you have to find good replacements. Every vehicle shown in the article is well supported by the aftermarket on the mechanical side except for maybe the 240-280Z (those have finicky carbs or injection systems). Some have fair reproduction body parts, but you still have to have the ability to install correctly and do the paint otherwise it costs a fortune. Like they say, buy the best condition that you can afford because the restoration costs a whole lot more. As for comments that aren’t thrilled with some of these vehicles and say they aren’t ‘classics’, a classic is whatever you say it it. Buy what you want to drive.
I worked for VW dealers in the 70s and a Datsun dealer in the 80s. Unfortunately I never acquired 20/20 foresight.
To state the obvious…you get what you pay for.
And another car cliche…it’s cheaper to buy a restored car then doing it yourself.
The key points here…
-Some trim may be unobtainable…so you may not be able to do it yourself or take a #3 car to make it a #2.
-And then…do you REALLY need a #2 car in the first place?
Unless you have Bill Gates money or a need to show off, do you really need to spend the extra $48k to have a nicer beetle that you’ll use occasionally? The kids won’t notice the difference on ice cream runs, neither will 99.9% of the people who see it…they’re just thinking “cute car”. It it not a top tier collectable, so why bother?
A 911(or top shelf anything) is a different story.
Couldn’t agree more. Even a 911, or a Ferrari, find one that has been driven and enjoyed and that you can actually drive and not worry about, realizing you need to keep them properly maintained, regardless. Un-driven garage queens deteriorate just sitting there, and it’s common for otherwise “#1” or “#2” cars that have mostly sat for years to require major mechanical and electrical repairs to get running reliably.
I would assume most of these were actually driven (as they should be) and a few were not. When I have shopped or just plain checked out a “classic”, and the mileage is abnormally low, I ask myself why. 99.9% of the vehicles purchased were to drive, not stuff into a bubble bag. I agree with JohnB, but I also think restoring a vehicle yourself is (for the most part) a fun, keep busy, enjoyable, satisfying hobby as long as your wallet can support the itch.
What does it cost to take a #3 car and make it a #2? Mercedes is good about having parts available for classic models, Volvo not so much. But that’s where this data might be helpful! Find the best #3 you can and put some work into it to make it a solid #2. There’s nearly a $30K gap for the Mercedes. If you have $15-20K to put in it (and that will do the job!) you can make $10-15K. That’s assuming you can actually sell it for the #2 guide price.
Mechanically you’re probably correct.
But as I said earlier, trim parts…even for mass market Mercedes may not be available…
I had to do some interior work on a somewhat neglected R129 SL…you’d be shocked what is no longer available for a car 15 years younger than the 123 featured here.
And don’t get me started on the NLA replace keys. 🙂
I think the EG, EK Civics and the CRX Hondas are in that class. Try to buy any clean unmodified examples.
Think how cool the Cherokee XJ is then make it as a pickup. I have owned my “87 Comanche for nearly 30 years and to reference another article I just read, my 24-year old Gen Z’r would have my head if I sold it. The passion for cars and bikes still exist…
Sold my ’96 Jeep XJ for a ’91 Range Rover Classic SWB. WTF was I thinking? I love the RRC, it is however a rolling, never ending experiment in anticipation, dread, apprehension and joyous relief when I get where I’m going. It does, however, make me smile whenever I look at it and drive it. The pricing on those thing from #3 to #2 is just stupid. Mine’s white and is about to get the Daktari treatment. Zebra Stripes! YEAHHHHHH!!!!!!