Ecco

I am going to buy a 1996 993tt. The car that I am looking at is a 2 owner local car with all records and really clean. The only thing is that it has had one side re-sprayed due to being keyed. The re-spray was done by one the most respected shops in town. My question is, does this diminish the value of the car?

38D

Yes. I would say 5-7% off.

ca993twin

If this is a car that gets driven, the owner will always be faced with a choice of rock chips and door dings, or getting some parts of the car resprayed. If there was no body damage, and the car is not a super-low mileage garage queen where you'd like to brag "no paint... ever", then a really nice respray should not detract from the value. Are there "before & after" photos so you can see there was no body damage? IMHO.

Bill (NC)

I used to think so, but as our cars age either the orginal paint ends up with numerous chips and dings, or you have it resprayed to keep it looking new. I think the caveat would be that the respray wasn't to repair damage as in a wreck. If there were two identical cars side by side, sure you would pick the one that hadn't been sprayed....but that's never the case. If you find a good car with a good history I think that overrides cosmetic repair. My2c.

gr8330

I agree

Tim Wasmer

Bill is right. My car has 83k and has been re-sprayed due to chips etc. It looks great. So if that is the only issue, go for it

38D

My 5-7% reduction was for a low miles car. The higher the miles, the less it matters. But I think you are kidding yourselves if you think it does not matter at all. I know plenty of people that wouldn't even consider a repainted car.

Rob 97 993c2

i think it depends. I was waaay too picky when i searched for my tt. If you are going to be a long term holder like most fanatics here seem to be as these cars are getting older, i think you can use a little respray as a way to get a discount .. assuming it was well done and not due to a crash.
I think its getting harder and harder to find a pure 'no paint' car that has been used at all.

Bradford

If I had a choice to buy a 40,000 mile TT with the original paint (which means it most likely has rock chips on the front bumper, hood, mirrors) or buy one that the owner kept up on and repainted for the rock chips, I would buy the repainted one. People make such a big deal over a repainted bumper or hood. As long as the car hasn't been in an accident, I see nothing wrong with a respray for normal driving. It is part of the maintenance. A good shop can shoot a hood or bumper and it is almost undetectable from the original. My $.02.

hal m

As an avid reader of Sports Car Market magazine, most of the cars being sold have been re-sprayed. The issue in terms of value relates to the quality of the re-spray. A show quality re-paint adds value to the car. Cars with original paint are deemed "survivors" and are valued for originality, but are not the prettiest cars.

As our cars continue to age, I do not see that high quality repaint will really detract from the value.

As has been said, many of us are too **** about this stuff.

dbtk

Does anyone have a recommendation for a good body shop in the San Francisco Bay Area for a good respray?

hal m

I have used Cecil Beach at Body Styles in San Jose for several previous cars with excellent results.

BlkC4S

I think it depends on the buyer. When I was in the market earlier in the year, I was willing to pay more for a car with original paint even if it had chips or other blemishes. I ran into too many cars that were resprayed to hide accident or other problems.

Here's a thread on SF area body shops. I haven't used any of them:

https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/191915-paint-shop-recommendations-sf-bay-area.html

There's also Dawydiak in SF http://carsauto.com

ignomini

I'm a no respray guy because I don't think these cars are old enough that a well cared for car should need it. I won't say I would avoid a resprayed car, but right away it makes me suspicious and I'm going to offer less accordingly.

dbtk

hal and rob, thanks!