7 Sports Cars That Last the Longest Over 5 Years
The used car resource iSeeCars has recently compiled a study analyzing the depreciation rates of the various vehicle types available on the automotive aftermarket, all to discern which brands and models depreciate the most quickly as well as slowest. Why? Because this information can aid car shoppers hoping to invest in a new car that will maintain a high resale value after five years of use, rather than depreciate to a level of a meek trade-in.
Discover More:
Check Out:
Having poured over the iSeeCars data, GOBankingRates has identified the seven sports cars that are projected to maintain the most of their value over a five-year span and depreciate the least compared to other, similar vehicles. Curious as to whether you should invest in a new Mustang, or perhaps a Porsche? Keep reading.
Average 5-year depreciation: 19.5%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $24,428
The Robb Report has noted that the Porsche 911, while expensive, is a sound automotive investment if you can afford it. The sports car has the lowest depreciation rate over five years of any model or vehicle type (sports car, truck, coupe, sedan, hatchback, SUV, electric vehicle, wagon, hybrid) on the market. As such, the Porsche 911, if resold, can net a significant amount in the used car arena.
Trending Now:
For You:
Average 5-year depreciation: 21.8%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $15,851
The Robb Report also noted that slow depreciation isn't exclusive to the Porsche 911 — many iterations of the Porsche, including the 718. Why? While all vehicles suffer some depreciation, that of the Porsche is particularly slow because the Porsche itself is a rather iconic brand (and thus highly desired, even in the aftermarket), and comes with extremely high performance as well as advanced designed and tech.
Find Out:
Average 5-year depreciation: 28%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $8,653
GM Authority has reported that the Chevrolet Camaro manages to hold its value exceptionally well over time. Some of that is due to sports cars like the Camaro being more in-demand during the pandemic lockdowns due to their 'fun' value, as well as sports cars in general — and a venerable model like the Camaro in specific — always being exceptionally popular with discerning car shoppers looking for sporty used rides.
Average 5-year depreciation: 29.2%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $9,325
As one of America's most iconic sports cars, the Mustang's value in the public consciousness is almost impossible to overestimate. As HotCars has noted, the Mustang's depreciation slows considerably after the five-year mark — the Mustang is known for extremely high performance, and a reputation for reliability.
Average 5-year depreciation: 29.6%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $22,155
Very similar in design to the Porsche 718 Cayman, the Boxster, like most Porsches, holds its value extremely well after five years, per CarBuzz.
Read Next:
Average 5-year depreciation: 30.2%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $9,424
Subaru BRZ's hold their value extremely well, according to Torque News, due to the brand's powerful motor, roomy interior and smooth-running tech.
Average 5-year depreciation: 33.7%
Loss of value vs. MSRP: $25,343
Slash Gear has noted that the Corvette tends to depreciate slower than most sports cars, and perform higher in the resale market. Like the Mustang, and the Porsche, the name 'Corvette' conjures an automotive ideal in the minds of many used car shoppers, and it easily outruns depreciation.
More From GOBankingRates
6 Used Luxury SUVs That Are a Good Investment for Retirees
How Far $750K Plus Social Security Goes in Retirement in Every US Region
7 Overpriced Grocery Items Frugal People Should Quit Buying in 2025
How Much Money Is Needed To Be Considered Middle Class in Every State?
This article originally appeared on GOBankingRates.com: 7 Sports Cars That Last the Longest Over 5 Years
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
2025's Most Reliable New German Car Is Also a Performance Icon
German engineering is often praised for its precision and performance, but not every car from the region lives up to long-term reliability expectations. In 2025, however, one iconic model defies the trend, delivering not just exhilarating performance, but rock-solid dependability. This high-performance sports car has earned its reputation through decades of refinement, blending speed, balance, and everyday usability. It's a rare kind of machine that feels equally at home on a racetrack or during a relaxed highway cruise. More impressively, it manages to deliver this thrill while maintaining excellent reliability scores year after year. If you're looking for a luxury performance car that won't leave you worrying about repair bills or breakdowns, this model stands tall among its peers. It's proof that you can have legendary performance and daily-driver dependability in one package. In 2025, no other new German car strikes that balance quite as well. In order to give you the most up-to-date and accurate information possible, the data used to compile this article was sourced from various manufacturer websites and other authoritative sources, including TopSpeed, the EPA, J.D. Power, RepairPal, and the EPA. Germany is renowned for producing some of the most mechanically impressive cars in the world. However, brands from the nation haven't always had the best reputation when it comes to reliability. Despite being performance-oriented, Porsche stands out by having a lineup of sturdy cars, with the 911 ranking the highest. J.D. Power is a site that collates data submitted from verified owners to rank cars in a number of different categories. The 911 ranks incredibly highly, with an 87 out of 100 overall. The main thing that lets it down is its resale. Its reliability, however, helps carry it, with it scoring a whopping 89 out of 100 for quality and reliability. This means it isn't just the most reliable German car, but it is also one of the most reliable cars you can buy overall. The 911, and the 992, especially, is the perfect daily driver- beautiful styling, enormous power, and reliability. It's a good thing that the 911 is considered to be such a reliable car because the maintenance costs are extreme. If things do go wrong, you'll end up spending a small fortune on repairs. RepairPal estimates that you'll spend $1,072 annually to maintain Porsche's extreme sports car. The most common problems reported by owners are oil and coolant leaks. Porsche does at least cover your first scheduled maintenance visit on the house. In terms of recalls, one has been issued for the 2025 Porsche 911, having to do with a software error causing low beams to create a glare for oncoming traffic. Porsche doesn't just hold the top spot when it comes to reliability, but they actually appear in the top five three times. This proves that their ability to build sturdy cars extends beyond a single model, and that when you buy from the prestigious brand you can expect high levels of quality. Close behind them, though, is BMW with the X3 and the X4. These models are among the automaker's most popular models and are mechanically similar to one another. They showcase that BMW has come a long way when it comes to reliability, ranking among the top automakers in the world. Porsche's penchant for crafting works of art is something that is well respected throughout the automotive industry. The fact that they produce such reliable vehicles is just another marker of their success. All of this comes at a cost, though, with every model of iconic sports car featuring a steep price tag. There are a plethora of different 911 models to choose from. We've even excluded the high-performance 911 Turbo and track-focused GT3 from the above. Essentially, there are three body types to choose from: the coupe, the drop-top cabriolet, and the Targa, which allows you to remove the roof panel above the front seats while keeping those in the back covered. Each body type has a number of different performance variations as well. Choosing which 911 to buy is an incredibly personal choice, with each model having its individual pros and cons. The base model is an easy option for those looking to get good bang for their buck, with the Carrera T being the choice for enthusiasts. We'd go for the GTS, though, which comes standard with the incredible T-Hybrid powertrain. Last year, Porsche made a number of really large changes to the 911. This included a shuffling of powertrains, extensive exterior updates, and the introduction of a fully-digital instrument panel. The Carrera T was also brought back, which is essentially a lightweight trim with a standard six-speed manual. For 2026, changes are smaller. The infotainment system has been updated with new features. Dolby Atmos was also added to improve the already impressive Bose and Burmester sound systems on offer. The system has also been streamlined, meaning its more responsive. It is impressive that such a performance-oriented machine is considered to be the most reliable new German car you can buy right now. Even more impressive is that, regardless of which model you go for, you know that you're getting a sports car that is tuned for maximum levels of enjoyment, all while being comfortable enough to drive every day. The base Carrera gets the three-liter flat-six that produces 388 horses. The T uses the same powertrain but can be equipped with a manual transmission. The Carrera S produces more power from the three-liter engine, but only comes with the PDK. The T-Hybrid GTS gets a 3.6-liter flat-six that gets help from a powerful single electric motor. Regardless of which model you opt for, the 911 is sports car perfection. It is quick, agile, and responsive. Every move you make translates to the road. The PDK is brilliant and those that like a more engaging feel will enjoy the manual in the Carrera T. When not being driven hard, the 911 seamlessly converts into a comfortable cruiser, gliding along and absorbing bumps in the road with ease. Automatic emergency braking LED headlights with Porsche Dynamic Light System Adaptive Cruise Control Lane Keep Assist with Traffic Sign Recognition ParkAssist with Active Parking Support Porsche only offers the most basic safety and driver assists standard on the 911. The biggest criticism we have of this car is that tons of features that should be included are locked behind paywalls. That being said, some impressive tech is on offer, including a headlight system that adapts to other cars on the road, your steering inputs, and curves in the road. Semi-autonomous driving is on offer through the advanced adaptive cruise control system.
Miami Herald
7 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Ford Recalls 29,501 F-150 Lightning Trucks Over Suspension Defect Risk
The NHTSA is recalling more than 29,000 models of Ford's electric F-150 Lightning truck, but the problems reported have nothing to do with the electric powertrain. Suspension components are prone to failure, with the separation of the front control arms possibly resulting in a loss of steering control. According to the recall details provided by the NHTSA, the nut of the control arm's upper ball joint may have been insufficiently tightened, allowing the upper control arm to completely detach from the knuckle assembly, leading to a loss of steering control and, potentially, a crash. A total of 29,501 F-150 Lightnings from the 2024 and 2025 model years are included in the recall. Repair work involves replacing the nuts and tightening them to the correct torque. While this is a notable safety issue, this recall is a drop in the ocean compared to the recent recall of nearly 1.1 million vehicles announced on June 1. This recall was for rearview camera displays that can freeze or go completely blank, covering many popular Ford models such as the Mustang, Bronco F-Series, and Ranger, and Lincoln models such as the Corsair, Nautilus, and Navigator. So far, in 2025 alone, Ford has recalled vehicles for problems with transmission valve bodies that cause a loss of reverse gear, failing high-current fuses that can cut power to electric motors, missing cup plugs on 3.5L EcoBoost V6 engines that may lead to oil leaks, missing dashboard airbag warning labels, and loose or missing steering shaft bolts, to name only a few. In the beginning of the year, Ford's BlueCruise drew attention to itself when several Mustang Mach-Es were involved in fatal nighttime crashes while BlueCruise was engaged. This came fresh off the back of a September 2024 recall for more than 90,000 vehicles for intake valves on 2.7L and 3.0L Nano V6 engines that may break while driving, leading to engine failure and a loss of drive power. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Motor Trend
8 hours ago
- Motor Trend
Pony Tales: 1967 Chevy Camaro vs. 1967 Ford Mustang
[This story first appeared in the May/June issue of MotorTrend Classic] The Ford Mustang and Chevy Camaro have probably sold more magazines than any other pair of cars. Pit the two against each other, and you have a contest with the same emotional appeal as Mac versus PC, Coke versus Pepsi, Army versus Navy. Such contests have been widened to include 'Cudas, Firebirds, Javelins, and others, but most customers pay to watch the Ford and Chevy duke it out. The cars pictured here could've competed in round one of this epic battle: a third-year redesigned Mustang GT 390 and a freshly minted Camaro RS/SS 350. Each was built early in the 1967 model year, with the highest- performing mainstream engine and suspension packages available. In the early 1960s, the first baby boomers were coming of age and market research suggested they wouldn't be buying the cars their parents drove. They'd be looking to express themselves, but on a budget. Everyone got the message, and GM was the first to respond. To keep costs down, the Big Three leveraged the compacts they'd reluctantly introduced in 1960 to stem the flood of small imported cars. Plymouth had the Valiant, and Ford had the Falcon, both of which were miniaturized big cars. Chevrolet went with the more daring and sophisticated rear-engine, air-cooled, independently suspended Corvair. This radical car never caught on with the masses (the Falcon outsold it by 74 percent), prompting development of the more conventional Chevy II/Nova for 1962. But by bolting in bucket seats and sporty trim, the mid-1960 Corvair Monza became just what the boomers wanted, and it soon evolved into the young-person's cool car. By 1963, Monzas accounted for 80 percent of Corvair sales. The 1964 Falcon-based Mustang and Valiant-based Barracuda were designed in response to the Monza's success. 0:00 / 0:00 Meanwhile, Chevrolet design chief Irv Rybicki wondered aloud to GM design boss Bill Mitchell whether Chevy might win additional sales by offering a cut-rate personal coupe—a Riviera shrunk to fit a Chevy budget. Mitchell liked the idea and set up a secret studio in a warehouse, where project XP-836 was born. Riding atop the Chevy II platform, the clay model's dimensions and long-hood short-deck proportions were eerily similar to the Mustang's. Chevy boss Bunkie Knudsen liked the clay model, but demurred, noting that with the Corvette and Corvair Monza covering the sporty spectrum, the Chevy II and Chevelle spanning the mid-market, and a broad full-size lineup, the last thing Chevy needed—or could afford—was another new car. Can you blame him? But the Mustang arrived and instantly became more popular than sex and chocolate, not to mention the Corvair Monza (sales of which plunged by a third in 1964). At first GM brass was unimpressed with what they saw as an angular, unimaginative design. They felt certain their svelte, Euro-styled 1965 Corvair replacement could hold its own. But dealers signed 26,000 Mustang orders on the first day, and after four months and 100,000 sales, Chevy swallowed its pride and green-lighted development of a conventional front-engine, rear-drive competitor, code-named F-body. The mandate: Make it longer, lower, wider, faster, and better in every way. The warehouse project resumed where it'd left off. A replacement for the Chevy II/Nova was slated for 1968, and the F-car would share its architecture, which consisted of a unit-body aft of the firewall, bolted via tuned rubber mounts to a front stub frame. This combo boasted the packaging efficiency of a unit-body with the ride and powertrain isolation of a body-on-frame. For the first time at Chevy, computers helped speed the tuning of the aerodynamics and the suspension's ride/handling calibration. Dimensionally, the F-car measured several inches longer and wider than the original Mustang, and each of its initial engine offerings trumped the power of its closest Mustang rival. Initially, there were two inline-sixes and three small-block V-8s in five states of tune depending on carbs and exhaust, followed by a pair of 396-cube big-block options introduced in November 1966. Chevy reckoned the key to winning over boomers was letting them custom-tailor their ponycar, so the order sheet included a staggering array of 80 factory options and 40 dealer accessories. As the fall 1966 launch date loomed, all that was left was to choose a name for Chevy's Mustang-killer. Panther, Nova, and Chaparral were considered and rejected. After mining the foreign-language dictionaries, Camaro won the day. Chevy defined its meaning as French slang for 'companion,' though Ford favored the Spanish translation: 'a type of sea shrimp.' Detroit's a small town, so Ford had ample time to prepare for the Camaro. Having cranked out a million Mustangs, the tooling was shot anyway. In order to keep ahead on the power front, a 390 big-block option was added to the order book. Accommodating it required stretching the front end two inches and widening the car by 2.7 inches. Widening the track 2.5 inches and raising the front suspension's roll-center improved handling, and interior space increased marginally. Stylists preserved but embellished all the original design elements, stretching the hood, widening the grille, deepening the side scallops, and extending the fastback's roofline to the rear of the car. So how did the upstart Camaro fare against the million-strong Mustang? MotorTrend ran the first driving impressions of both cars in December 1966, but they were driven by different authors at separate venues and hence not compared. The Mustang GT 390, with its enlarged front anti-roll bar and stiffened springs (30 percent front, 26 percent rear), drew praise for its quieter ride and improved handling, though it remained a heavy understeerer, and the big-block produced major axle-tramp on full-power launches. The Camaro RS/SS 350's standard traction bar reduced wheelhop (later Camaros cured the problem using staggered shocks), but excessive tirespin demanded a light touch at launch. The front disc brakes required similarly light footwork to keep from locking (stops from 60 mph took 156 feet versus the GT 390's 134). In May 1967, we finally got all the ponies together, testing several variants of each. This time the Mustangs understeered the most; the Camaros the least, and the V-8 Chevys were prone to throttle oversteer. The Camaro felt the most agile in tight twisty maneuvers, but its two-speed automatic drew loud criticism. We dinged the Mustang for unlighted ventilation controls that only the driver could reach, while the Camaro took heat for its lack of instrumentation and the low mounting location of the auxiliary gauges. No outright winner was declared, though reading between the lines, the Camaro seemed the favorite. Car and Driver compared the Trans-Am-racing homologation versions of each and gave the nod to the Camaro Z/28, which outperformed the Tunnel-Port Mustang in acceleration (13.8 versus 14.0 in the quarter) and braking (1.02 g versus 0.86 g). Road & Track chose a 289-powered Mustang over its 327-cube Camaro competitor, judging the soft-riding Camaro to be 'frankly, a disappointment.' Our photo cars were originally purchased by well-heeled boomers demanding the best-dressed pony on the block. Each spent half again the base price on optional upgrades, and as a result both look and feel special, inside and out. The Camaro's $105 RS exterior decor package adds classy hidden headlamps and chrome flourishes that sparkle against the Royal Plum paint and white vinyl top. Interior extravagances include air-conditioning, power windows, a console with gauge package, deluxe striped upholstery, and an odd fold-down rear seatback that doesn't pass through to the trunk. Our Clearwater Aqua Mustang is similarly equipped, with interior and exterior spiffs like turn-signal indicators on the hood, extra chrome and styled steel wheels outside, two-tone aqua vinyl upholstery, a console with rolltop stowage compartment, and a fold-down seat (accessing the trunk). From the wheel, the two cars feel more different than what their spec-sheets suggest. The fastback Mustang looks racier, and the view down its extra-long hood reinforces the impression. The big-block 390 seems always to be straining at the leash with its three-speed C6 automatic ready to make the most of the available torque, though the 3.00:1 axle is better geared for economical cruising than jack-rabbit starts. Overboosted power steering typical of the day transmits little road feel, but the heavy springs and shocks appear to control body motions quite well. The GT traverses bumps and dips without losing its composure. This restored 57,000-mile Camaro is tight and carefully assembled despite the beating it takes from period-correct Firestone Wide-O-Oval bias-ply tires that provide little cushioning over the rough stuff. The venerable 350 small-block exhales a sonorous burble through the SS 350's 'dual deep-tone mufflers.' It accelerates briskly at lower speeds, but the two-cog Powerglide slush-box is a liability. Shifts are smooth while accelerating, but it clunks into low gear when slowing to a stop. The 396 big-block and Turbo-Hydramatic three-speed was a better match for the 390 Mustang. The steering and brakes feel even more overboosted than the Mustang's, but that's all part of the charm of a 1960s pony. While rare-option Z/28 and Shelby GT350/500 variants of the classic ponycars are gaveling stratospheric prices at auction, more mainstream models like these are still affordable. For $30,000 to $35,000, you can get a solid driver that's easy to maintain and repair and loads of fun at cruise nights. Which pony wins this magazine comparison? The Mustang, because I owned two of them in high school, and irrational prejudices like that have fueled enthusiasm for the Mustang and Camaro for four decades. Long may it be so. 1967 Ford Mustang GTA 390 Ask the Couple Who Owns One Neil and Kathy Holcomb own four Mustang fastbacks and help run the Mustang Owners Club of Southeastern Michigan ( Neil as president, Kathy as secretary. Why they like it: '1967 was the year the Mustangs became more muscular. The 1965s were sporty Falcons, but by 1967 the Mustang was developing its own identity.' It's collectible because: Expressive styling and freedom from the emissions and safety requirements that began phasing in a year later make 1967s popular. Restoring/Maintaining: Mass production and continued popularity mean parts are so easy to find that you could build a new one from scratch. Beware of: Rust attacks the subframe near the firewall; check for mismatched engine and chassis numbers; and crash damage leading to poor panel fit. Expect to pay: Concours ready: $41,150; solid driver $21,825; tired runner: $9500 Join the Club: Mustang Club of America ( Our Take Then: 'Ponycar' means Mustang. It's the original, and the one all other contenders to the throne are out to beat. It made the whole scene happen, and like it or not, you can't drive home in a new Camaro, Javelin, or Barracuda without the neighborhood gang comparing it with a Mustang.—Motor Trend, January 1968 Now: The Mustang is woven into American pop culture as tightly as the Big Mac and polyester. It may never be rare, but it'll always be special. 1967 Chevrolet Camaro 350SS/RS Ask the Man Who Owns One Doug May owns an auto-detailing business and enjoys maintaining and restoring a variety of old cars with his father, Ken. Why I like it: 'This loaded RS/SS has all the best factory options, and its Royal Plum and white color scheme is a perennial crowd pleaser.' It's collectible because: The freshly styled, strongly performing Camaro started a competition that's improved the entire pony breed. Restoring/maintaining: First-generation Camaros have the widest availability of reproduction parts, so they're the easiest to keep up. Beware of: Rust attacks the rear quarters and trunk-pan and floorboards, and electrical problems can crop up with age. Expect to pay: Concours ready: $47,675; solid driver $25,100; tired runner: $9,500 Join the Club: Worldwide Camaro Club ( Our Take Then: The Camaro is one of the most pleasurable cars of its size—or any other size—we've driven. It invades the luxury kingdom of the Cougar by offering more comfort options, and the sporty area of the Mustang by having at least the same amount—if not more—of enthusiast oriented accessories. —Steven Kelly, MotorTrend, December 1966 Now: The vast array of available powertrain combinations and options help make every surviving Camaro an original, with its own unique and satisfying driving character.
