ZDriver.com - 1990 300ZX TT vs 1994 300ZX convertible

I have never asked this type of question on a forum, and when I see others do it, it seems to me to be somewhat silly. Today, it is not silly to me.

I have 2 cars I am looking to purchase: a red 1990 Twin Turbo with 10K miles, and an emerald black/green 1994 convertible with 1800 miles. Yes, 1800 miles.

Both are near or actual museum quality. The TT is ~$6K above market price, the convertible is ~$10K above market. The price of each car doesn't bother me in that I will keep the car long enough for the them to - in my view - appreciate past the purchase price (at least 5 years)

Both of these are collector cars (duh), with the TT of course being (far) more desirable. But both are unicorns. And the convertible with 1800 miles is, of course, a freak of nature.

I would not touch either car. They would be left exactly as they are: factory perfect and unmodified. As much as I would love the turbo, it has drawbacks relative to the NA as far as maintenance and complexity (though neither will come into play most like during my ownership as the miles would be kept low - see below).

I will drive whichever I purchase about 2K miles per year, as I have a few other cars that I use as DDs. In 10 years, the TT would have 30K on it, and the convertible would have 21K miles on it.

I realize that driving the TT a few thousand a year will not take away from its value appreciating compared to the convertible, but driving the convertible WILL take away from its value by putting miles on it. Its collectibility at 1800 miles is high and mostly uncharted territory, so putting miles on it would quickly take it out of this category. On the other hand, a 30K TT vs a 10K TT is not as big as a drop.

One of my thoughts is to purchase the convertible, as i will never find one like it again (1800 miles) and then when I can afford it, find a mint TT (those ARE out there with very low miles).

Which would you purchase, and why?