Real-World Trade-In Values

steine13

>> smart speed limits based on safety, science, and statistics,

Let's not get carried away with all the science... pull up a chair and let Uncle Mathias tell you a little story.

Here in town [East Lansing], there are two roads that are governed by the state; one a major throughfare [Saginaw highway] that was always at 35 mph, and then "Grand River," which is an old plank road dating back who knows how long that cuts clear across Michigan East-West. That one was at 25 everywhere in town, which brought smiles to ticket writers and revenue generators, but also made for a pleasant ride, as I bike along it regularly, during my so-called "commute"... both miles of it

Anyway, Grand River goes right through the city and forms the border between town and university, and the speed limit downtown is today and always has been 25 mph.

Enter the state legislature, citing "safety and science" and a study saying you should just put your speed limit at the 87th percentile or whatever the heck the study said. So they put the two roads at 45and 35 mph, respectively.. except for the very downtown mile of Gd River, of course.

Drivers were kinda shell-shocked and for quite a while drover UNDER the speed limit, esp. at the 45 mph end.
However, the city sued, there were arguments, there was judicial whatnot, and soon enough, the limits are back where they had been..

...Until the whole thing wound up in the Michigan Supreme Court or wherever the final ruling happened, and sure enough, it's back to 45/35 a second time. At this point, all of us have 100% lost any respect for speed laws -- I know I have. Especially since the cops disappeared as soon as the limits went up. Both times

Accident rates increased, by the way. People didn't miraculously get a lot quicker and smarter because of some percentile speed. The study that car people like to cite is from the sixties, it turns out, and was taken in rural areas. It has NOTHING to do with in-town driving but it is handy if you want to speed things up.

This was a really stupid fight. Just splitting the difference at 40/30 mph would have been just fine. Keeping in mind there are actual single-family houses with actual driveways on both roads. But compromise isn't what we're all about. Apparently.

>> they are 16, but that they have 0 years of experience.

Well not if you put them on bicycles they don't. It really helps with the learning curve. But I'm just riding a hobby horse of mine...

cdnpinhead

Your posts are always interesting, my man. The 10K and 40K posters (moderators excepted) fall into a different category. Anyway, thanks.

andres3

steine13 said:

>> smart speed limits based on safety, science, and statistics,

Let's not get carried away with all the science... pull up a chair and let Uncle Mathias tell you a little story.

Here in town [East Lansing], there are two roads that are governed by the state; one a major throughfare [Saginaw highway] that was always at 35 mph, and then "Grand River," which is an old plank road dating back who knows how long that cuts clear across Michigan East-West. That one was at 25 everywhere in town, which brought smiles to ticket writers and revenue generators, but also made for a pleasant ride, as I bike along it regularly, during my so-called "commute"... both miles of it

Anyway, Grand River goes right through the city and forms the border between town and university, and the speed limit downtown is today and always has been 25 mph.

Enter the state legislature, citing "safety and science" and a study saying you should just put your speed limit at the 87th percentile or whatever the heck the study said. So they put the two roads at 45and 35 mph, respectively.. except for the very downtown mile of Gd River, of course.

Drivers were kinda shell-shocked and for quite a while drover UNDER the speed limit, esp. at the 45 mph end.
However, the city sued, there were arguments, there was judicial whatnot, and soon enough, the limits are back where they had been..

...Until the whole thing wound up in the Michigan Supreme Court or wherever the final ruling happened, and sure enough, it's back to 45/35 a second time. At this point, all of us have 100% lost any respect for speed laws -- I know I have. Especially since the cops disappeared as soon as the limits went up. Both times

Accident rates increased, by the way. People didn't miraculously get a lot quicker and smarter because of some percentile speed. The study that car people like to cite is from the sixties, it turns out, and was taken in rural areas. It has NOTHING to do with in-town driving but it is handy if you want to speed things up.

This was a really stupid fight. Just splitting the difference at 40/30 mph would have been just fine. Keeping in mind there are actual single-family houses with actual driveways on both roads. But compromise isn't what we're all about. Apparently.

>> they are 16, but that they have 0 years of experience.

Well not if you put them on bicycles they don't. It really helps with the learning curve. But I'm just riding a hobby horse of mine...

It's not just one study from the 60's though. There are numerous studies. The 85th percentile (not 87) is a tried and true "optimum" that has been proven over and over throughout the decades, even before the 60's I think.

I don't think most people had any respect for speed laws before, so no love lost there. Let's address your real issues:

1) Of course the cops left when the speed limits were realistically set. People don't disobey realistically set speed limits, so the job of a speed ticket-writing officer becomes pointless. Don't you think the whole scam is a little self-serving to make their own jobs seem worthwhile or useful?

2) Just because the speed limit is 45 or 35 doesn't mean you have to drive the speed limit all the time. You are allowed to go slower, in fact, most States let you go significantly slower than the speed limit. In fact, you can always drive reasonably and prudently given conditions. The speed limit is not a mandate. Although it can seem that way when set too low. I chalk this one up to bad habits and customs from badly set previous laws. It's not the new improved speed limit's fault here!

3) Did the accident rates actually increase? Or did the traffic increase due to higher and more utilitarian speed limits. Higher speed limits would attract more drivers and cars as now the road serves a greater benefit for getting from A to B faster. If traffic flow increased then increased accidents becomes moot unless the RATE actually did increase? Where they able to isolate for when the limits were lowered? Lowering speed limits would tend to cause an increase in wrecks if lowered below the 85th percentile. That must of been one strange City lawsuit!

4) The 85th percentile is by its very definition a compromise that you seek. Offer a study that says the 80th or 75th percentile is safer and more efficient, and we'll talk about it. Otherwise, it's not up for debate in my view.

5) One Exception: IF surveys show an unusually high accident/collision/fatality rate for a certain stretch of road as compared to national averages, perhaps there can be further compromise.

6) I've found the places where I'm ticketed for speeding are always (not mostly, but always in my small sample size) zones with particularly EXTRA safe collision/fatality rates per million miles traveled. The two studies I remember were 1/6th and 1/8th as dangerous as the average roadway; yet it seems they have 6 or 8 times the enforcement on them, and of course, the speed limit is under the 85th percentile! go figure!

You mean what I always suspected about traffic enforcement and speed laws as the truth from general observation was supported by the Traffic and Engineering surveys? Yes! They say there is genius in noticing patterns and anomalies others might miss. Fortunately, I think the "speed kills" myth and mantra is so obviously false to most people, that most people vote with their right foot on the accelerator. No genius required.

steine13

Changing gears here.. to used-car values, of all the crazy topics...

I'm thinking of taking Thu afternoon of and running to Detroit to check this out:
http://www.matickchevy.com/VehicleSearchResults?category=used&year=2012&make=Ford&model=Fiesta&trim=5dr HB SES

For those not prone to clicking on links in dubious posts, it's a '12 Fiesta SES hatch stick w/ 110k, SES meaning pretty well equipped down to leather steering wheel and sun roof, but still your basic transportation Fiesta with the 1.6....in white, unfortunately, but you can't have everything.

Given Q's recent information on a higher-mileage unit, I'm thinking at most they're into it for the high $2s or $3 but they're asking a proud $6t. I'm also thinking low $4s ought to buy the thing even if it's nice.

This sharing-a-car business is getting old, plus I really enjoyed driving the two examples I"ve looked at so far. There is a lot to like about those little Fords, so long as you're OK with small cars in general.

And If I may ask, what are 2016/17 Fiesta sticks going for...? I see some crazy examples -- even STs -- with asking prices at 60% of MSRP for cars with around 10k miles. That seems.. not right.

steine13

andres3 said:

In 2002 dollars, I was able to avoid a crap box by spending $3,500 plus taxes and fees, by buying from a used car dealer, sticking to Honda, and going with high miles (166K). Also, he had receipts for a few things showing he put some effort into reconditioning the car wherever it had some faults.

I think a big part of this is the high mileage. With the proper care, engines and [some] transmissions will last essentially forever. But one must be careful to find the right car and especially. the right owner.

It takes so little to make a three-year-old car into a complete rat... but it doesn't take that much effort to have a really nice car at 12 years old.

In that sense, I really like high-mileage cars. By definition, a car north of 150k has been taken care of pretty well or it wouldn't be on the road anymore. The next problem is getting the appropriate discount for the miles...

stickguy

the higher mileage cars don't bother me. For the right one. But totally depends on what you plan to do with it. for a kid to use around town, going to school, sure. For a spare car for me, to use for errands and local stuff, sure. For primary, gotta rely on, take on long trips use? Nope.

nyccarguy

stickguy said:

the higher mileage cars don't bother me. For the right one. But totally depends on what you plan to do with it. for a kid to use around town, going to school, sure. For a spare car for me, to use for errands and local stuff, sure. For primary, gotta rely on, take on long trips use? Nope.

chrisk327 said:

chrisk327 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

I was wondering what the real world value is of my car. 2016 WRX STi base model. 20K miles. WR Blue. it has an accident on the car fax noting frame damage. The accident was a front end accident, fully repaired with new subaru parts had literally 1 hr on the bill for frame pulling for the radiator support.

Hmmm...well a radiator support isn't frame damage, so there might have been more to it, or the data was entered wrong. Do you have a VIN you can post? We'll take a look at it.

Hi, the Vin is below. JF1VA2M65G9810636 Thanks Chris

Okay Thanks. The CARFAX report is pretty demonstrative on the damage. It says: Damage reported after accident Structural damage reported Damage to front Damage to left front Damage to right front Perhaps Q can do the math on this one, but given how relatively new it is, it's going to scare a lot of buyers away. If you have a detailed repair order that can clarify matters for the buyer, that might lessen the value hit somewhat--but I suspect the deduct is going to be substantial here. What was the dollar amount of the damage?

Oh boy. Well... this is kind of a gut evaluation. If we're talking trade-in, even if repaired perfectly, I'm gonna say $21k-$22k. Now, if you sell it yourself, due to the desirability by young men of little means, I think it wouldn't get hurt SO bad because they'd be happy to save a couple grand (remember, this is just my gut talking), so I'd try pricing it at $27,495 or $27,995 and take the first $26k offer. 

Point of reference, fair retail for a clean one would be $30k.

Thanks. I was kind of hoping that the trade in value would be around the $26K you're tell me I should take, but I do understand the situation here.

How much do you owe on it?  How come you want to ditch it?  Glad you didn’t get hurt.

I don't owe a lot, I put a lot down, I owned my car outright before this. I want the money out of the car to roll into the next car. I wnt to ditch it b/c well, its behaves like an STI, and even though I thought it was OK and cool as a daily, I'm growing tired of it. Its got a very firm suspension, its fun to wring out when you want to have fun, but in the daily grind its peaky and a pain in traffic. It is a tad on the small side, I could really go a size up. All of these complaints are things that are inherent in the car, but I "had" to have the STI rather than an automatic WRX, so here we are. I basically want something more comfortable, a bit more room, automatic.

Gotcha.  Good to know.  Might I also suggest you join us on the Chronic Car Buyer’s

nyccarguy

stickguy said:

the higher mileage cars don't bother me. For the right one. But totally depends on what you plan to do with it. for a kid to use around town, going to school, sure. For a spare car for me, to use for errands and local stuff, sure. For primary, gotta rely on, take on long trips use? Nope.

I’m with you on this one @stickguy.  @steine13 has a point as well.  My 158,000+ mile Prelude runs like a top.  I’ve taken excellent care of it mechanically.  If I had never bought the Prelude or had gotten rid of it and wanted one (or another one) would I buy my car from another owner in its current condition and mileage, even for the right price?  I don’t know.

qbrozen

steine13 said:

Changing gears here.. to used-car values, of all the crazy topics... I'm thinking of taking Thu afternoon of and running to Detroit to check this out: http://www.matickchevy.com/VehicleSearchResults?category=used&year=2012&make=Ford&model=Fiesta&trim=5dr HB SES For those not prone to clicking on links in dubious posts, it's a '12 Fiesta SES hatch stick w/ 110k, SES meaning pretty well equipped down to leather steering wheel and sun roof, but still your basic transportation Fiesta with the 1.6....in white, unfortunately, but you can't have everything. Given Q's recent information on a higher-mileage unit, I'm thinking at most they're into it for the high $2s or $3 but they're asking a proud $6t. I'm also thinking low $4s ought to buy the thing even if it's nice. This sharing-a-car business is getting old, plus I really enjoyed driving the two examples I"ve looked at so far. There is a lot to like about those little Fords, so long as you're OK with small cars in general. And If I may ask, what are 2016/17 Fiesta sticks going for...? I see some crazy examples -- even STs -- with asking prices at 60% of MSRP for cars with around 10k miles. That seems.. not right.

You are pretty much spot on with the 2012.

2017 SE sedans with 20k'ish miles are right around $10k at auction. You want a stick, so probably $11.5k-$12k should nab one.

steine13

Thanks, Q!
That sounds about right. Wonder what the story is on the ST for $9k asking or the S for $5,995 -- these are 2016/2017 cars with manual transmissions on autotrader and cars.com. Miles around 20k... so it looks like craigs is not the only place for scams. Good to know.

Twelve thousand bucks for a nearly new Fiesta is not attractive to me. Too expensive to get by without collision insurance, plus a lot of cash to just cough up.

At that point, new Cruze hatch here I come for $16. THAT is a good deal but a lot more car than I need. Damn you GM card for making life complicated.

stickguy

This is bigger, but seems like it kinda splits the difference in what you are trying to find (age, miles, price)?

http://www.royaleasing.com/detail-2013-ford-focus-5dr_hatchback_se-used-17662167.html

steine13

Looks great. I'll take it. Please have it here by Friday.

I mean, seriously? Philly?

Other than the distance, that looks like a good deal. No wonder you keep going back to these guys.

stickguy

Wimp. Wes would fly in from Alaska and drive it home if he really wanted it. according to Google maps, only 10.5 hours to Lansing. Only 667 miles.

28firefighter

For those of you keeping track, my buddy ended up submitting a DV claim to the insurance company of the person that rear-ended them. They offered him $675 (which I thought was generous). Apparently based on pictures of the accident, the repair, and the market for the RDX, an independent appraiser that my buddy found put the DV around $3000. He's planning to really fight now.

Thoughts, @Mr_Shiftright ?

xwesx

steine13 said:

Changing gears here.. to used-car values, of all the crazy topics...

I'm thinking of taking Thu afternoon of and running to Detroit to check this out:
http://www.matickchevy.com/VehicleSearchResults?category=used&year=2012&make=Ford&model=Fiesta&trim=5dr HB SES

For those not prone to clicking on links in dubious posts, it's a '12 Fiesta SES hatch stick w/ 110k, SES meaning pretty well equipped down to leather steering wheel and sun roof, but still your basic transportation Fiesta with the 1.6....in white, unfortunately, but you can't have everything.

My Fiesta was an SES w/ manual. Very nicely equipped, pretty decent fuel economy (though not stellar considering how small it is), comfortable for long drives. I sold it three years ago for $10,200 (private party) with ~56,000 miles on it. So, $4K for this one seems about right (assuming it is in good condition!).

Your daughter may have really liked mine.... it was magenta!

Actually, I take it back a bit. I'm not sure how this one can be an SES, yet it has steel wheels and cloth interior? Cloth may have been an option on SES (not sure that it was), but steel wheels certainly were not. Seems maybe suspicious to me.

Michaell

My daughter was involved in a minor incident a couple weeks ago. Stopped at traffic signal, gets bumped from behind by the person behind her, who was hit by someone not paying attention. Very minor damage to the MINI.

The offender has progressive, so they will be coming out to do an estimate the week after next. She will use the same body shop where she got the hail damage repaired.

explorerx4

@steine13,
SES means push button start, heated seats, mood lighting.
Not sure those are the original wheels, they are supposed to be alloys.
I see xwesx already commented, but cloth seats are standard.
Picture below, taken in my driveway, shows the correct wheels.
Probably not a big deal, but you can point it if you start negotiating.

steine13

Thanks... that fits, actually, as the car is shod with Blizzaks on steelies -- they've had it a while. And they can keep it. Dog hair all over + the attendant smell + a bad wheel bearing. Didn't even make a lowball offer. I figured at $6 asking it had better be nice. I was wrong.

I don't get it. There was more than a half million bucks in Corvettes alone in the showroom. What are they doing with a rat like that??? Makes no sense.

Too bad, really, it drove very nicely. I now remember why I started buying new cars.
cheers -mathias

explorerx4

@stein13,
Don't let it deter you from your search, we are living vicariously through it.

stickguy

Mathias, the same exact reason that every time I decide to buy a used/cheaper car I eventually give up. The right one (heck, sometimes any halfway plausible options) never seem to come up. And the process is way too time consuming.

Mr_Shiftright

28firefighter said:

For those of you keeping track, my buddy ended up submitting a DV claim to the insurance company of the person that rear-ended them. They offered him $675 (which I thought was generous). Apparently based on pictures of the accident, the repair, and the market for the RDX, an independent appraiser that my buddy found put the DV around $3000. He's planning to really fight now.

Thoughts, @Mr_Shiftright ?

Depends on how good a job the appraiser does on the DV report. His competence will pretty much determine the outcome. So if he submits evidence + testimonials, that'll all help. If he just guesses, then not so much.

xwesx

explorerx4 said:

Wait a minute... I don't ever remember parking in your driveway!

chrisk327

nyccarguy said:

Gotcha.  Good to know.  Might I also suggest you join us on the Chronic Car Buyer’s

I should!. Its not as bad as it looks. It is a 2016, but was purchased in Sept 15, so I'm over 2.5 years, under 3. Honestly, what is driving me now is 1) bumper to bumper is ending and thinking that may be a little selling point, having some bumper to bumper left. 2) I'm interested in a Forester XT (turbo), and that is going out of production over the summer, since they discontinued the turbo with the new model.
Otherwise I'd run it out until next spring I guess...

explorerx4

@xwesx,
HA HA, that one is Candy Red. A beautiful extra cost paint color.

xwesx

explorerx4 said:

@xwesx,
HA HA, that one is Candy Red. A beautiful extra cost paint color.

Ah! I love the candy red color (believe it or not, my old Econoline van was nearly the same color, called "candy apple red," in 1971!). That lighting, though, masks the intensity of it and it looks quite similar to the appearance of the magenta (raspberry) of my car.

Sandman6472

Mr. Shifty, any way you could check my Golf’s Carfax. The vin# is 3VW217AU9FM044856. Would think by now, the accident has shown up and will bring a lower price come trade time though right now, plan on keeping it. Still too ill to go test driving as I’ve only driven once and felt a bit shaky. Still need some time having someone else drive at this point.
Thanks so much for any help you can give here.. still bummed VW dropped the Golf SEL model as that’s the one I’d want right now. Has all the extras I want and a great warranty now. Will give the new 2019 Jetta another look though wish it was about 10” shorter. Like the Mini Cooper also but just afraid of it’s reliability and how smooth it might drive, hear it’s a jarring ride and want something closer to my Golf. And the Golf wagon does nothing for me.

The Sandman

Sandman6472

Hertz got in a load of new 2018 Ford Fock last month and they all drove so much better than the older units. Ford can say the older ones had no tranny issues but I totally disagree. No matter, the new auto tranny no longer shudders and shifts like a normal auto now. Was waiting for the nonsense to start but they all drove nicely, we had the Tianium model, and was a bit impressed. Even though I dislike any Ford product, I think for the right price, I could be persuaded to purchase one but would have to be a price that blew my socks off!!! And it would have to be a hatchback.

The Sandman

andres3

Mr_Shiftright said:

28firefighter said:

For those of you keeping track, my buddy ended up submitting a DV claim to the insurance company of the person that rear-ended them. They offered him $675 (which I thought was generous). Apparently based on pictures of the accident, the repair, and the market for the RDX, an independent appraiser that my buddy found put the DV around $3000. He's planning to really fight now.

Thoughts, @Mr_Shiftright ?

Depends on how good a job the appraiser does on the DV report. His competence will pretty much determine the outcome. So if he submits evidence + testimonials, that'll all help. If he just guesses, then not so much.

Define evidence and testimonials for me. Evidence such as other accident damaged and non-accident damaged cars for sale of the same model and age?

andres3

28firefighter said:

For those of you keeping track, my buddy ended up submitting a DV claim to the insurance company of the person that rear-ended them. They offered him $675 (which I thought was generous). Apparently based on pictures of the accident, the repair, and the market for the RDX, an independent appraiser that my buddy found put the DV around $3000. He's planning to really fight now.

Thoughts, @Mr_Shiftright ?

Age and mileage of the RDX at the time of the collision? How much was the damage again?

qbrozen

sandman_6472 said:

Hertz got in a load of new 2018 Ford Fock last month and they all drove so much better than the older units. Ford can say the older ones had no tranny issues but I totally disagree. No matter, the new auto tranny no longer shudders and shifts like a normal auto now. Was waiting for the nonsense to start but they all drove nicely, we had the Tianium model, and was a bit impressed. Even though I dislike any Ford product, I think for the right price, I could be persuaded to purchase one but would have to be a price that blew my socks off!!! And it would have to be a hatchback. The Sandman

Never heard that unfortunate model name before. ;b

Mr_Shiftright

sandman_6472 said:

Mr. Shifty, any way you could check my Golf’s Carfax. The vin# is 3VW217AU9FM044856. Would think by now, the accident has shown up and will bring a lower price come trade time though right now, plan on keeping it. Still too ill to go test driving as I’ve only driven once and felt a bit shaky. Still need some time having someone else drive at this point.
Thanks so much for any help you can give here.. still bummed VW dropped the Golf SEL model as that’s the one I’d want right now. Has all the extras I want and a great warranty now. Will give the new 2019 Jetta another look though wish it was about 10” shorter. Like the Mini Cooper also but just afraid of it’s reliability and how smooth it might drive, hear it’s a jarring ride and want something closer to my Golf. And the Golf wagon does nothing for me.

The Sandman

Yes, it's on there now. It reads:

Accident reported
Involving front or side impact
Involving left rear impact
with another motor vehicle
Damage to left side
Damage to rear
Vehicle functional
Airbags did not deploy

Mr_Shiftright

andres3 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

28firefighter said:

For those of you keeping track, my buddy ended up submitting a DV claim to the insurance company of the person that rear-ended them. They offered him $675 (which I thought was generous). Apparently based on pictures of the accident, the repair, and the market for the RDX, an independent appraiser that my buddy found put the DV around $3000. He's planning to really fight now.

Thoughts, @Mr_Shiftright ?

Depends on how good a job the appraiser does on the DV report. His competence will pretty much determine the outcome. So if he submits evidence + testimonials, that'll all help. If he just guesses, then not so much.

Define evidence and testimonials for me. Evidence such as other accident damaged and non-accident damaged cars for sale of the same model and age?

Yes a DV report could/should include other damaged vehicles of a similar type and value; testimonials from used car dealers or from auctions; and legal rulings made recently which might affect deliberation of DV claims; detailed description of the damage and a "grade" as to severity, explaining precisely what is meant by "panel", or "structural"; copies of the body shop work order that might show frame damage or frame straightening.

Stuff like that. A "bad" DV report would be more along the lines of the appraiser's "opinion" or the use of some obscure "table of percentages" that someone made up.

Sandman6472

Thanks so much, figured by now it would show up. My diminished value case is moving along, the guy came and saw my car when I was in the hospital and have not heard a word. My kid works at the law firm so when they hear, she’ll let me know. Have decided to keep it since I’m in no condition to test drive or even make such a big decision right now. Just took it for a spin around the block, as I need to get my driving legs back. Went well even though it was pouring. Petrol prices are hovering around $2.75 to $3.00 right now and have no clue why they’re so high to be honest? With summer almost here, would’ve thought them prices would’ve dropped a bit down to the $2.65 range. Since I’ve been home since May 1st, haven’t needed to put any petrol into the Golf as only my son drove it for those few days he was in town.
So right now, plan is to keep it until I feel well enough to test drive something else. Just hope it’s not dinged to badly once I do trade it. It looks great a ddrives great for a vehicle with 40500 on the clock.

The Sandman

andres3

What's sad is most people first learn about diminished value when they are trading in a recent model upscale car and suddenly lose $5-$6K (or more) in their trade-in offer, which is obvious, and noticeable.

It takes incurring a loss to learn about it usually.

Mr_Shiftright

People who are victims of some other driver's carelessness shouldn't have to suffer DV.

The problem with DV is that it is ill-defined and not well understood. If your new Nissan Versa gets its bumper dented, there's no DV. If your Ferrari gets t-boned, there is massive DV.

andres3

Mr_Shiftright said:

People who are victims of some other driver's carelessness shouldn't have to suffer DV.

The problem with DV is that it is ill-defined and not well understood. If your new Nissan Versa gets its bumper dented, there's no DV. If your Ferrari gets t-boned, there is massive DV.

Yes, but it seems Insurance does a good job of keeping DV on the down low

I don't see that Ferrari vs. Versa phenomenon as being any different than getting a 50% offer on a 2-year old totaled Dodge while getting almost all your money back on a 2-year old totaled Honda. Depreciation varies, why would DV be any different.

kyfdx

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Mr_Shiftright

Some cars are far more sensitive to DV than others, was the point.

True, a percentage of DV is a %---so the dollar amount on a Versa DV will no doubt be less than on an Accord.

But the % is not uniformly applied to all cars nor to all types of damage.

Sandman6472

Not even sure how DV workers, just know they came and inspected my Golf a few weeks ago today. Haven’t heard back yet about what it all means. But hopefully will get some restitution as none of this was my fault, just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

The Sandman

andres3

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

kyfdx

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

If the insurance company is making money off of it, where do you think that money comes from?

stickguy

Sandy, the new Jetta is up to 185" long. It is a big car. Especially by your standards.

stickguy

speaking of the new Jetta, we stopped and checked them out today. Daughter drove it. I rode in the back (in case of attack?).

first impression, it looks like a Jetta, at least from the nose, but much different from the side. Looks a lot bigger (only 3" at most though in length really). Much more stylish looking. I liked it though, lots of style lines.

interior is a big upgrade. Especially the tech features. Very roomy. Rode nice. Daughter said it drove better than her 2015. Not as fast as the Elantra, but moved along fine. Probably comparable to the 1.8t sport.

very well equipped. We drove an R line. Could get by with an SE, but she liked the 2 tone seats. Also comes with 17" wheels, and an electronic LSD. Comes with LED headlights, auto Climate, heated seats, BLI/cross path, auto braking, car play, pano moonroof, keyless entry/go, and some other stuff that slips my mind. But has everything you really need.

I wanted to get home (we were down in Delaware), and are not going to buy for about 3 months, so I did not bother to drive it but will at some point to see how it drives.

overall though, an impressive car.

Sandman6472

Sounds like a nice vehicle and if I have to do 185", just means it'll take up most of my side. I like VW and not so sure I want to look elsewhere to be honest at this point. And since I love having a warranty, theirs is like the best going forward so why not. The two-toned seats sound interesting and think I'll go again with a lighter interior, as there is no gray which is my first choice. Not sure I'd do blue this time and white's nice but since the A3 is white, won't do the same. A dark gray is my #1 right now but will see when the time comes.
Still want to check out Hyundai/Kia and see what they got. The Kona is growing on me as is the Elantra Limited and both hybrids. A friend has the Elantra Limited and I'd swear it was a Sonata when it was in our driveway in March, it looked that good. I hear the Elantra hybrid has that crazy dual rear window which seems ridiculous to me but will withhold judgement until I drive one.
As much as I like MB and BMW, a bit on the expensive side and not really the vehicle for me. I want a long warranty and a smaller size vehicle with somewhat decent mpg's which narrows the playing field substantially. But that's o k because am happy with VW or either of the Korean cousins, On paper, the Ford Ecosport is a 100% match but have to drive one first to see...and need to get over that aversion to anything Ford. Have sat in one a few times at the dealer and liked it, has Sirius/XM and all the controls were where they should be. Ingress/egress was pretty good to be honest with just a slide in and slide out so no spinal problems I could see. The Titanium edition was nice and would give me the Sirius/XM I desire but the mpg's were a bit low. But it's on the short list. Just wish Honda would fix the HR-V issues, the lack of radio knobs and the lack of low end grunt but hoping they address these issues with the new model whenever that will be. They did it on the CR-V and assume they'll do the same with the new HR-V. If so, it could be "the one" as I like Honda's and they are "cheap to keep"

The Sandman

stickguy

I still think you will really like the Kona. Seems to fit your desires to a "T"

Sandman6472

Yes, you've said that before and since we seem to have similar desires in the vehicles we like, gonna go with you on this. I do like the way they look also, a bit out there for some but I'm o k with it. That and the Elantra GT I need to try. Saw a GT the other day and I liked the way it looked. Remember you said you liked the way it drove, with good low end torque, so it'll get up to speed quickly when needed. And having the Hyundai dealer just across the street from the Audi store means we're super close to home if service is ever needed. Add to that their great warranty and I could have a winner here.

The Sandman

andres3

kyfdx said:

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

If the insurance company is making money off of it, where do you think that money comes from?

The people causing wrecks, collisions, and accidents of course. DV doesn't come into play if your never at-fault. People with bad driving records need to pay their fair share.

andres3

kyfdx said:

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

If the insurance company is making money off of it, where do you think that money comes from?

The people causing wrecks, collisions, and accidents of course. DV doesn't come into play if your never at-fault. People with bad driving records need to pay their fair share.

As always, I'll pay a percentage just like I do for "uninsured" or "underinsured" coverages right now. Those are the ones that pay off for me.

kyfdx

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

If the insurance company is making money off of it, where do you think that money comes from?

The people causing wrecks, collisions, and accidents of course. DV doesn't come into play if your never at-fault. People with bad driving records need to pay their fair share.

As always, I'll pay a percentage just like I do for "uninsured" or "underinsured" coverages right now. Those are the ones that pay off for me.

You pay for collision and liability insurance, even if you never make a claim that is your fault. Why would DV be any different?

andres3

kyfdx said:

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

andres3 said:

kyfdx said:

Insurance companies aren't real big on promoting items that might increase the money paid out for claims.

Not sure why anyone would be surprised at that.

Perhaps a law stating the tables and rules and equations that'll be used to determine DV will be final and binding, would make it easy for Insurance companies to appropriately price the risk, and make money off it.

I tried to come up with a simple equation, and it actually isn't so simple. Still, a mathematician could do it.

If the insurance company is making money off of it, where do you think that money comes from?

The people causing wrecks, collisions, and accidents of course. DV doesn't come into play if your never at-fault. People with bad driving records need to pay their fair share.

As always, I'll pay a percentage just like I do for "uninsured" or "underinsured" coverages right now. Those are the ones that pay off for me.

You pay for collision and liability insurance, even if you never make a claim that is your fault. Why would DV be any different?

Because theoretically all not-at-fault claims get subrogated making the injured party and insurance company whole. They don't pay a dime, theoretically.

I guess I'm talking about 3rd party DV claims. I don't need 1st party DV coverage. I can take on that risk myself. Of course, then I need to make sure my under/un insured riders include DV coverage for those drivers.