Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

stever

Mr_Shiftright said:

stever said:

Driving some of those roads, I'd worry a bit about free-range cattle but I've yet to see a square foot outside of Big Bend in Texas that isn't fenced with no trespassing signs. Hitting an antelope would make your day though.

Eastern Oregon will drive you nuts though. Big empty, can see for miles on the straights, expect you'll miss the trooper in the brush waiting to tag you for going over the 55 limit.

What you don't want to hit is a full grown pig.

That would be a boar.

driver100

graphicguy said:

driver100 said:

jmonroe said:

driver100 said:

Quick update from Bern Switzerland. Insurance company found a dealer who will sell me the same car for about $3000 less than my dealer.....so that is the amount they are offering. But it doesn't include technology package ($2600), which my last car had.
Have to fight it out, nothing comes easy.

Sleazy dealer with $3000 lower price does etching for $300! That turns me off right there.

Don't get excited until you talk to someone that has the authority to get to the bottom of this. It sounds like what you got was from a clerk at the office that saw a low number pop up from a search done by them or someone else that didn't do a proper search. I'm almost positive that your VIN will provide all the info required to get you a one for one replacement.

Don't let this spoil your vacation. BTW, I guess Mrs. driver is doing fine since you guys are on vacation and that in itself is a good thing to celebrate given the BIG hit your late car received.

One more thing, I don't really understand you Canadians. What's wrong, you don't get enough cold weather there in the late Summer so you have to go looking for it thousands of miles away? I'll say this though, you're going to really appreciate thawing out this Winter in Florida.

I know you'll let us know what happens when you get back home.

jmonroe

jm, it is actually hot in Switzerland, it has been in the mid to high 8th since we got here....very unusual. I had to run into Him to get some short sleeve Tee shirts, I brought mostly long sleeves.

The trip has been a nice break from all the insurance and accident stuff.

I am in communication with a retired very successful insurance agent and he is advising me. He is saying I should be getting an equivalent car....With the same options.

We will see what the insurance company comes up with..........to be cotinued.

Whenever I've dealt with insurance companies on cars that have been totaled (which thankfully, was only 2, and I walked away from both accidents), they tried the same thing. Take a lower end car, or one with fewer options because it would be cheaper for them.

Fortunately, although my insurance never had to pay out, they went to bat for me. I had one agent tell me that the insurance company who was paying out once claim to me was hoping I didn't have anything else to drive and would settle for less once the rental contract expired.

As I told him...."this is the GG household they're talking about. We never have "only one car"!

I was thinking if I can drag this out maybe I can stretch out the car rental period. I need a rental unit early November. Once I take the payout the insurance company will be off the hook for the rental. I am holding out until they give me a fair amount.

The deal I got included a lot of things the low ball dealer will be charging me for after I agree to to their phony low price.

driver100

Good news murph. The trick was matching the Giants to the exact right buyer.....looks like you did it.
Hopefully she doesn't live in Nigeria.

driver100

nyccarguy said:

@driver100 - I was thinking of you yesterday. I saw a 2016 E400 4Matic Sport in white. I hope you'll be happy with the new one, the one you had was one sweet ride!

I liked the style of my 2015 a little more than the 2017 model. But, there should be lots of technological and engineering improvements in the 17 car.

Sometimes looks grow on you too, so I am hoping that will happen.

andres3

js06gv said:

@stever - I have been surprised by the 75 limits on some of the two lane blacktops out in the boonies in Texas.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I've got a heavy foot but a few of them even have me saying "really?"

I really appreciate speed limits set high enough that they don't make an outlier out of normal flow of traffic. I even encounter a few that make me smile, as I know I can drive spiritedly, have fun, and still not worry about a speeding ticket. They are few and far between in CA though, other than highways with the default 65 or 55 for not being posted at all.

driver100

I have two observations about cars in Switzerland;
1. Only about 20% of private cars are actually cars, the rest are suvs, vans, or station wagons, and station wagons make up about a third of that total.

2. There are no trucks with long hoods and fenders over the front wheels. All trucks have flat fronts. They all seem to be in great shape, a little smaller and neater looking, and they have rails that keep cars from going under the trailers. All have nice paint and they are all clean, they seem to be built lower to the ground......they look like they are safer and have better handling.

andres3

TX will probably the first state since Montana to go "Autobahn" style and eliminate speed limits all together where they are not needed (probably anywhere the speed limit is already 80 or higher).

Of course the safety of the high speed limits will continually prove for greater safety, less accidents, and less death, but each incremental increase is sure to be met with powerful resistance from the "speed kills" myth believers.

How quick people are to blame the rising speed limits for the greater death tolls the last 2 years only to be thwarted by the fact the worst performing States never raised their maximum speed limits yet.

Mr_Shiftright

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I don't think your average American driver has the competence to drive much beyond 85 mph, nor are many "beaters" on the road safe to drive at those speeds. In Germany, they don't allow the piles of crap on the road that we do.

andres3

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I think what happens is you die at 55 or 100, it doesn't matter if you run into a concrete column. So it doesn't make any difference at a certain point a head-on collision from two cars going 55 (110 MPH impact) vs. a 220 MPH impact if both are going 110 MPH will lead to the same result, death. If anything, crashing at 220 MPH speed differential is probably more humane and merciful as death will come very quickly vs. what might be an agonizing end at 55 MPG into a concrete column.

Remember, these high (or limitless) speed limits are reserved for roads that have traffic all going the exact same direction, making high speed collisions or head-on crashes extremely rare.

Also, since there are less collisions there is less opportunity to be exposed to the mayhem and hazards of a crash. It's the same phenomenon as the safety of air travel; which by the way, have cruising speeds that make a Bugatti's top speed seem slow.

Michaell

Just read an article that the unrestricted speed limit stretch of the Sturt Highway in the Northern Territory of Australia will be going away by the end of the year.

There was about a 200 mile stretch where 'reasonable and prudent' was the limit, but the newly elected territorial government will restrict it to 130 km/h (about 81 MPH) soon.

Porsche is raising an issue as it was one of the few places where they could test top speed in real world conditions.

Mr_Shiftright

andres3 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I think what happens is you die at 55 or 100, it doesn't matter if you run into a concrete column. So it doesn't make any difference at a certain point a head-on collision from two cars going 55 (110 MPH impact) vs. a 220 MPH impact if both are going 110 MPH will lead to the same result, death. If anything, crashing at 220 MPH speed differential is probably more humane and merciful as death will come very quickly vs. what might be an agonizing end at 55 MPG into a concrete column.

Remember, these high (or limitless) speed limits are reserved for roads that have traffic all going the exact same direction, making high speed collisions or head-on crashes extremely rare.

Also, since there are less collisions there is less opportunity to be exposed to the mayhem and hazards of a crash. It's the same phenomenon as the safety of air travel; which by the way, have cruising speeds that make a Bugatti's top speed seem slow.

Well okay if you want to make sure people die quickly and efficiently, then have unrestricted speed limits.

I would personally AVOID any road in America that had no speed limit.

ab348

I guess speed depends on what you're used to. Here most of the rural expressways have limits of 110 km/h (66mph) and most people drive 120 (72mph). That feels OK to me on most roads but we have some that were converted into 4-lane expressways from the original 2-lane highway routing and you occasionally get an oddball curve that is sharper than normal or other design flaws that make me feel less than safe at those speeds. I suppose when I was younger I would easily drive 75 or 80 mph but now that depends on the vehicle I am in and its capabilities. If something goes bad at 80 you don't have much chance to recover.

stickguy

well, from experience, on most of the normal highways in this area, 80 is easy. With cars today, it is common to sneak up on that without realizing it when traffic is light. Even more sometimes.

I would probably be good up to 80 on the better roads, traffic permitting, but would be very happy to have a lot of them jump to 75! some even 70.

even if they made it unlimited, I doubt I would be doing much over 80 most of the time.

andres3

stickguy said:

well, from experience, on most of the normal highways in this area, 80 is easy. With cars today, it is common to sneak up on that without realizing it when traffic is light. Even more sometimes.

I would probably be good up to 80 on the better roads, traffic permitting, but would be very happy to have a lot of them jump to 75! some even 70.

even if they made it unlimited, I doubt I would be doing much over 80 most of the time.

And that's perfectly OK. I believe 80 MPH was the top safe and comfortable cruising speed of the wife's old '05 Honda Civic EX. With proper lane discipline and courtesy, speed differentials are not nearly as dangerous as are roads where lane enforcement is lacking.

andres3

Mr_Shiftright said:

andres3 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I think what happens is you die at 55 or 100, it doesn't matter if you run into a concrete column. So it doesn't make any difference at a certain point a head-on collision from two cars going 55 (110 MPH impact) vs. a 220 MPH impact if both are going 110 MPH will lead to the same result, death. If anything, crashing at 220 MPH speed differential is probably more humane and merciful as death will come very quickly vs. what might be an agonizing end at 55 MPG into a concrete column.

Remember, these high (or limitless) speed limits are reserved for roads that have traffic all going the exact same direction, making high speed collisions or head-on crashes extremely rare.

Also, since there are less collisions there is less opportunity to be exposed to the mayhem and hazards of a crash. It's the same phenomenon as the safety of air travel; which by the way, have cruising speeds that make a Bugatti's top speed seem slow.

Well okay if you want to make sure people die quickly and efficiently, then have unrestricted speed limits.

I would personally AVOID any road in America that had no speed limit.

Most accidents occur at very low speeds (the vast majority). Based on my last couple fender benders (one of which I wasn't present for since my car was parked), I should avoid roads with 35 MPH or lower speed limits, and parking lots at Costco! Is 10 or 15 MPH the conventional accepted speed limit in parking lots?

I bet this holds true for most here when they think of their last couple accident collision occurrences.

snakeweasel

berri said:

Now Snake, take I-88 in rural western Illinois. There isn't much traffic on it usually, but often you see more cops running speed traps on it than on the much busier (and usually more speeders) I-80 some 20 miles south and essentially parallel. Why, because the Illinois State Police has a headquarters in the Sterling / Rock Falls area off of I-88. It has nothing to do with safety. It is a pure function of revenue and overheard absorption. If you have a headquarters that hasn't much to police but traffic on a low volume tollway, then it seems you have a headquarters that ought to just be eliminated to me.

I am going to have to challenge you on that one. The Sterling/Rock Falls State Police headquarters is the headquarters for State Police district 1. District 1 covers an area of over 2,650 square miles (larger than the state of Delaware) and patrols all the state roads in that area, so yes it has a lot to police. It is centrally situated in that area and they do not patrol the Tollway, the Tollway is patrolled by district 15 which is headquartered in Downers Grove. Only the very end of I-88, which is a freeway, is patrolled by district 1.

I would also like to know if that is the case with Sterling/Rock Falls how come we don't see the same thing on I-80 which has District 17's headquarters on it at LaSalle/Peru right off the highway?

I have had many people tell me to go slow through LaSalle/Peru because of the state police there, but I have never seen anyone pulled over near there unless it was a county police car.

Truth be told I regularly go down both and while I-80 is busier it isn't by much and I really don't see much of a difference in people being pulled over. Now 20 years ago on I-88 you could drive for a long time on a seemingly empty road, but those days are long gone. The buildup of the Western suburbs have seen to that.

roadburner

When we were saddled with the asinine 55 mph NMSL I drove 80-85 mph- assisted by a CB radio and a first generation Escort radar detector. I never received a ticket. Today most interstates in my area are 70 mph, and I still drive them at around 80 mph(as conditions permit). I think its a comfortable and reasonable speed for most limited access highways outside of urban areas.

andres3

roadburner said:

When we were saddled with the asinine 55 mph NMSL I drove 80-85 mph- assisted by a CB radio and a first generation Escort radar detector. I never received a ticket. Today most interstates in my area are 70 mph, and I still drive them at around 80 mph(as conditions permit). I think its a comfortable and reasonable speed for most limited access highways outside of urban areas.

I would add that quick bursts of +10 MPH to 90 MPH should be legal, as it is safe to do so and can be conducive to avoiding an anticipated bottleneck or hold-up due to a couple oblivious drivers that are about to engage in a multi-lane going the same exact speed rolling roadblock. By speeding up from your normal cruising speed for a few seconds you can avoid the congestion, potential calamities, and more!

They should also re-write the book on speeding to allow momentary bursts of speed when passing on a two lane highway. When you are facing oncoming head-on traffic, it isn't a time to be minding the speed limit.

snakeweasel

bwia said:

How to Close the sale when the customer objects that the payment is too high. I thought I'd share this short training video that appears to be quite effective, and probably more so if the vehicle has a high residual value.

From that perspective, it makes leasing very expensive by comparison and thus the old saying -- leasing is for suckers. Enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO9APD0yc1U

I am an accountant and one thing you should never do is give an accountant figures because we will crunch them.

OK $600 a month for 60 months totals $36,000 and the guy says that it is a $50,000 car. That means we have a difference of $14,000. Now unless you got zero percent interest part of that $36,000 is interest on the loan, add to that title, tax, license, Doc fee, nurse fee, nitrogen in the tires, helium in the trunk (makes the car lighter and saves on gas, get with it guys), advertising fees, delivery fees, set up fees, undercoating, overcoating, inside coating, mop and glow, rinse and spit, rise and shine, Rowen and Martin, Martin and Lewis, lot boy fee, inventory lookup fee, you're breathing our air fee, papal blessing fee, because we can fee and the ever present "if you want to buy this car you have to pay this fee" fee you're looking at a down payment of at least $20,000.

So now 5 years down the line you have a car that's worth no more than your original down payment and maybe even less. This means your not getting that $333 of every payment back, all you're getting is a bunch of hot air.

snakeweasel

Mr_Shiftright said:

My only real resistance to leasing is that it is hard to bail out early.

My real resistance is that you never get out of making car payments.

3 more payments and then both cars will be paid off. Hoping for many years of payment free life.

explorerx4

I've been looking around for another vehicle, although I don't need one, just like having the extra set of wheels, just in case.
One of my kids mentioned looking for something new. I guess it runs in the family(at least my side).
Taking her '09 Escape in for 90k service on Wednesday.
Thinking maybe I could buy it and help out with the payments on something new.
My kids didn't get anything from their Oma when she passed, but I wanted to give them something.
My other daughter got my wife's 2013 Escape Titanium, which was easy because no cash was involved.

snakeweasel

henryn said:

andres3 said:

henryn said:

Last night I was very happy with the brakes on my Passat. I was driving along a busy surface street, 4 lanes, divided with an esplanade. About 8:30, full dark, but good street lighting, businesses all along the street on both sides.

A fair bit of traffic, but not congested, cars spaced and moving at about 30 mph. I was in the right hand lane, as I was going to make a right turn at the next light. Some idiot sitting at the stop sign on a side street, decides to pull out in front of me. I mean, directly in front of me. Very luckily, I was looking right at him, saw what he was doing as soon as he started doing it, and hit the brakes very hard. The Passat stopped with about 2 feet to spare, very, very close thing.

If I had been looking down at the radio, or thinking about work, or any of a hundred different things, I would have hit him square in the driver’s door at 30 mph. If I had been driving my truck, I would have hit him, the truck is new (5k miles), so perfect brakes, but a pickup truck, any half ton pickup, cannot stop as quickly as the Passat did.

Now imagine is someone had skimped on decent tires and lengthened their stopping distance 4 feet because of that. Frankly, just another couple feet could be the difference between a claim and no claim, points or no points. There is so much riding on your tires (end of commercial here).

It has been a while since I did a true panic stop, try to push the brake pedal through the floor board, hold on and hope for the best. I really expected to hit this guy, he did not leave enough room for me to stop. I was very happy that the car did stop in time, that is after I quit shaking from the adrenaline.

I know that modern ABS, anti-lock braking systems, pulse the brakes, turning them on and off very rapidly to prevent the tires from skidding. I remember noticing, in a back corner of my mind, the part that wasn’t in total panic mode, that the brakes were really jerking the car. I mean seriously hard jerking, very rapid. It worked, and I’m very glad it worked. It’s not the kind of thing that I test, so I have no idea if my last few cars (and trucks) would do the same. Very noticeable, though, very.

Back in the late 80's/early 90's when I bought my first car with antilock brakes the salesman suggested that the first time it snows I find a vacant parking lot go in there and get up soe speed then lock up the brakes so I could experience what the ABS does. that way I would know what to expect if it happened in traffic.

Good advice.

stickguy

well, if you always trade your car in at or before the end of the loan, you don't own a car outright either. So that isn't a leasing issue, it's a gotta have a new car issue.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

Someone said how about enacting speed limits based on what the road was designed for; be careful what you wish for. Many engineers would agree our Interstates were designed to easily handle 100 MPH traffic. Now when traffic gets too heavy 100 MPH is obviously unrealistic, but that doesn't change the fact the road can support 100 MPH when not too many people are on it.

Actually the interstates, with few exceptions, were designed for 80MPH.

snakeweasel

js06gv said:

@stever - I have been surprised by the 75 limits on some of the two lane blacktops out in the boonies in Texas.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I've got a heavy foot but a few of them even have me saying "really?"

75 MPH? I once came across a 7.5 MPH speed limit sign.

It was on a road in the old Joliet arsenal so all I can say is that if you were driving around bombs you would drive slooooooow too. the sign is now gone and area is now open for hiking and biking (no driving).

Should have gotten a picture of it.

stever

Turns out that's the average speed limit in Beijing.

cdnpinhead

snakeweasel said:

. . . part of that . . . is interest on the loan, add to that title, tax, license, Doc fee, nurse fee, nitrogen in the tires, helium in the trunk (makes the car lighter and saves on gas, get with it guys), advertising fees, delivery fees, set up fees, undercoating, overcoating, inside coating, mop and glow, rinse and spit, rise and shine, Rowen and Martin, Martin and Lewis, lot boy fee, inventory lookup fee, you're breathing our air fee, papal blessing fee, because we can fee and the ever present "if you want to buy this car you have to pay this fee" fee . . .

As I heard on one of these boards many years ago and will repeat here: "I bow down to this post."

Well done!

snakeweasel

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I don't think your average American driver has the competence to drive much beyond 85 mph, nor are many "beaters" on the road safe to drive at those speeds. In Germany, they don't allow the piles of crap on the road that we do.

there have been multiple studies that support that increase speeds increase your likelihood of being in a fatal accident. Some suggest that it increases by as much as 5% per 1 MPH increase.

When you hit something going 100 MPH you are hitting it with 3.3 times as much force as you would at 55 MPH. Not to mention that going faster makes it harder to maneuver the car, brake or if something happens it is harder to maintain control. run over a 4X4 at 80 MPH and you will find out.

The one fact that people like Andres like to omit from statements about the worst performing states having never increased their speed limits is that 1.) the worse performing states are usually the most congested states and congestion is another factor that increases risk of accidents and 2.) the states that did raise their limits did see an increase in accidents.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

Remember, these high (or limitless) speed limits are reserved for roads that have traffic all going the exact same direction, making high speed collisions or head-on crashes extremely rare.

Head on crashes yes, however it does increase single car crashes.

andres3 said:

Also, since there are less collisions there is less opportunity to be exposed to the mayhem and hazards of a crash. It's the same phenomenon as the safety of air travel; which by the way, have cruising speeds that make a Bugatti's top speed seem slow.

I'll tell you what, when every driver goes through an extensive training program and then has to do thousands of hours as a co-pilot before being the pilot. then has to pilot their car in such a way that they are at least a mile from any other car and are strictly controlled by traffic controllers who know where everyone is at and that they lose their license if they violate the rules then you can compare air traffic with cars.

explorerx4

All these speeding posts remind me of this:

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

andres3 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I think what happens is you die at 55 or 100, it doesn't matter if you run into a concrete column. So it doesn't make any difference at a certain point a head-on collision from two cars going 55 (110 MPH impact) vs. a 220 MPH impact if both are going 110 MPH will lead to the same result, death. If anything, crashing at 220 MPH speed differential is probably more humane and merciful as death will come very quickly vs. what might be an agonizing end at 55 MPG into a concrete column.

Remember, these high (or limitless) speed limits are reserved for roads that have traffic all going the exact same direction, making high speed collisions or head-on crashes extremely rare.

Also, since there are less collisions there is less opportunity to be exposed to the mayhem and hazards of a crash. It's the same phenomenon as the safety of air travel; which by the way, have cruising speeds that make a Bugatti's top speed seem slow.

Well okay if you want to make sure people die quickly and efficiently, then have unrestricted speed limits.

I would personally AVOID any road in America that had no speed limit.

Most accidents occur at very low speeds (the vast majority). Based on my last couple fender benders (one of which I wasn't present for since my car was parked), I should avoid roads with 35 MPH or lower speed limits, and parking lots at Costco! Is 10 or 15 MPH the conventional accepted speed limit in parking lots?

I bet this holds true for most here when they think of their last couple accident collision occurrences.

Also avoid driving within 25 miles of your home as most accidents happen within 25 miles of your home.

Both stats are meaningless as they don't address the amount of time spent driving at slower speeds or how much driving is done within 25 miles of home.

Also remember most reported speeds at the time of an accident are self reported.

"Yes officer I was only doing the speed limit of 35 MPH when I ran off the road and launched my car 100 feet into the air and into the corn field".

snakeweasel

stickguy said:

well, if you always trade your car in at or before the end of the loan, you don't own a car outright either. So that isn't a leasing issue, it's a gotta have a new car issue.

The thing is is that leasing forces you into the new car every X number of years. Now if you trade your car in before your pay it off then yes you never outright own the car. But that's your choice, you could keep it but not with the lease.

oldfarmer50

murphydog said:

Last Ghia update -

Looks like I finally found a buyer. Got a hit from the Craig's list ad Friday, she lives less than a mile from me and has always wanted a Karmann Ghia - "ever since I saw Pretty in Pink I have wanted a Karmann Ghia". She came over Sunday to look the car over. Fired it up, adjusted the seats and gave it a good look over. I answered a few questions and she says what is my bottom dollar. Mind you it was listed at $14,500, but at this point I am tired and want to move on so I say we could take $13K. She says deal!!!

I am a little surprised as she did not actually drive it yet. She knows air-cooled VWs as she has a 78 convertible bug that is in need of lots more work, and she has a shop nearby that she is comfortable using.

I am waiting for the $$ transfer to my savings account today, and she will be picking up tonight.

Net net - took a lot longer than I thought, and given the uniqueness of the car it was harder to market than I thought it would be. Still very surprised by the very few hits from Craig's list. Will pull down all three ads once the $$ is in my account.

Great news. I bet you feel relieved. I would have kept it had I had been you.

stever

explorerx4 said:

All these speeding posts remind me of this:

That's about the most boring piñata I've ever seen. Hope there's at least some excitement inside it.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

js06gv said:

@stever - I have been surprised by the 75 limits on some of the two lane blacktops out in the boonies in Texas.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I've got a heavy foot but a few of them even have me saying "really?"

75 MPH? I once came across a 7.5 MPH speed limit sign.

It was on a road in the old Joliet arsenal so all I can say is that if you were driving around bombs you would drive slooooooow too. the sign is now gone and area is now open for hiking and biking (no driving).

Should have gotten a picture of it.

The speed limit in our bus compound is 5mph. And the boss is serious about it.

The diesels IDLE at 7.

The only fun I have at that place is after the first inch of snow when I can get the old Lincoln to pivot in a circle around the front bumper in the driver's parking lot.

berri

Now that sounds like one of those military Catch 22's

stickguy

snake, actually you can keep the same car on a lease. Right there in the contract how much it costs to buy it out.

like I said, it is just a different way to finance vs. taking out a loan. Instead of a big DP then pay until you own, it is payments for a set period, then a balloon payment at the end. At least on the lease, all the figures are locked in up front. On a purchase, the buyer assumes all the market risk.

nyccarguy

cdnpinhead said:

snakeweasel said:

. . . part of that . . . is interest on the loan, add to that title, tax, license, Doc fee, nurse fee, nitrogen in the tires, helium in the trunk (makes the car lighter and saves on gas, get with it guys), advertising fees, delivery fees, set up fees, undercoating, overcoating, inside coating, mop and glow, rinse and spit, rise and shine, Rowen and Martin, Martin and Lewis, lot boy fee, inventory lookup fee, you're breathing our air fee, papal blessing fee, because we can fee and the ever present "if you want to buy this car you have to pay this fee" fee . . .

As I heard on one of these boards many years ago and will repeat here: "I bow down to this post."

Well done!

Have you ever watched the SEINFELD episode when he's trying to get the "insider's deal" on a new car from Elaine's Boyfriend? In the middle of the episode, Elaine breaks up with him and the guy starts "sticking" Jerry with all these fees. Jerry is of course going nuts as he reads the laundry list:

Jerry: "finder's fee? It was on the lot!"

Putty (Salesman): "That's right. I had to go find it."

The actual car is a side show compared to the circus of extras:

Doc Fees (or Conveyance Fees as they call them here in CT) that cost anywhere from $199 - $599 (I know it's higher in GA & FL).

I sat in the F&I office with my Dad when my parents bought their 1st Cayenne in 2011. I watched the guy try to sell them a $5,000+ extended warranty & a $5,000 + Tire & Wheel warranty. I asked the salesman what kind of car he drove: "An Acura TL." I then asked the F&I guy what kind of car he drives: "They give me a 911 Turbo Cabriolet as a DEMO." Guess who makes more money for the dealership?

fintail

I agree with those speeds. Outside of the cities, they are fine for even a mildly competent driver.

It's funny/depressing to think that 60 years ago, my grandfather was driving on many of the same roads I drive now. He was in an oversprung underbraked marshmallow of a car with almost nothing in the way of passive or active safety. The limits were usually equal to or even sometimes greater than those today, and few were crying about it. Modern cars are monumentally safer and better. The fuddy duddy old scaredy cats and nannies who know what is best for all and are protecting us from ourselves, won't we think of the children, aren't exactly creating progress. Of course, when they don't have to submit verifiable third party data to support their claims - and those who oppose them are expected to build Rome in a day, the world is their oyster. It's an industry.

roadburner said:

When we were saddled with the asinine 55 mph NMSL I drove 80-85 mph- assisted by a CB radio and a first generation Escort radar detector. I never received a ticket. Today most interstates in my area are 70 mph, and I still drive them at around 80 mph(as conditions permit). I think its a comfortable and reasonable speed for most limited access highways outside of urban areas.

fintail

No car payments is a good thing, if you like the car/cars. Sometimes, life is too short

For many cars, if one wants to buy new but isn't going to keep it for maybe 6-7 years or more, I suspect leasing is cheaper, especially if one knows how to negotiate even just a little.

fintail

But it's for your safety! We must protect you from yourself! Not for money, nope! And this is a big factor in why so many don't respect the profession.

stever said:

Driving some of those roads, I'd worry a bit about free-range cattle but I've yet to see a square foot outside of Big Bend in Texas that isn't fenced with no trespassing signs. Hitting an antelope would make your day though.

Eastern Oregon will drive you nuts though. Big empty, can see for miles on the straights, except you'll miss the trooper in the brush waiting to tag you for going over the 55 limit.

stever

I'm curious to see what happens when autonomous cars (that presumably will drive the speed limit) hit the roads in significant numbers. Might make it easier to speed in the left lane, but you may occasionally wind up behind longish car trains on the two lanes.

Gonna be a tough choice - "drive" and get there 5 minutes faster or "ride" and do something fun and immersive, like playing pinball on the iPad.

fintail

I'm curious to see if/how the powers that be will even allow mass market autonomous cars on the road - if we can assume they won't be speeding or violating other well thought out and defendable laws , what will compensate for those revenue streams? What will the LEOs do with their time? What will become of the useless little goshforsaken heckholes that rely on speedtrap revenue?

Going 75 in a 65 for a 6 hour drive will save a lot more than 5 minutes, If Americans could fathom lane discipline, a lot of these arguments wouldn't exist.

js06gv

!

Have you ever watched the SEINFELD episode when he's trying to get the "insider's deal" on a new car from Elaine's Boyfriend? In the middle of the episode, Elaine breaks up with him and the guy starts "sticking" Jerry with all these fees. Jerry is of course going nuts as he reads the laundry list:

Jerry: "finder's fee? It was on the lot!"

Putty (Salesman): "That's right. I had to go find it."



@nyccarguy and the charge for "keys" because as Putty says "How are you gonna start it?" One of my favorite Seinfeld episodes, probably because it involved cars!

stickguy

One problem with the autonomous car to travel. You don't have your own wheels wherever you are going

murphydog

oldfarmer50 said:

murphydog said:

Last Ghia update -

Great news. I bet you feel relieved. I would have kept it had I had been you.

I did think about it, but I simply did not love the car enough for the amount of $$ I had to spend to get it put back together. When dad died the body was still of the chassis, a carpet kit was needed as well as a new wiring harness. Plus I went ahead and upgraded the wheels and tires. I am just glad to have sold it for more that it owed me!

stever

stickguy said:

One problem with the autonomous car to travel. You don't have your own wheels wherever you are going

You could "drive" your own autonomous car around. But then you'd lose that garage slot, unless you sent it somewhere else for parking off-site.

nyccarguy

fintail said:

No car payments is a good thing, if you like the car/cars. Sometimes, life is too short

For many cars, if one wants to buy new but isn't going to keep it for maybe 6-7 years or more, I suspect leasing is cheaper, especially if one knows how to negotiate even just a little.

This is the internal battle going on within me on a daily basis.

stickguy

I was good. For years no payments. This current round of college years, screwed that up. Soon though, will be back to max of one, and possibly none if I go cheap!

ab348

fintail said:

No car payments is a good thing, if you like the car/cars. Sometimes, life is too short

For many cars, if one wants to buy new but isn't going to keep it for maybe 6-7 years or more, I suspect leasing is cheaper, especially if one knows how to negotiate even just a little.

Aside from the Cutlass, I have never kept a car longer than 6 years. This made me think about that history:

'77 LeMans - 4 years
'85 MR2 - 4 years
'90 GTI - 4 years
'64 Skylark - 5 years
'78 Delta 88 - 6 years
'79 Park Avenue - 3 years
'02 Intrigue - 6 years
'09 LaCrosse - 2 years
'11 Regal Turbo - 3 years
'14 ATS - ???

All were owned except the last 2 which were leased. I must take after my dad and like to change cars fairly often.