Cash for Clunkers...
- Thread starter mrsilv04
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
just did 2 engine disables. one on a 91ish ranger that lasted about 4 minutes, another on a 86 ranger with a 2.9l that lasted about 6 minutes. got them on video, including the radiator exploding on the ranger.
That sucks. 23 years ended by liquid sand dumped in the engine.
just did 2 engine disables. one on a 91ish ranger that lasted about 4 minutes, another on a 86 ranger with a 2.9l that lasted about 6 minutes. got them on video, including the radiator exploding on the ranger.
That sucks. 23 years ended by liquid sand dumped in the engine.
I wonder how many of the cars bought with the cash-for-clunkers eventually get repo'd. Bet we won't be seeing any of those stats!
I doubt my wife will let her Astra get repoed.
What did you trade in for the Astra?
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
just did 2 engine disables. one on a 91ish ranger that lasted about 4 minutes, another on a 86 ranger with a 2.9l that lasted about 6 minutes. got them on video, including the radiator exploding on the ranger.
That sucks. 23 years ended by liquid sand dumped in the engine.
Yea that does suck.
Then you have guys like me.........
Got the 2.9 in my 1990 Bronco2 rebuilt at around 150,000 miles.
She's sittin at 180,000 now, and ready for the next 120,000+!
Specially with 2 new "world super duty" heads, and a new flowmaster exhaust! hee hee hee!
No way in all [censored] will MY 2.9 ever see "liquid glass".
Unless its to patch up a fender or quarter panel. LOL!
Wonder if this [censored] off the govt. eco-nazi types?
It DOES?!?
YEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWW!
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
just did 2 engine disables. one on a 91ish ranger that lasted about 4 minutes, another on a 86 ranger with a 2.9l that lasted about 6 minutes. got them on video, including the radiator exploding on the ranger.
That sucks. 23 years ended by liquid sand dumped in the engine.
Yea that does suck.
Then you have guys like me.........
Got the 2.9 in my 1990 Bronco2 rebuilt at around 150,000 miles.
She's sittin at 180,000 now, and ready for the next 120,000+!
Specially with 2 new "world super duty" heads, and a new flowmaster exhaust! hee hee hee!
No way in all [censored] will MY 2.9 ever see "liquid glass".
Unless its to patch up a fender or quarter panel. LOL!
Wonder if this [censored] off the govt. eco-nazi types?
It DOES?!?
YEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWW!
Originally Posted By: opus1
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible. Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible. Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
Originally Posted By: 1999nick
Originally Posted By: opus1
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible. Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
My girlfriend's parents tried to get rid of their '97 Bonneville and that didn't qualify either, for some reason. It gets pretty bad gas mileage, and it has almost 200,000 miles on it and runs horribly.
Originally Posted By: opus1
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible. Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
My girlfriend's parents tried to get rid of their '97 Bonneville and that didn't qualify either, for some reason. It gets pretty bad gas mileage, and it has almost 200,000 miles on it and runs horribly.
Originally Posted By: ThirdeYe
My girlfriend's parents tried to get rid of their '97 Bonneville and that didn't qualify either, for some reason. It gets pretty bad gas mileage, and it has almost 200,000 miles on it and runs horribly.
doesn't matter what it gets now, they go by EPA.
The stimulus people would be mad if a true clunker made it through, as it would have to be replaced shortly anyway, stimulus or no.
My girlfriend's parents tried to get rid of their '97 Bonneville and that didn't qualify either, for some reason. It gets pretty bad gas mileage, and it has almost 200,000 miles on it and runs horribly.
doesn't matter what it gets now, they go by EPA.
The stimulus people would be mad if a true clunker made it through, as it would have to be replaced shortly anyway, stimulus or no.
Originally Posted By: 1999nick
Originally Posted By: opus1
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible.
Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
I just called the local Ford dealer and my 96 Merc GM does qualify with 18 MPG.
Originally Posted By: opus1
Granted, I only watched 2 of the videos, but where the heck are the "clunkers"?
I find it hard to believe that the owner of that Volvo couldn't have gotten more than $4500 for it some other way.
Really hard to believe a Volvo actually qualified, when they say a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis gets 19 mpg and is not eligible.
Just what cars are eligible if a Grand Marquis isn't?
I just called the local Ford dealer and my 96 Merc GM does qualify with 18 MPG.
Originally Posted By: ms21043
These must be worth more than $4500?
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
These must be worth more than $4500?
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
Quote:
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
I think they're required to de-streetifize it, in order to get their $$$$. One of the guys here said they have to dump something in the engine oil, then start it, which causes it to seize up.. Dunno what that is.
From an earlier post:
we got the paperwork for it. you have to drain the oil and add some substance, not sure what exactly. then run the motor at 2k rpm until it seizes. then we have to call a salvage yard to takes it and crushes it. apparently we also have to destroy the trans internals as well.
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
I think they're required to de-streetifize it, in order to get their $$$$. One of the guys here said they have to dump something in the engine oil, then start it, which causes it to seize up.. Dunno what that is.
From an earlier post:
we got the paperwork for it. you have to drain the oil and add some substance, not sure what exactly. then run the motor at 2k rpm until it seizes. then we have to call a salvage yard to takes it and crushes it. apparently we also have to destroy the trans internals as well.
Originally Posted By: RWEST
Quote:
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
I think they're required to de-streetifize it, in order to get their $$$$. One of the guys here said they have to dump something in the engine oil, then start it, which causes it to seize up.. Dunno what that is.
From an earlier post:
we got the paperwork for it. you have to drain the oil and add some substance, not sure what exactly. then run the motor at 2k rpm until it seizes. then we have to call a salvage yard to takes it and crushes it. apparently we also have to destroy the trans internals as well.
No, no. What I mean is, instead of putting a car such as the Cadillac and Mercedes in the picture in the "Clunkers" program, just give the customer a $4500 trade-in allowance and then sell the car at auction for much more than $4500. No reason for the customer to know, and the dealer makes a profit on the resale instead of nothing.
Quote:
You are right. Wonder if there is any reason why a dealer couldn't, after giving the owner a $4500 trade-in allowance for a vehicle like these, just take the vehicle to auction and sell it for much more, instead of treating it as a "Clunker"?
I think they're required to de-streetifize it, in order to get their $$$$. One of the guys here said they have to dump something in the engine oil, then start it, which causes it to seize up.. Dunno what that is.
From an earlier post:
we got the paperwork for it. you have to drain the oil and add some substance, not sure what exactly. then run the motor at 2k rpm until it seizes. then we have to call a salvage yard to takes it and crushes it. apparently we also have to destroy the trans internals as well.
No, no. What I mean is, instead of putting a car such as the Cadillac and Mercedes in the picture in the "Clunkers" program, just give the customer a $4500 trade-in allowance and then sell the car at auction for much more than $4500. No reason for the customer to know, and the dealer makes a profit on the resale instead of nothing.
I'm sure they will do that if they can get more than $4,500 for the car at auction. But there is always the risk that it will not sell on the auction and they miss out on the risk free clunker money. So unless it's a sure bet, they will go with the government money.
Originally Posted By: 1999nick
No, no. What I mean is, instead of putting a car such as the Cadillac and Mercedes in the picture in the "Clunkers" program, just give the customer a $4500 trade-in allowance and then sell the car at auction for much more than $4500. No reason for the customer to know, and the dealer makes a profit on the resale instead of nothing.
Some of our local dealers are doing that. On every lot of clunkers, I've seen at least three Jeep Cherokees (SJ and XJ). At one Toyota dealer they had an XJ up in the used lot up on a ramp for $5500. This particular dealer has few clunkers and the ones that they do have are clunk-worthy (rust, fire damage, missing windows, dents, etc).
No, no. What I mean is, instead of putting a car such as the Cadillac and Mercedes in the picture in the "Clunkers" program, just give the customer a $4500 trade-in allowance and then sell the car at auction for much more than $4500. No reason for the customer to know, and the dealer makes a profit on the resale instead of nothing.
Some of our local dealers are doing that. On every lot of clunkers, I've seen at least three Jeep Cherokees (SJ and XJ). At one Toyota dealer they had an XJ up in the used lot up on a ramp for $5500. This particular dealer has few clunkers and the ones that they do have are clunk-worthy (rust, fire damage, missing windows, dents, etc).
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
since these clunker trades are for more fuel efficient vehicles, there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
The average gain for the trade-up was 9mpg, multiplied by 250,000 cars. Assuming 12k mi per year, that translates to about 40 million less gallons of gas consumed annually which is pretty insignificant. I doubt CFC would reduce gas prices more than a couple of pennies
since these clunker trades are for more fuel efficient vehicles, there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
The average gain for the trade-up was 9mpg, multiplied by 250,000 cars. Assuming 12k mi per year, that translates to about 40 million less gallons of gas consumed annually which is pretty insignificant. I doubt CFC would reduce gas prices more than a couple of pennies
Quote:
there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
NEVER happen. Corporations want, and now expect a certain profit (ie: utility companies) and they will raise prices to maintain their profit levels. Electric companies did it here a few years ago. 1st was 'turn off the lights, save electricty' (the early '70's). 2nd was the 'hey, you guys are doing great, we've saved a bajillion kilowatts' (late 80's thru early 90's) and finally; 3rd "Due to less demand we have lost significant income and can't maintain the system so we will need to raise your rates" (late 90's, early 00's). The same will happen with gasoline.
Alex.
there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
NEVER happen. Corporations want, and now expect a certain profit (ie: utility companies) and they will raise prices to maintain their profit levels. Electric companies did it here a few years ago. 1st was 'turn off the lights, save electricty' (the early '70's). 2nd was the 'hey, you guys are doing great, we've saved a bajillion kilowatts' (late 80's thru early 90's) and finally; 3rd "Due to less demand we have lost significant income and can't maintain the system so we will need to raise your rates" (late 90's, early 00's). The same will happen with gasoline.
Alex.
Originally Posted By: tonycarguy
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
since these clunker trades are for more fuel efficient vehicles, there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
The average gain for the trade-up was 9mpg, multiplied by 250,000 cars. Assuming 12k mi per year, that translates to about 40 million less gallons of gas consumed annually which is pretty insignificant. I doubt CFC would reduce gas prices more than a couple of pennies
if you multiply 40 million gallons of gas saved a year x 10 yrs = 400 million gallons of gas and so forth. Hopefully, I won't be riding a horse and buggie in 50 years
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
since these clunker trades are for more fuel efficient vehicles, there should be less demand for gas. are we going to see any drop in gas prices at the pump?
The average gain for the trade-up was 9mpg, multiplied by 250,000 cars. Assuming 12k mi per year, that translates to about 40 million less gallons of gas consumed annually which is pretty insignificant. I doubt CFC would reduce gas prices more than a couple of pennies
if you multiply 40 million gallons of gas saved a year x 10 yrs = 400 million gallons of gas and so forth. Hopefully, I won't be riding a horse and buggie in 50 years
Last edited:
Oh NO!!!!!
A Subaru dealer takes in a 1985 Maserati BiTurbo with 18k miles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32419704#32419704
A Subaru dealer takes in a 1985 Maserati BiTurbo with 18k miles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32419704#32419704
Originally Posted By: LTVibe
Oh NO!!!!!
A Subaru dealer takes in a 1985 Maserati BiTurbo with 18k miles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32419704#32419704
That piece of [censored] biturbo is one of the worst cars ever made.
There was an episode on top gear where they went to great lengths talking about how bad it was and they dropped a big cargo container on top of it to smash it. Every one of these cars should be destroyed ASAP along with every fiat x19. Whoever had that POS and unloaded it has to be the happiest person on the planet!
Oh NO!!!!!
A Subaru dealer takes in a 1985 Maserati BiTurbo with 18k miles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32419704#32419704
That piece of [censored] biturbo is one of the worst cars ever made.
There was an episode on top gear where they went to great lengths talking about how bad it was and they dropped a big cargo container on top of it to smash it. Every one of these cars should be destroyed ASAP along with every fiat x19. Whoever had that POS and unloaded it has to be the happiest person on the planet!
- Status
