If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
I dont get the c3 vs c4 values
I am not complaining. I just do not get it.
I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 6spd. So enlighten me...... without being insulting. Thanks |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ralph wrote:
> I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks You must REALLY be upset with C2's going for $30k to $50k then! Supply and demand, mixed with a little nostalgia, what else? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ralph wrote:
> I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks You must REALLY be upset with C2's going for $30k to $50k then! Supply and demand, mixed with a little nostalgia, what else? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
the C-4 in my opinion do not look as attractive as the C3. People are not
buying these cars for "everyday use" though the may get used everyday....sounds like that doesn;t make sense. What I mean is most people buying these cars buy them for the LOOK that they like NOT whether they can throw the kids and wife in and go out to dinner. Also lot more of the C-4 around than the C-3 thus higher value for the C-3 "Ralph" > wrote in message om... >I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
the C-4 in my opinion do not look as attractive as the C3. People are not
buying these cars for "everyday use" though the may get used everyday....sounds like that doesn;t make sense. What I mean is most people buying these cars buy them for the LOOK that they like NOT whether they can throw the kids and wife in and go out to dinner. Also lot more of the C-4 around than the C-3 thus higher value for the C-3 "Ralph" > wrote in message om... >I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
First off, eBay prices can be a bit crazy at times. Remember the what was
it, $700 Owners Manual for a 1967? But overall, they give a reasonable picture of prices, if you average several of the same basic condition. Most late C3s I've seen have been averaging around $10,000. Sure you may get a low mile immaculate '78 Pace Car or someone has a restored '82 CE in the mid to high teens, but most are lower. Corvettes have never been about practical. People buy them because of emotion, and emotion does not follow blue books or NADA guides or whatever. After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any C5 can blow away and you can buy for $40,000 or less? Any C4 on a stretch of twisty country roads will run off and hide from it. Yet, do you see people paying $65,000 for a restored '89 or '94? Maybe for 4 of them. People buy them for memories. In the '70s, the '63 began an incredible climb, from an average street price of $1800 around 1972 to around $15,000 by 1978. Why? Part of it was that those who were 10 and 12 in 1963 and fell in love with it were in their twenties, had decent paying jobs, and could buy their fantasy now. And they did. Why did the '67 435 hp go nuts? Because many who had always wanted one were rich enough to have them in the '80s, and they bought them. And with the rise, many "experts" told how these were "investments" so many more jumped in on it and prices went higher. If these had been stocks, the FTC would have been involved for stock manipulation, because the "experts" were really hyping their stock to get others to buy them and make outrageous profits. And if you had ever owned a 435 hp, you'd know they are a high maintenance item and are not a really great car for what most of us like to do - drive around. They are great at the stop light and the gas station, where they help dent the National Debt, but if you want to have a good time cruising around or weekend drives, any small block is much better and the 390 hp is better still. This is also why Corvette Price Guides are something you can only take as a reference, and not as carved in stone, because the true price of any Corvette is how much someone is willing to hand over at that moment. "Ralph" > wrote in message om... > I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
First off, eBay prices can be a bit crazy at times. Remember the what was
it, $700 Owners Manual for a 1967? But overall, they give a reasonable picture of prices, if you average several of the same basic condition. Most late C3s I've seen have been averaging around $10,000. Sure you may get a low mile immaculate '78 Pace Car or someone has a restored '82 CE in the mid to high teens, but most are lower. Corvettes have never been about practical. People buy them because of emotion, and emotion does not follow blue books or NADA guides or whatever. After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any C5 can blow away and you can buy for $40,000 or less? Any C4 on a stretch of twisty country roads will run off and hide from it. Yet, do you see people paying $65,000 for a restored '89 or '94? Maybe for 4 of them. People buy them for memories. In the '70s, the '63 began an incredible climb, from an average street price of $1800 around 1972 to around $15,000 by 1978. Why? Part of it was that those who were 10 and 12 in 1963 and fell in love with it were in their twenties, had decent paying jobs, and could buy their fantasy now. And they did. Why did the '67 435 hp go nuts? Because many who had always wanted one were rich enough to have them in the '80s, and they bought them. And with the rise, many "experts" told how these were "investments" so many more jumped in on it and prices went higher. If these had been stocks, the FTC would have been involved for stock manipulation, because the "experts" were really hyping their stock to get others to buy them and make outrageous profits. And if you had ever owned a 435 hp, you'd know they are a high maintenance item and are not a really great car for what most of us like to do - drive around. They are great at the stop light and the gas station, where they help dent the National Debt, but if you want to have a good time cruising around or weekend drives, any small block is much better and the 390 hp is better still. This is also why Corvette Price Guides are something you can only take as a reference, and not as carved in stone, because the true price of any Corvette is how much someone is willing to hand over at that moment. "Ralph" > wrote in message om... > I am not complaining. I just do not get it. > > I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do > not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000 > documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand. > > Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison > between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4 > 6spd. > > So enlighten me...... without being insulting. > > Thanks |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The 1963 as first of the midyears is valued high, as is the 1967 as the last
of the midyears. However, only the 1953 as first of a series is valued high, and that is as much due to it being the first Corvette as anything. The 1968, 1984, and 1997 are not high compared to others of their series in any way. On the last of a series, the 1962, 1982 are not any special value compared to the others. The 1996 and the 2004 are, but only because they are still in the normal depreciation slope were a '96 is worth more than a '95 which is more than a '94 which is etc. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The 1963 as first of the midyears is valued high, as is the 1967 as the last
of the midyears. However, only the 1953 as first of a series is valued high, and that is as much due to it being the first Corvette as anything. The 1968, 1984, and 1997 are not high compared to others of their series in any way. On the last of a series, the 1962, 1982 are not any special value compared to the others. The 1996 and the 2004 are, but only because they are still in the normal depreciation slope were a '96 is worth more than a '95 which is more than a '94 which is etc. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A4 1.8T -2000 & MAF sensor | J.P. | Audi | 0 | May 20th 04 05:50 PM |