He Had a Hemi

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> So I'm pulling onto the freeway. Traffic is typical SoCal - light to
> moderate by our standards - and moving about 70 - 75 MPH. There's a
> car in the right lane; it's going with the flow, but a nice big gap in
> front of it, so I accelerate and merge about three carlengths in
> front. Turns out it's one of those new Dodge Magnum station wagons -
> so new it still has dealer plates on it. For some reason, this guy,
> who had been content to just go with the flow, suddenly wakes up and
> floors it. He speeds up, starts weaving, cuts people off, uses the
> acceleration lane to pass people; stuff you expect to see from a young
> punk in a riced-up Neon but not from a middle-aged businessman in a
> brand new car. I guess he saw a Corvette merge effortlessly in front
> of him and felt he had to prove his HEMI-car was better.
>
> The funny part was, due to traffic conditions, he couldn't get very
> far ahead of me; I ended up catching up to him at the off-ramp. All
> that effort for nothing...
> --
> What the heck, I'll play too.
> - Dave

Question for ya. I am looking at a Vette, 2006 Coupe. I really dont want all
the gizmos (like the nav, overhead display)... just a standard 400 hp with a
manual tranny. What can I expect to pay? I checked out edmunds, and it seems
under "what others pay" most pay msrp. Is that right? Any room to wiggle?

Thanks!!

Dan J.S. wrote: <brevity snip>
> Question for ya. I am looking at a Vette, 2006 Coupe. I really dont want all
> the gizmos (like the nav, overhead display)... just a standard 400 hp with a
> manual tranny. What can I expect to pay? I checked out edmunds, and it seems
> under "what others pay" most pay msrp. Is that right? Any room to wiggle?
-----
It's almost always better to buy a "loaded" vehicle, for both resale
and/or historical values.

If cost is that much of a consideration you'd be better off buying a 3
year old model, either now or later. IMNSHO.
-----

- gpsman

"gpsman" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Dan J.S. wrote: <brevity snip>
>> Question for ya. I am looking at a Vette, 2006 Coupe. I really dont want
>> all
>> the gizmos (like the nav, overhead display)... just a standard 400 hp
>> with a
>> manual tranny. What can I expect to pay? I checked out edmunds, and it
>> seems
>> under "what others pay" most pay msrp. Is that right? Any room to wiggle?
> -----
> It's almost always better to buy a "loaded" vehicle, for both resale
> and/or historical values.
>
> If cost is that much of a consideration you'd be better off buying a 3
> year old model, either now or later. IMNSHO.
> -----
>
> - gpsman
>

Cost is not an issue. Its that with the NAV for example, the car dates
itself. My 2003 4runner's nav looks so much worse than my Sienna mini van
one (2005)...

So I just want a pure muscle car... i think i got a line on one... it has
the overhead, but thats ok... and the dealer is willing to deal way below
msrp.

In article . com>,
gpsman > wrote:
>Dan J.S. wrote: <brevity snip>
>> Question for ya. I am looking at a Vette, 2006 Coupe. I really dont want all
>> the gizmos (like the nav, overhead display)... just a standard 400 hp with a
>> manual tranny. What can I expect to pay? I checked out edmunds, and it seems
>> under "what others pay" most pay msrp. Is that right? Any room to wiggle?
>-----
>It's almost always better to buy a "loaded" vehicle, for both resale
>and/or historical values.

What if you buy the car to DRIVE, not as an investment?
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:54:27 -0600, "Dan J.S." > wrote:
>
>>Question for ya. I am looking at a Vette, 2006 Coupe. I really dont want
>>all
>>the gizmos (like the nav, overhead display)... just a standard 400 hp with
>>a
>>manual tranny. What can I expect to pay? I checked out edmunds, and it
>>seems
>>under "what others pay" most pay msrp. Is that right? Any room to wiggle?
>
> Depends on where you buy. If you're willing to travel (say to
> Kerbeck's in Atlantic City), you can probably get one for a few
> thousand below MSRP. Smaller dealers, especially the ones that have
> small allocations and don't see very many 'Vettes on their lots,
> generally hold out for MSRP or even more (an example is Watson
> Chevrolet in Tucson - NEVER buy from them!) However, most 'Vettes are
> ordered with lots of options; if you want a stripped-down version,
> you'll have to find a dealer who will order it that way for you, and
> you'll have to wait several weeks while it is built and shipped.
>
> HTH!
> --
> What the heck, I'll play too.
> - Dave

I got one! 2006 C6 with the lt3 package... paid 43300 - thats right at
invoice... manual tranny, black on black... really lots of fun! put 30 miles
on it so far...

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
news
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:17:12 -0600, "Dan J.S." > wrote:
>
>>I got one! 2006 C6 with the lt3 package... paid 43300 - thats right at
>>invoice... manual tranny, black on black... really lots of fun! put 30
>>miles
>>on it so far...
>
> Kewl! How do you like the HUD?
>
> Have fun, but remember: the vast majority of Corvettes that get
> totalled do so within the first 24 hours of ownership...
> --
> What the heck, I'll play too.
> - Dave

yeah i passed the 24 hours already... the HUD is great!! i didnt think i
wanted it at first, but it really is cool. i lived in japan, owned an older
skyline and the soarer so i know speed. Of course this is beyond fast.

Matthew Russotto wrote: <brevity snip>
> gpsman > wrote:
> >It's almost always better to buy a "loaded" vehicle, for both resale
> >and/or historical values.

> What if you buy the car to DRIVE, not as an investment?
-----
AFAICT... vehicles that are "loaded" drive equally well, perhaps with a
touch more comfort and/or convenience. I guess I just assumed he was
going to drive it. Good point!

My point is... and I'm not trying to embarrass you... when you're
buying large-ticket items like a 'Vette, you're "investing" rather than
"spending" and should consider the return on that investment (ROI)
before purchase. ROI is "price" vs "cost"... what is actually gained
for the money.

Using a hypothetical example... A/C is a $700 option new, 5 years later
it's still worth $500 according to NADA. The final "cost" of A/C is
$200 and you've enjoyed A/C for $40 per year. I'd say the A/C was a
pretty good "investment". Optional equipment/accessories usually
maintain their values better than the car itself.

Delving a tad deeper... the market for a 'Vette w/o A/C (or other
bells/whistles) will be smaller than that for a "loaded" one. That's
supply/demand. Dan's "pure muscle car" may end up "costing" more than
a "loaded" one due to the limited market/lower value at resale time.

If, like many expensive vehicle owners, Dan wants to "trade up" in a
few years he's probably gonna get ****in' hammered at a dealership.
The market for fully-optioned used is always better than for lesser
equipped vehicles. More supply/demand.

If you're not careful you can get that supply/demand **** all over ya
and it can be expensive to get off.
-----

- gpsman

In article .com>,
gpsman > wrote:
>Matthew Russotto wrote: <brevity snip>
>> gpsman > wrote:
>> >It's almost always better to buy a "loaded" vehicle, for both resale
>> >and/or historical values.
>
>> What if you buy the car to DRIVE, not as an investment?
>-----
>AFAICT... vehicles that are "loaded" drive equally well, perhaps with a
>touch more comfort and/or convenience.

Nope. Sometimes they have significantly increased weight. And
sometimes the various "luxury and convenience" features are
just plain annoying.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.