Something I'm thinking of right now is that I probably don't want a car that I need to keep for 30 years in order to amortize the cost. The technology is changing so rapidly. I'd like my next car to be an electric.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Are expensive cars worth it?
- Thread starter socialleper
- Start date
I probably had the rare prototype Saturn SL that didn't use a drop of oil between changes.
My neighbor, otoh, has a Saturn SL that the motto is "fill the oil and check the gas."
The sad thing is that after we paid for the car, the salesman actually told us to check the oil every time we filled the gas, and we just weren't disciplined enough to do it. What apparently happened was that, in addition to gunking up the entire intake system, letting the oil get more than about 1/2 quart low caused the timing chain to lose lubrication, and eventually it skipped a tooth. That was the end of the engine.
Now my '76 Dodge van was a dripper, due to the oil pan bung being replaced by a rubber plug after the threads got stripped out. I'd just wait until the tappets started making noise, and add a quart. That got me to well past 120k miles. One day, I noticed that it had rusted to the point where I could see nothing holding the body to the frame. That's when I got a new car.
How well I remember the Mopar drain plugs stripping out and the rubber replacements. I still have the tool to R&R those rubber plugs in my box at work. The other day, one of the young guns saw it and said "w t f is that for??" That was also the same reaction he had upon seeing my dwell meter and timing light.....
The dealership I worked for (Ford/Chrysler) was a "One Price" (no haggle) business for every new and used vehicle. Period. Most of our customers really did appreciate this as there are few things less pleasant than being shoved through he sales process by an aggressive sales staff.
Ahead of its time? Well, that business model did not work for Saturn partly because they lacked innovation in design. Tesla lacks innovation in pricing and design. Buyers looking to spend $50,000, $75,000 or more on a vehicle have a ton of choices from other well established manufactures. Either way, lack of design or not catering to the $30,000 to $50,000 market, plus haggle free, are not good business models. Buyers like to haggle. Even if they are not actually getting a deal it makes them feel better about the purchase. The idea of eliminating the haggle is like saying "this is the price, take it or leave it". In the case of Saturn this philosophy caters to people that find it intimidating to haggle. In the case of Tesla it caters to people that want to feel special. Unfortunately it doesn't work. We'll see if Tesla can pull out of the bankruptcy they're facing by reducing their prices. I doubt if they will because they'll be competing against Lexus, Infinity and other moderately priced car companies.People forget that part of the Saturn business model was “The price you see is the price, and it’s fair. We’ve eliminated haggling, so Saturn buyers have a much more positive purchase experience”.
Tesla didn’t exactly invent that. Saturn was just ahead of its time.
I'm not intimidated by it, I'm just no good at it. There's no rational reason to negotiate with someone unless you think that you might actually be a better negotiator. It's a win-lose proposition. I can't imagine that I'm a better negotiator than a car dealer.
So I just don't negotiate with people.
"This is the price, take it or leave it," is exactly how I buy a can of tomatoes at the supermarket. I love it. Why should a car be different? More and more people let someone else handle car price negotiation, by using pricing services.
At my workplace, prices are negotiated by trained negotiators. It's completely out of my hands.
You said it better than I did. Some people don't like negotiating. I don't necessarily like it, but I do it because I know that the seller has wiggle room. I've gotten great deals on cars, guitars, a lot of stuff because I want to get the best deal I can. It probably comes from working in sales and knowing how it works. Your point is well taken on that. But if you don't know the difference between negotiating a can of tomatoes from negotiating a car deal, I can't help you.
"More and more people let someone else handle car price negotiation, by using pricing services."
I did not know this. I wonder how much they have to pay the pricing services? Sounds like another service thats out to rip off people.
The difference between a car and a can of tomatoes is that the car is more expensive, and it's more time consuming to get good pricing data. One of the key factors in negotiation is information (time, power, information). And the Internet is eliminating the information arbitrage in car price negotiation.
What I mean by pricing services is that you can look up car pricing data at Consumer Reports if you're a subscriber. It's pretty low key. I had those reports in hand when my spouse and I bought a minivan. The dealer knew that he could make a quick deal, so he handed us his printout that listed every van available in the region, and we picked the cheapest one. It showed up a few days later. The check that I wrote matched the number from Consumer Reports.
As I understand it, both AAA and Costco have similar car pricing services. Then there's what my relative did, looked up the average selling price on her cell phone, and showed it to the dealer. He agreed to the amount. The dealers seem willing to get into the game, for instance I was able to get a price on a particular new car online, because the dealers who want to sell cars are willing to share their pricing and inventory data.
Granted, we're talking low end cars. These are cars that the manufacturers actually lose money on. It may be that the salesman is willing to give me a deal in order to get rid of me. Whatever. I rarely waste more than a few minutes of their time.
It's getting to the point where you will be able to order a car online and have it delivered to your door.
I don't work in sales. We have people who do that, and we pay them handsomely.
The difference between a car and a can of tomatoes is that the car is more expensive, and it's more time consuming to get good pricing data. One of the key factors in negotiation is information (time, power, information). And the Internet is eliminating the information arbitrage in car price negotiation.
What I mean by pricing services is that you can look up car pricing data at Consumer Reports if you're a subscriber. It's pretty low key. I had those reports in hand when my spouse and I bought a minivan. The dealer knew that he could make a quick deal, so he handed us his printout that listed every van available in the region, and we picked the cheapest one. It showed up a few days later. The check that I wrote matched the number from Consumer Reports.
As I understand it, both AAA and Costco have similar car pricing services. Then there's what my relative did, looked up the average selling price on her cell phone, and showed it to the dealer. He agreed to the amount. The dealers seem willing to get into the game, for instance I was able to get a price on a particular new car online, because the dealers who want to sell cars are willing to share their pricing and inventory data.
Granted, we're talking low end cars. These are cars that the manufacturers actually lose money on. It may be that the salesman is willing to give me a deal in order to get rid of me. Whatever. I rarely waste more than a few minutes of their time.
It's getting to the point where you will be able to order a car online and have it delivered to your door.
I don't work in sales. We have people who do that, and we pay them handsomely.
I don't know where you got this idea, but opinion polls and surveys consistently show that the general public hates the car buying experience. Sure, every consumer likes to get a good deal, but it's the process of getting that good deal that most people detest. Unfortunately, the good deals mostly go to customers who have the ability to be aggressive and adversarial and know how to avoid being manipulated by the psychological gamesmanship of the salesperson. People who are naturally meek and mild mannered get shafted.
Invalid Link Removed
I tried to speed-read all 8 pages of this thread, so sorry if I misconstrue anyone’s point. Bottom line, remove the word “car” from the original post and insert “watch”, “scotch”, “handbag”, “smartphone”, “pen”, “suit” and the answers will track pretty closely. It depends on what is important to you and how you use it. I would never pay the prices I see for top shelf scotch or cigars, because I don’t indulge in either. But I would spent a decent amount for a Tag Heuer or Breitling. Even so, I have no need for a Rolex. We all have our price norms.
The part in bold is also not totally true. I’m not pointing these things out to be contrarian, but just so that should someone encounter a Camry with the same engine as their neighbors Corolla, they won’t be wielded out. The engine lineups for the two cars often overlap. The top trim engine for a Corolla could be the same as an entry level trim motor for Camry. Again, using my car as an example...Base Corvettes have a 6.2L 460 hp V8. Uplevel Corvettes can have an optional 655 hp supercharged V8. My Camaro has a 6.2L 455 hp V8. Basically the same engine as the base Corvette. The 5 hp difference is pretty much exhaust system tuning differences and is lost in the rounding. All automakers do this.
Not totally true. They share architectures. There is a lot an automaker can do with an architecture. My 2017 Camaro is built on the same architecture as a Cadillac ATS and CTS. Doesn’t make them the same under the skin.
The part in bold is also not totally true. I’m not pointing these things out to be contrarian, but just so that should someone encounter a Camry with the same engine as their neighbors Corolla, they won’t be wielded out. The engine lineups for the two cars often overlap. The top trim engine for a Corolla could be the same as an entry level trim motor for Camry. Again, using my car as an example...Base Corvettes have a 6.2L 460 hp V8. Uplevel Corvettes can have an optional 655 hp supercharged V8. My Camaro has a 6.2L 455 hp V8. Basically the same engine as the base Corvette. The 5 hp difference is pretty much exhaust system tuning differences and is lost in the rounding. All automakers do this.
Alkali Ike
Gold Supporting Member
- Jan 1, 2011
- 2,855
- 15,666
- Disclosures
- I never actually learned to play very well
Tesla’s problem isn’t pricing. Tesla's problem is costs.
Weren't the underpinnings of Saturns basically right out of the GM parts bins? They got their own styling and certain features, but I always thought they were basically a rebadged Chevy.
Weren't the underpinnings of Saturns basically right out of the GM parts bins? They got their own styling and certain features, but I always thought they were basically a rebadged Chevy.
Bicycles are made this way today. Every bike "brand" is a frame ordered from a factory in China, hung with components from Shimano and a handful of other makers. Very few bike makers actually make anything. I see no problem with it, in principle. Cell phones and computers too.
The Saturn brand was marketed as "a different kind of car." They were trying to break away from GM's reputation for quality problems. Ford tried to do the same thing with the aerodynamic-looking shapes of models like the Tempo -- the so called Flying Potatoes.
I did like the idea of the plastic body, having grown up in a succession of rustbuckets.
An amusing story: The Saturn salesman wasn't allowed to say "plastic." He gave us this long spiel about the body being made of a newfangled material called "polymer." I couldn't get the guy to say "plastic." At the time, I worked in a plastic molding factory, and knew exactly what kind of plastic the Saturn was made of -- pretty much the cheapest kind.
The original Saturn SL1, SL2, and SC were totally separate from the rest of the GM portfolio. They did not share architecture, engines, transmissions, sheet metal or anything else with any GM products. The first Saturn Vue was a variation of the first generation Equinox architecture, but just barely.
By the time Saturn Aura and Saturn Astra came in, Saturn vehicles shared content with Opel vehicles (GM’s European arm at the time), but not necessarily Chevrolet. I say not necessarily because eventually Saturn Aura, Opel Vectra, and Chevy Malibu shared architectures and powertrains and 2nd Gen Vue was basically a rebadged Opel Antara crossover a little smaller than Equinox. When Saturn died it was rebadged Chevrolet Captiva.
So they got $4k for it.
I'm going to disagree.
As a tech guy, if something costs more I can tell you exactly why. This phone, that computer, or this router have real specs. Those differences equate to o objective, measurable changes in performance. A car should be tech.
However, they are often treated like purses. I'm a vehemently anti fashion person that thinks the whole thing is a worthless scam to separate fools from their money.
The technological differences between models of cars is generally not well known, and most sales people are clueless. I hate that about cars.
At the very least, cars should be closer to watches where there is a indefinable style aspect, but there is still a fair balance between price and precision\reliability. Rolexes are infamously precise and reliable. Whether or not someone needs a watch like that is a question or their check book, but they are expensive for a reason. Meanwhile a Tiffany bracelet has no way to validate its existence. My wife and sister swear that Coach purses really are worth it, but can't explain to me why.
I'm not sure how it can be said that there isn't a significant technological difference going from a cheaper car to a more expensive car. I'm pretty knowledgeable about automotive technology and I can tell you that a $70,000 Porsche actually does have 2-3 times the technological architecture of a $20,000 Volkswagon. The difference is far more than cosmetic and it is in no way comparable to a 20$ ordinary purse and a much more expensive "designer" purse. With more expensive cars, it usually isn't cosmetics you're buying.
I do think you have a point when it comes to very expensive cars, though. Once you get above the $100,000 range you've not adding as much in performance technology as status.
