How much for a low-mileage 85 300CD? - Page 6 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

TylerH860 · #76 05-21-2008, 09:45 PM

So we have two interpretations, both perhaps encompass this low book value. That's a big problem. The sentences "The exterior paint, trim, and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. and" May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration" what kill it for me. A car needs alot more than minor reconditioning if it has received a poor amateur paint job. That means you put your car in the leagues of a $199 Maaco paint job car that will require $5,000+ to make it presentable again. Do you really think your car is worth the same? I suppose if we compromise, low retail encompasses a HUGE range of cars of various values. Thus it can't be accurate.

No you didn't overpay for your car, I suppose I made a mistake; chalk it up to my youthful idiocy.

According to NADA, you stole it, since I would judge it as more towards average, but the descriptions are very contradictory. Certainly your car looks perfect from 20 feet away, which is written in the average description.

Hold up, math whiz. 15% off NADA's $23,600 trade in value comes to a bit over $20,000. You're quite a bit off; your numbers are lying to you.

jim16671836 · #77 05-21-2008, 09:56 PM

I don't think the seats are leather but rather are MB Tex. Usually the leather seats have a piece at the front of the seat that runs east and west and the MB Tex runs all the way north and wraps the front edge. This is based on the front of the car being north.. jim16671836

rcounts · #78 05-21-2008, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

You failed to address my point that we more often than not bought and sold cars far under book value because they were inaccurate. People are going to trust themselves, and know not to listen to someone who constantly overpays for his cars.

Nope, I just didn't address it because I didn't want to insult you. But the fact is, a dealer doesn't give a squat about book value. All he cares about is his profit on the sale. If he can get the car for way under book by hoodwinking someone to taking trade-in value because they're all hot for a new car, then he can and will sell it for less than book as long as he still makes a decent profit and doesn't have to "sit" on it for any length of time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

I agree with you on the higher value of coupes on the high end, NADA does not. You also missed my point that according to NADA the differences between coupes and sedans are negligable at the high end, when they clearly are.

Negligable? A 1500 difference on a $10,000 car is negligable? That's 15% - not what I'd call negligable. But I guess when you've got your kind of money to throw around...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

You were supposed to compare those 2 with a California zip code with the other 2 from my Kansas zip code that I previously posted. The prices are almost the same, clearly a mistake on NADAs part that you again fail to address.

Sorry, I didn't go back that far into the thread. Was this another one of those "negligable" differences?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

The car you bought was in NADA's average condition classification. Would you have paid $8,000 for it?

HARDLY! With the number of flaws it has it is much closer to their description of a low retail car - a daily driver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

Book value is a good starting point for newer cars, but older cars its a bit more ambiguous, requiring more research.

And I've done it - I've told you what they are going for in my area - when you can even find one. The numbers are pretty much in line with NADA - within a few percent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

Your're supposed to disregard them because they are clearly innacurate. Once again, would you have paid $8,000 for your CD? Highly doubtful. The low retail describes a dog of a car, which is clearly what you didn't buy. Anyone who would pay $5,000 for a CD that has several mechanical issues and a poorly done ameteur paint job is nuts.

Re-read their description of a low retail car. As previously stated it pretty well fits what I bought. It is certainly closer to their desription of LOW than an AVERAGE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

The book is far from perfect, and until I know exacly how its calculated, I'm not going to trust it.

Finally something we agree on - the first statement I mean. Don't trust it? Fine, but you saying its crap just because you can't get your head around the math doesn't add up to much either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

I guess the jokes on you if you keep overpaying for these cars. Many times a week savy buyers on this forum report on their recent purchases; stick with us a little while and you'll see.

So far I haven't seen anybody buy or sell a coupe on here for less than $5 grand in the last few months - unless you count Austin85's "fire sale". OmegaBenz sold his for $6,500 and the buyer though that was low. He sold it for that though he could have got more because he wanted to move it quick. Just like Austin. It just so happens OmegaBenz is in AZ - where the car that started this whole thread is located.

If you think the jokes on me for buying my car for $4800, you're sadly mistaken. I got a decent deal on a car at the high-end of LOW retail condition. That's all. There's no way it fits the book description of an AVERAGE retail car.

TylerH860 · #79 05-21-2008, 10:13 PM

I'm posting this again just in case you missed it.

So we have two interpretations, both perhaps encompass this low book value. That's a big problem. The sentences "The exterior paint, trim, and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. and" May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration" what kill it for me. A car needs alot more than minor reconditioning if it has received a poor amateur paint job. That means you put your car in the leagues of a $199 Maaco paint job car that will require $5,000+ to make it presentable again. Do you really think your car is worth the same? I suppose if we compromise, low retail encompasses a HUGE range of cars of various values. Thus it can't be accurate.

No you didn't overpay for your car, I suppose I made a mistake; chalk it up to my youthful idiocy. According to NADA, you stole it, since I would judge it as more towards average, but the descriptions are very contradictory. Certainly your car looks perfect from 20 feet away, which is written in the average description.

Hold up, math whiz. 15% off NADA's $23,600 trade in value comes to a bit over $20,000. You're quite a bit off; your numbers are lying to you.

In addition:
The difference between the two regions looks to be exactly the same, but my computer skills could be failing me. Perhaps they don't consider regions on classic cars? That's a big mistake on their part. One of many.

You couldn't get your head around a simple multiplication problem. Can you get your head around NADA's math as well? I sure can't, but I'm guessing the math makes about as much sense as their horrible descriptions the their 3 tiers.

rcounts · #80 05-21-2008, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

So we have two interpretations, both perhaps encompass this low book value. That's a big problem. The sentences "The exterior paint, trim, and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. and" May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration" what kill it for me. A car needs alot more than minor reconditioning if it has received a poor amateur paint job. That means you put your car in the leagues of a $199 Maaco paint job car that will require $5,000+ to make it presentable again. Do you really think your car is worth the same? I suppose if we compromise, low retail encompasses a HUGE range of cars of various values. Thus it can't be accurate.

Well there you go. To you a poor restoration or detriorated restoration means a $199 maco paint job. To me that sentence means a PROFESSIONAL resoration that has not been maintained, or an amateur restoration that never approached PROFESSIONAL standards. Doesn't say anything about cheap paint jobs. It could have the best paint job in the country, but if they didn't get it nice and straight first then it is still a poorly done amateur job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

No you didn't overpay for your car, I suppose I made a mistake; chalk it up to my youthful idiocy.

According to NADA, you stole it, since I would judge it as more towards average, but the descriptions are very contradictory. Certainly your car looks perfect from 20 feet away, which is written in the average description.

Really? When were you 20 feet from my car? You can tell it looks perfect from 20 feet away from a digital picture smaller than a postage stamp? Damn, you are GOOD, son! Or would be if it were true. It has numerous dings that are readily visible from 20 feet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

Hold up, math whiz. 15% off NADA's $23,600 trade in value comes to a bit over $20,000. You're quite a bit off; your numbers are lying to you.

Nope, my mistake. I only glanced at the page you linked and used the base trade in of $22,200 and 85% of that price is, like I said, 18,900 ($18,870 actually but close enough). I overlooked your add-ons. My mistake. The numbers don't lie, but I am far from infallible - and willingly admit when I make a mistake.

TylerH860 · #81 05-21-2008, 10:27 PM

You can probably see the dings because you look at the car every day; I haven't seen your car so I probably shouldn't presume. Another thing to chalk up to my youthful idiocy.

I finally see an end coming to this! We can easily agree that:

1. NADA classic car values do not factor location, which is a huge flaw in their system

2. The descriptions need to be more clear, since two entirely different interpretations can be made. We have 2 very different definitions of the word "poor." Certainly there are various levels of poorly done amateur paint jobs.

3. NADA needs to clearly describe exactly how they get their data and make their calculations.

rcounts · #82 05-21-2008, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

I'm posting this again just in case you missed it.

So we have two interpretations, both perhaps encompass this low book value. That's a big problem. The sentences "The exterior paint, trim, and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. and" May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration" what kill it for me. A car needs alot more than minor reconditioning if it has received a poor amateur paint job. That means you put your car in the leagues of a $199 Maaco paint job car that will require $5,000+ to make it presentable again. Do you really think your car is worth the same? I suppose if we compromise, low retail encompasses a HUGE range of cars of various values. Thus it can't be accurate.

No you didn't overpay for your car, I suppose I made a mistake; chalk it up to my youthful idiocy. According to NADA, you stole it, since I would judge it as more towards average, but the descriptions are very contradictory. Certainly your car looks perfect from 20 feet away, which is written in the average description.

Hold up, math whiz. 15% off NADA's $23,600 trade in value comes to a bit over $20,000. You're quite a bit off; your numbers are lying to you.

In addition:
The difference between the two regions looks to be exactly the same, but my computer skills could be failing me. Perhaps they don't consider regions on classic cars? That's a big mistake on their part. One of many.

You couldn't get your head around a simple multiplication problem. Can you get your head around NADA's math as well? I sure can't, but I'm guessing the math makes about as much sense as their horrible descriptions the their 3 tiers.

By golly, the kid scored a debate point! The numbers ARE the same regardless of zip code! I guess they don't account for that in the online consumer version. I know they do in the print guides and the subscription version. I guess the differences are just accounted for by the condition. Obviously a rustbucket from Witchita isn't going to sell for the same as a rust free AZ, WA or CA car. Even if it does have a Maco paint job!

Truth is, we really aren't that far apart - not enough that regional markets can't account for the difference. We agree the coupes go for more than sedans, we agree the book isn't perfect. We agree that condition is more a factor in sale price than what the book says. Heck I think we even agree that in the end, they're worth whatever someone will pay for them.

It's been a fun debate. No hard feelings. You throw away your book, and do your buying and selling based on "gut". I'll continue to consult mine as one of the sources when considering price/value. I have to take a break now - its been a long day and I need some dinner and a shower.

And as for the original question of the car in AZ. I still think it is worth $5k-$6k if everthing works and a bit more if the mileage can be proven. At least that's what a rust free 300CDT is worth to me and in my area.

TylerH860 · #83 05-21-2008, 10:36 PM

Heated debates usually don't end like that. Normally, a closed thread and a ban is involved.

Hatterasguy · #84 05-21-2008, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rcounts

So you think at $4,800 I overpaid for my CDT, eh? Well, I'm real disappointed and hurt that you think that. Considering how much I value your opinion and all

I had no idea this had anything to do with your car, I was just simply arguing that NADA isn't always right.

rcounts · #85 05-22-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

I had no idea this had anything to do with your car, I was just simply arguing that NADA isn't always right.

Yeah, that comment was addressed to Tyler - that is why it followed a quote of one of his comments.

A couple of other things regarding your friend's W140. No matter how good the ad or how nicely he descried it, a west coast buyer like me is going to think 2 things right off the bat

1) snow + salted roads = serious rust concerns
2) East coast = it is 3000+ miles away and if I win it getting it here will be costly or a pain

Those two things pretty much eliminate most west coast buyers and a lot of them from the midwest too. And I think we all can agree that West Coast cars go for the highest prices, can't we? Tyler didn't even want to include any cars from California as comparisons because of their "inflated prices". Of course those inflated prices couldn't have anything to do with the fact that 20-30 year old cars out here with hardly a speck of rust on them are the rule - rather than the exception - now could it?

During the months that I was searching eBay, AutoTrader, Craig's list etc., I pretty much turned a blind eye to anything east of the Missisippi and all of the midwest rust belt states for those reasons alone. Reading some of the rust issue stories on this and other MB boards was enough to convince me I wasn't interested in cars from those places.

For my money, on anything over 20 years old, it has to come from the west coast or the southwestern states. Or maybe Florida - though that's really way too far to go for anything less than half off book price.

Hatterasguy · #86 05-22-2008, 12:18 AM

I agree. I would buy a CA car in a heartbeat and gladly pay $1,500 shipping in order to avoid rust issues.

$1,500 doesn't fix much rust.

I have been to CA and I have seen the weather, its very easy on cars!

rcounts · #87 05-22-2008, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

Heated debates usually don't end like that. Normally, a closed thread and a ban is involved.

Heated? Not me man. I stay c-o-o-l when I'm debating.

Getting hot & bothered and flying off the handle doesn't win debates. Like you said, it just gets interesting threads locked.

A strong argument is just weakend if you let the other guy get the better of you and make you loose your cool. And the converse is equally true. Even a so-so argument can be made stronger if presented well and calmly.

TylerH860 · #88 05-22-2008, 12:28 AM

Synonyms for heated. I guess we have two different definitions. Kind of a theme for the past 24 hours, huh?

Animated
Impassioned
Intense
Passionate

rcounts · #89 05-22-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

I agree. I would buy a CA car in a heartbeat and gladly pay $1,500 shipping in order to avoid rust issues.

$1,500 doesn't fix much rust.

I have been to CA and I have seen the weather, its very easy on cars!

Same is true of WA and OR. But since we don't get all that CA sunshine, paint, vinyl, and carpets don't fade so badly, and interiors don't get so baked.

The only thing ou have to watch out for is mold - and that's only an issue with cars left sitting too long.

Funny, but you never hear people say that they'd buy and pay extra to ship a car from CT or KS

TylerH860 · #90 05-22-2008, 12:34 AM

Texas is very easy on cars, and they don't seem to have the "inflated values" I describe. The salt air of the West coast versus the intense Texas sun; no obvious winner, I guess.

How was the dinner and shower?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode