EXACTLY - which is why KBB and NADA both make you enter your zip code up front in order to look up prices.

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

If you are talking about the car that started this thread, it is for sale for $7500 - pretty close the the $8k figure you quoted. BTW, did you look that up using an AZ zip code? Because the pricing is regional - a fact that you don't seem to be "getting". What they sell for in Kansas (salted roads = rust) vs. what they sell for in AZ, or WA, or CA (where the roads aren't salted and truly rust-free cars are the norm) are TOTALLY different.

Yup and there are also a LOT more Mustangs out there than there are MB diesels. Again, it comes back to supply and demand. The rare Mustang models fetch higher prices than the more common ones, and the same is true of MB diesels.

Nobody called you ignorant. That is your word - not mine. However, since you have applied that label to yourself I will say that you may not be as all-knowing as you seem to think you are.

You do understand what the term average means, right? That is how they calculate the median price. The lows and highs are more than likely the average of the top and bottom 20% or 25% of the range. I admit that I don't know the exact formula either. But I know it is statistically complied from actual sales - which has to be more accurate than an opinion someone pulls out of the air, or their head, or (ehem) somewhere else.

Sounds like you haven't ever even taken many used car loans either. The banks won't loan 100% of value or purchase price. They will only loan 75% or 80% (whatever their particular guidline happens to be - it varies a little from one to the next depending on their risk tolerance) of the VALUE of the car. Note that is the value, NOT the sale price. They require that the borrower put 20% - 25% in up front (down payment) so that the borrower has something to lose and is less likely to default. Sure, when people default on the loan the bank usually looses - because if you know how loan amoritization works, you're paying mostly interest the first half of the loan term. The principle is going down very slowly, whereas depreciation is proceeding at full speed. If NADA says your car is worth $10k, and it meets the lenders other criteria, they will loan you $7500 - $8000 to finance it.

Yes, I do. Where the banks weren't conservative enough is that they allowed people to take loans where the payment was 35% of their net monthly income. The old guideline was 25%. They started loaning people more than they could afford - just like I said.

I also think that having bought, sold, or owned 40 different vehicles over the last 30 years has given me a better grasp of the facts in terms of the automotive market too. How many cars have you owned?

No backpedaling, just a simple statement of the facts. I never said or bragged that I was rich - that was just your interpretation of my statment that I've been buying all my vehicles for cash for the last 10 years or so. As I said, I save up and buy them instead of financing them. Does that make me a braggart? Nope, it just makes me smart.

You're right though. Somehow the "stupid" banks and lenders have convinced the majority of the last couple of generations of people in our country that they aren't really living unless they are in debt up to their eyeballs. And the average person (who, like a 3 year old refuses to delay their own gratification) has bought it hook line and sinker. Not me. I know better.

Insult? Are you ashamed of being a young college student? Sorry you feel that way or took it that way. Don't be looking so hard to get insulted.

The fact that you don't understand how the numbers are arrived at doesn't make them invalid. Neither does your fear. Those are just the basis for your opinion - and why it is more questionable than their compiled numbers.

The Department Of Motor Vehicles (may have a slightly different name in your state) records the sale price of every vehicle registered - usually for tax purposes. That is why they require a bill of sale and/or that the sale price be filled in on the signed title when you bring it in to transfer the title to your name. KBB and NADA have access to that info just like Carfax has access to the DMV records for mileage, inspections, license renewals, accidents, branded titiles, etc.

Did you look up your car for your area, and find that the high retail is $10k? There's one on eBay that went for $9,885, so sure, the HIGH end could be 10 grand. Would I pay that for one? Nope, cause I don't want one that bad, but obviously some people do. Average NADA on yours is more like $4900 retail and a coupe is $5500. Do I believe the coupes are 10%-15% higher? Sure, that's what the book says and what they seem to be going for.

Sorry, but to me (and most people) you are just "some guy" - though one who obviously has a very HIGH opinion of his own opinions.

OK, so they are good at new cars and good on high-end cars, but don't know jack on average condition cars? That doesn't make sense. You act as if there were some incentive for NADA/KBB to inflate the value - but only for older cars. Again, that makes no sense. The numbers are all arrived at using the same methods - its called statistical analysis. If you want to know more about that, I'm sure your school offers a class in it. I took one, but it has been a few years and I don't think I want to try to explain it to you here.

I only looked at your profile because the way you comport yourself made me suspect that you lack the experience that comes with age. And sure enough my suspicion was confirmed.

That is not a "personal attack" - just pointing out that your very strong opinions may not be based on a vast accumulation of experience. It is a valid observation in my opinion. In reality, how many cars have you shopped around for and bought? Of the two you list as ones you own, one was given to you, so it doesn't count. Experience is important when evaluating someone's opinion.

As to a "poll", again that is just a collection of opinions - as opposed to statistical facts, but this thread has served as a pretty good poll, and the results seem to be somewhere in the 50/50 range. Poll results, like car values, vary by region. A car worth $6k in Washington may not be worth $6k in Kansas, and the opinions of the people will vary accordingly.

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

You may not think so, but you are getting very personal with your statements, giving a very elitist aura to me anyway.

I have prefaced most of my statements with "I don't know, or I may be wrong". How did you come to the conclusion that I have stubborn opinions and my youth and inexperience clouds my judgement? I've been pretty open minded to your arguments, and not typing away angrily trying to set a young whipper snapper straight.

As I said before, I'm not going to brag about my personal finances, but I will say that I'm not the average college student. I've worked at various dealers as a salesmen for many years up until very recently. Never once, even on newer cars, did managers even look at KBB or NADA to craft a price. They looked at their regional auction data and made their own judgements. When someone came in waving KBB in my face for a trade in, I would just ask them, "Is KBB willing to buy your car for that price?" When they would answer no, I would explain to them how actual trade in values are found, through dealer auction data and our managers qualified judgement based on 30 years of experience. Often on our lot we would put KBB or NADA's prices on the window just as a selling point, because we were thousands under it. I know all about the numbers, required down payments and such. The example I was trying to give was that I own my 300d. If I want to borrow against it, will they refinance based on that inflated $10,000 value. Even if it is only 85%, I would still thousands more than I could ever sell it for.

I'm looking at your public profile, an engineer? You seem to be used to things being concrete, numbers not lying, and you don't seem to question the world around you. I learn by asking questions and forming my own opinions. This little debate of ours has taught me alot, but my opinion on how these prices at NADA are highly inaccurate is unchanged. Why does KBB not go back 20 years? Perhaps there is another website they devote to classic cars, but don't dare put the KBB seal behind it. I could, once again, be wrong.

Oh, I typed in a southern California zip code rather than my Kansas one, and guess what, the numbers barely changed. Look for yourself.
http://www.nadaguides.com/default.aspx?LI=1-22-1-5013-0-0-0&l=1&w=22&p=1&f=5014&y=1985&m=1115&d=4166&c=7&vi=76749&z=90210&da=-1

http://www.nadaguides.com/default.aspx?LI=1-22-1-5013-0-0-0&l=1&w=22&p=1&f=5014&y=1985&m=1115&d=4224&c=7&vi=76750&z=90210&da=-1

Still want to testify to the accuracy of these resources? Would you pay $5,000 for a 300cd with a cheap Maaco paint job and some mechanical issues? Highly doubtful. Would you pay $8,000 for a 300cd that looks good only from 20 feet, but has a multiple imperfections close up? I hope not. The high retail value seems reasonable, I will admit, but is not that far off from sedans, at least according to NADA. Is that really the case? Do you think Kansas prices are the same as California prices? Their calculations, which neither of us know how they do it, are clearly flawed.

You are obviously a highly intelligent individual, but you may not notice you are more stubborn and sure of you opinions than I am. I have admitted throughout this exchange that I may be wrong, and accepted much of your argument, yet you fail to see the core issue. These prices are wrong. We don't know why. You would think it would be easy to divide these cars up by region and average them, but they seem to screw it up. They need to find where they drop the ball and fix it, or people like you will have justification to overprice, or overpay.

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

1997, 85k miles, perfect shape, AMG wheels, every option W140's came pretty much loaded.

In the real estate world one method that we use on residential SFH's is past sales on comparable properties. You can adjust up or down based on condition. Usualy you want to use comps that are 6 months old or newer, and in this market you want to use properties that are currantly still for sale.

This seems to be the best method to figure out what one of these is worth. Start watching Ebay auctions and see what they are going for. Ebay is the top of the market, no one will pay the prices I see this cars going for in the real world.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

I can't control how to "take" my statements - only how I meant and/or say them. Are you saying I'm making you look elitist - or that I'm coming across as an elitist. With the way you wrote it I can't tell.

Angry? Not me. I'm not the one typing colorful things like "No ****** WAY!" or "*********" or getting all butt hurt because you pointed out that (unlike you) I'm no "whipper snapper" OR because you pulled up info from my profile. I think you may be projecting your own feelings onto me.

OK, so now you think that bringing up the fact you've been a used car salesman is going to add to your credibility?!? Ask 10 people whose opinion they would trust when buying a used car, a 45 year old engineer who's worked on machinery all his life, owned 40+ cars, and carries a NADA guide in his back pocket - or a 20 something car salesman college student who's only only owned a couple of cars, and thinks he knows better than the banks, or the market, or anyone else what a car is worth. I'm kinda' thinking about 9 out of 10 will choose the former rather than the latter.

I am an engineer, trained in critical thinking. I question EVERYTHING - that is what analysis is. One critical aspect of my job involves estimating costs for projects in the 100's of thousands of dollars, and I'm pretty good at it. I must be since I'm getting paid quite well by a Fortune 100 company to do it. That's my skill set and credentials - what are yours?

NUMBERS DON'T LIE. I've shown you concrete examples that CDs go for at least 10%-30% more than comparable sedans. I've shown you a concrete example of a CD selling as high as $13,200 - and that the highest priced example for a sedan from the same source was $9,885. Both of those are in line - or higher than - the prices in NADA. We've looked at the book numbers and they also show a 10%-15% higher price bracket for the coupes. We've looked at "average" examples of coupes in the $5k-$6k range (which is what I said the one this tread started out about was worth - unless the mileage is verifiable).

Yet you still want to argue that coupes aren't worth more than sedans and the numbers in the book must be wrong. What, do NADA and KBB have some kind of conspiracy to make everybody pay too much for older cars - so they are making up or inflating the numbers? GET REAL. They have no incentive to misrepresent the numbers. What they sell for is what they sell for. Compiling, analyzing, and reporting those numbers is what they do. They do have every reason to report the numbers as accurately as possible though - otherwise their credibility goes right out the window and all the dealers and banks stop subscribing to their service.

Umm, those links are for different cars. A sedan and a coupe. They show the coupes 10% -15% higher across the board. Not quite sure what you're trying to illustrate there, but it doesn't seem to support your (wishful) assertion that sedans are worth the same $$ as coupes.

Dude, you haven't been paying attention. I just paid $4800 for one with a few mechanical and cosmetic flaws. Sunroof motor is dead. Antenna doesn't retract. Dash is cracked. AC doesn't work. A few minor dings here and there. Personally I was happy to find it at that price because the one I looked at right before it - that was quite comparable overall - was $5500 and the seller wouldn't budge. Two others I looked at were both non-turbos and one was just about trashed (peeling paint, hammered carpets, big scrapes and some rust), the other needed engine work. Sellers wanted $2200, and $2000 for them and wouldn't budge.

I am indeed a stubborn individual, and with 30 years of car buying experience under my belt, I can tell you the book prices aren't that far off. At least not for my area. I've bought from auctions, individuals and dealers - you name it. Just about every dealer I've ever sat down to haggle with brings out the book - or more often the printout from their online subscription to it. Individuals just about ALWAYS know the "book value" of the car they're selling - unless they are clueless. With auctions, book value doesn't figure into it unless it is used to set the reserve. Otherwise its someone else's car and the auctioneer could care less what its worth - he just wants to get as much as possible for it since he's paid on commision.

I've financed a bunch of used cars, and every private lender uses the book as the basis to determine how much they will loan on the car. The difference between the amount they loan and the sale price is paid up front by the buyer as down payment. They don't even care what the difference is - high or low. They base the maximum they will loan you to buy the car on the book. No haggling, no flexibility, no negotiation - the book price is what they use. Period. DMVs use it too. If you walk into any DMV in WA to transfer the title for a car you just bought into your name, and you have a bill of sale from an individual, it doesn't matter what dollar figure they wrote on the bill of sale, you pay sales taxes on the book value of the vehicle. Period.

And yet despite ALL of that I'm supposed to disregard what all these other institutions, and groups think and do, as well as my own experience, and knuckle under and "throw out the book" because some young guy in an internet forum says that "in his opinion the book is wrong"? I don't think so!

Is the book perfect? Nope, it actually lags by a couple of months. BUT it is still the best guide to car values out there. Certainly better than any one person's opinon.

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

NADA says $11,025 - $14,025 in WA.

Pretty much what NADA does - only they look at most (all?) of them instead of just a few.

Not necessarily "top of the market". I see a pretty broad spread on eBay - from what look like some great buys to some that go for 25% higher than book. A lot of it depends on how well you put the ad together, when it closes (late at night is good for snipers, but not so much for sellers), quality of the pictures, etc. etc. etc. You seem to think that eBay isn't the "real world" and if you get hooked up with one of the scammers, or a deadbeat bidder, you're right.

But most of the buyers and sellers are regular folks - and you can't get much more real world than that. The car goes for the price it goes for - what someone is willing to pay - and that's that. If that wasn't the case for the VAST majority of auctions, eBay would fold pretty fast...

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

Yeah NADA is way off, NFW is that car worth that. He put in on ebay twice with a reserve of $10k and its never gone above $9,500. Its been in the local paper for months, no one wants to give him more than $9k for it.



Ebay is top of the market, I prefer to buy them local, you get better deals.

I remember laughing like crazy when the City who I think used the classive blue book said my 300SD was worth $5k. Maybe in good shape, but it was a $500 car, get real.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

$4,025 $5,250 $8,700

Here is the span for my SDL, thats about right.

Here is for my friends S320:

$10,825 $12,650 $13,825


In the real world its worth about $9,500.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

I wonder why they got sdls right and are way off with 617 cars.

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

I've been trying to sell my X5 for a while, and the highest dealer bid I got was at Carmax for $18,000. Carmax is the top dollar in town, and doesn't jerk anyone around with underbidding.

Here's what NADA says. http://www.nadaguides.com/usedcars.aspx?LI=1-21-1-5013-0-0-0&l=1&w=21&p=1&f=5014&y=2003&m=1026&d=217&c=18&mi=74000&o=91~263&vi=50547&z=90210&da=-1

I will sell you my car at 15% under NADA's value right now. The car is in near mint condition, by the way, so don't go that route. Do you want it?

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

All I can say is if it was on the West Coast he might get that for it - if he doesn't tell that it is a CT car (they salt roads there don't they?) If he only wanted $10,000 and got a bid of $9,500 I'd say he should have contacted the high bidder with a "second chance offer". $9,500 is within 10% of low book value.

Look, I've said before, the book isn't the final word. What people will pay is, the book is just the best guide available. In my area, for the older bez diesels, it isn't far off the mark. Within 10% +/-

And I still say that's a heck of a lot better, more accurate, and more trustworthy than someone's opinion on the internet - especially when they live in a completely different part of the country.

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

Hattie put in his CT zip code, and that's what he got. You now agree that it is inaccurate, FINALLY. I don't presume to know how much a car is worth myself. Have I ever given you a number during this entire exchange?

Read the description of low book value again. That is clearly not the car he was selling.

__________________
1985 500SL Euro w/ AMG bits 130k
1984 300SD Turbodiesel 192k
1980 240D Stick China 188k
2001 CLK55 AMG 101k
2007 S600 Biturbo 149k Overheated Project, IT'S ALIVE!!!

This 140 is nice, it certianly would be one of the nicest examples on ebay when he lists it their.

The add and photography were very professional because that used to be his job. He got paid huge sums of money to create good adds by large companies.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

Nope, for 2 reasons
1) I don't have any interest in that vehicle and
2) I couldn't afford to pay cash for it

BUT, 15% off trade in value is $18,900 - and if I were looking for one and had the cash, I'd pay that - if the local market supported that number. Surely you realize he's going to turn around and sell it for MORE than what he pays you for it - right? That is how they stay in business.

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

The NADA "low retail" description is as follows
"This vehicle would be in mechanically functional condition, needing only minor reconditioning. The exterior paint, trim, and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration. Most usable "as-is".

Some of the vehicles in this publication could be considered "Daily Drivers" and are not valued as a classic vehicle. When determining a value for a daily driver, it is recommended that the subscriber use the low retail value.
That doesn't sound like the "dog" with a cheap Maco paint job you've alluded to as being their description of a low retail car.

In fact it sounds about like my car. Daily driver, requiring some minor cosmetic and mechanical reconditioning. Normal paint, trim, and interior wear (well maybe a little better than "normal" for most cars, but pretty normal for a Benz).

Maybe that's where our disconnect is. You read between the lines and get some other wierd interpretation or spin from what you read, rather than taking it at face value (we engineer types are so literal). You certainly seem to have done the same thing with several of my comments...

You're somehow calling a car that fits their description of LOW retail an AVERAGE retail, and therefore I guess your idea of average retail must fit their description of HIGH retail, and your idea of high retail must be factory showroom condition - which they specifically state it is NOT (i.e. NOT a "100 point" concours car).

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown