On Topic (31) | Off Topic (1) | All (32)
Nothing. Very reliable.
This car is still a great American alternative for those of us who just don't feel right about driving foreign cars. At 30 MPG and 400+ mile range on a tank of gas, why would you turn your back on the good old USA? Fun to drive. Quick response. And now with a huge amount of nostalgic appeal. A true modern classic. Get one if you can. You will be glad you did.
I have one. I agree with much of what you say. The engineering is so simple that it's a do-it-yourselfer, unlike all this computerized stuff. It also has the BEST rear visibility of ANY car I've driven.
True, the rear visibility is good due to the kammback design, but when you're driving a Gremlin there is usually nothing to see back there anyway. All the other cars are in front of you.
I am the proud and original owner of a 1975 Gremlin X with a 304 V8. I recently had it restored and did some engine work. First, folks are behind me only if I choose to allow them to do so. Secondly, if they are passing me, it is because they are attempting to get a look at a true and rare classic!
Folks are behind you only if you choose to allow them to be? So what do you do if choose not to allow them-go even slower so they'll pass?
Okay, guys, I'm a Dodge (and Plymouth) Boy through and through, but even I've had enough of this Gremlin bashing. True, AMC's never had the popularity of the Big Three, and they did some weird things. Gremlins, AMX's, Javelins, and Rebels were muscle cars as much as their Ford, Chevy, and Dodge/Plymouth contemporaries. While it's true that nobody had much of a real musclecar after about 1973, I'm sure that a nicely fixed up 304 Gremlin is going to be in the same class as similar post-muscle car era cars, and certainly no worse than the '76 Aspen R/T or Roadrunner, or the '76 305 Camaro. I would sure rather have a 304 Gremlin than a '76 Pinto-looking Mustang. Or any car made after 1990.
You would rather have a 304 Gremlin than "any car made after 1990"?
Apparently you are resigned to driving old cars for the rest of your life?
Are you the one that has kept that interminable thread going on the '76 Volare review? Don't try pulling that stuff here...
Dodge/Plymouth Boy is not answering. He's in the hospital since his Volare got hit by a 304 Gremlin trying to change lanes and couldn't see him because of the big "GREMLIN GT" sticker on the back window.
Resigned to drive old cars for the rest of his life?! Rather, resigned to putting the money he saved on car payments into his mortgage or investments. Let's see... drive a Volare and be a millionaire, or stay poor forever making car payments... Hmmm, what to do, what to do...
Yes, it's truuue... those people you see driving Volares, Gremlins, Fairmonts, etc...they're all millionaires, cause they don't have car payments.
They also keep Auto Zone and Pep Boys in business.
Well, let's think about this. You can go to Autozone and buy a part for $85 every 6 months and do maintenance yourself, or you can make a car payment EVERY month for $600. Okay, let's assume an APR of 10% (there's some variation, but 10% isn't a bad number) and term of 30 years, with an annual investment of $7200 (600 x 12). Your future balance will be:
F = $7,200 * ( (1+.10) ^30 -1) /.10.
F = $1,184,357.
Could be that you are seeing more millionaires than you thought.
And those that own new vehicles spiral deeper and deeper into debt... while those that own can save, take vacations pay off mortgages. I enjoy going into Auto Zone or Pep Boys taking care of an auto I actually own vs. going to the post office to mail off my monthly car payment that I will never own only replace with another new payment. I kept my new 1973 Gremlin X 304 V8 and maintained for 10 years and it was very reliable. I usually keep a car several years that's one of the reasons I was able to be mortgage free at age 50.
Well, I don't know about you, but I have never heard of anyone financing a car for thirty years; most financial institutions would not allow such a long loan period unless the collateral had a kitchen, bath and a couple of bedrooms in it. If you are referring to someone buying a new car as soon as the old one is paid off, that's a want vs. need decision. To argue that they have to buy a new one because the old one is no longer usable would contradict your own argument that it is better to keep a used car going than buy a new one.
Your interest rate example is also off, current new car interest rates in US are running around 6-7 apr, the only ones who would have to pay 10% are those with really bad credit, who probably should not be buying new cars anyway.
Finally, assuming a 60 month loan term and 6.5% apr, a $600 a month car payment would buy a pretty nice car, one costing over $30,000, in fact. There are a lot of new cars available for less than that which will have plenty of life left in them by the time the loan is paid off.
So, to make your claim of saving a million dollars correct, someone would have to buy a $30,000 car, pay it off, then immediately buy another one without getting any money back on the trade, and then continue doing that for thirty years. I suppose you could argue that is essentially what someone who is leasing a car does, and I would not dispute that, I think leasing is only for people who just HAVE to have a more expensive car than they can afford to buy, or who just have to have a new car every three years and have made the decision to spend the money to do so. Again, a want vs. need decision, but that does not make buying an OLD used car necessarily a more sound financial decision than buying a new one. You also seem to discount the "hassle factor" associated with owning an older car. Not everyone wants to be "in the Zone" every weekend nor be on a first name basis with their mechanic, and yes, older cars with more miles are usually going to require more repairs and parts replacement than new ones. There is also the image factor to consider, although you obviously don't agree with it, most people, for better or worse, will judge someone by the car they drive. The status conveyed by a new or late model car is worth something to quite a few people, if it weren't, nobody would ever replace their car until the old one got wrecked or completely worn out. You are no doubt familiar with the Click & Clack show on NPR; their advice is to buy a new car that you like and that will best meet your needs for at least the next 8-10 years, then maintain it regularly and keep it until it has completely worn out, which is usually at least 5-6 years after you have finished paying for it, maybe longer.
Any millionaires who ascribe to the above philosophy are probably the ones you see driving mid-ninety's era Corollas or Civics, which they bought new and have been able to continue using long after they paid them off.
The ones driving Volares or Gremlins are either driving them because they like old cars, or they have annual incomes of $8000 and a $750 car was all they could afford.
Finally, no I am not a new car salesperson nor do I have any financial interest in whether more people buy new cars or not. I just to present a viewpoint opposing the one I have seen frequently on this site, i.e., that anyone who buys a new car is a fool who is wasting his/her money, but that people who drive old cars are just saving tons of money by not having a car payment and that an old car is just as good in every way as a new one.
I owned the new Gremlin X V8 for 10 years sold it in 1983. I am not driving it 30 years. I have a Pontiac 6000 and a Pontiac Bonneville the last I have owned for 14 years and it is extremely reliable. I might even keep it longer I know what I have and they are garage kept. Not a weekly Auto Zone trip. As far as the prestige sure I could buy a new car every year or 2 with payments. Not everyone wants to. I paid for a home in less than 25 years that is now worth nearly $400,000. And I own it. If I bought new cars all the time unless they were used classics I would never have been able to do that at 50. Driving a vehicle around that depreciates rapidly for prestige isn't making it in my opinion. If you need prestige... it seems sensible to educate yourself send children to college and not accumulate debt. Its not what you make its what you spend... I hope using this logic allows me to retire by 55 or I could go out and drive a new Lexus and keep working.
This last commenter sure has a lot to say without having actually read any of the previous comments. 10%: assumed average APR for 401 (k) -type or mutual fund retirement plans. The $7200 is the money you would invest in that instead of making the car payment. Too bad you didn't understand that. Also, apparently you didn't understand that the 30-year term refers to a retirement plan, not financing a car. Perhaps you should read a little more carefully before commenting. I imagine that the tears obstructed your vision, as you had just finished writing the check for your car payment.
Because I know you are dying with curiosity, as well as seething with venom for anyone doing something different, I drive a 30-year-old car. I make $80,000 and paid off my house in 7 years, at age 37, while fully funding a retirement plan.
I read all the posts. The previous reader felt that comparing a home loan was not applicable to a vehicle purchase. A car note is not a 30 year mortgage. Not about funding your 401k or your portfolio. I guess we can sit here and comment on the Rule of 72. But this is not an investment class. It sounds like with your diverse portfolio you could simply set up 2 corporations then have a stockholder meeting with yourself loan the other corporation the money and write off half of your new Mercedes the first year. Did you ever own a Gremlin? I owned a 1973 Gremlin X 5 litre V8 3 speed through college. I paid $2900 and it was the only car I ever financed. That is what attracted to me this post initially. I am wondering if you ever owned a Gremlin at all?