Re: Caprice engine swap?
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:25 am
Still no pics from Norwood guy. To show interest, I told him I could come Sat afternoon, but that it would be nice to have additional pics. Plus, additional pics prove he has the car. Would be nice to get a pic of the VIN...or maybe I should do that myself if the car is real, and maybe run a Carfax (or someone else's report) from my phone on the spot.
Some conflicting thoughts on this whole thing...
I haven't checked out a single one of these, but the pros of a $1,200 version are that I have less to lose, theoretically lower expectations, and generally less stress over problems. With a $4,000 example, I may get something that was better taken care of more recently, but my expectations for the car's condition, reliability and everything else would go up proportionally. With a car like this, it seems like going full apathy may actually be a better plan overall, even if the risk is that the $1,200 car is more likely to have issues, hidden problems, etc. (the "shoot yourself in the foot" argument).
My retort to that argument is, these cars come with a service history a mile long and well into the 5 figures. Maybe there is a sweet spot for cost of ownership, but not sure where that is. For example, if I found a mint 42k mile example for $9,500, do you really think that would be $5,500 less costly to run over ~3 years than the $4,000 well kept example with 120k? Or $8,300 less costly over 3 years than the $1,200 example with 200k? I prefer rolling the dice than solidifying my cost (it would most certainly be the opposite if I were a business, but I am not), even if you could ALSO make an argument that the $9,500 example could be sold for, say, $7,000 (but minus maintenance/operating costs).
There may also be a mileage sweet spot but that would vary with the particular ownership attitude. My example would be that by 200k, things have gone wrong and were fixed. Yeah maybe it's on the original engine and trans which has certain implications, but common issues, you'd think, would have been fixed. Like massive oil leaks, suspension problems, broken electronics, etc. These cars aren't like Japanese cars where you run them to 200k with only oil changes, and then stuff starts to go wrong so you toss them. It's more like a ship - a more steady maintenance cost over the life of the vehicle (and an owner who has the will and the means to keep it like new - and more likely somewhere that is truly qualified), and somewhat from the beginning, which isn't a bad thing for a buyer such as myself.
Some conflicting thoughts on this whole thing...
I haven't checked out a single one of these, but the pros of a $1,200 version are that I have less to lose, theoretically lower expectations, and generally less stress over problems. With a $4,000 example, I may get something that was better taken care of more recently, but my expectations for the car's condition, reliability and everything else would go up proportionally. With a car like this, it seems like going full apathy may actually be a better plan overall, even if the risk is that the $1,200 car is more likely to have issues, hidden problems, etc. (the "shoot yourself in the foot" argument).
My retort to that argument is, these cars come with a service history a mile long and well into the 5 figures. Maybe there is a sweet spot for cost of ownership, but not sure where that is. For example, if I found a mint 42k mile example for $9,500, do you really think that would be $5,500 less costly to run over ~3 years than the $4,000 well kept example with 120k? Or $8,300 less costly over 3 years than the $1,200 example with 200k? I prefer rolling the dice than solidifying my cost (it would most certainly be the opposite if I were a business, but I am not), even if you could ALSO make an argument that the $9,500 example could be sold for, say, $7,000 (but minus maintenance/operating costs).
There may also be a mileage sweet spot but that would vary with the particular ownership attitude. My example would be that by 200k, things have gone wrong and were fixed. Yeah maybe it's on the original engine and trans which has certain implications, but common issues, you'd think, would have been fixed. Like massive oil leaks, suspension problems, broken electronics, etc. These cars aren't like Japanese cars where you run them to 200k with only oil changes, and then stuff starts to go wrong so you toss them. It's more like a ship - a more steady maintenance cost over the life of the vehicle (and an owner who has the will and the means to keep it like new - and more likely somewhere that is truly qualified), and somewhat from the beginning, which isn't a bad thing for a buyer such as myself.