I want to buy a gas guzzler!!!!

Since this is in the Auto News all over the place, I figure this is relevant...

I keep reading and hearing how people are trading in trucks and SUVs and basically getting nothing for them just to get a car that gets better mileage... I haven't purchased a used vehicle in years, but am giving this some thought.

If I can get a 2007 or 2008 Avalanche, or Tahoe, or Silverado, etc... for a RIDICULOUSLY low price, I may consider going low mile used.

So, just how much of a discount should I expect to be able to get these days? Let's use a 2007 Avalanche as an example... what WOULD have I paid for a nice low mile example before the SUV purge? And how much MORE should I save NOW?

Talk to Jason E

If we get that $5 July 4th spike people are going to panic, you should be able to get something for wholesale (or less) very easy.

Where I used to work there is a 2007 black Ford Expedition for $14k. Its sitting next to an 06 Corolla for $16k...

Where I used to work there is a 2007 black Ford Expedition for $14k. Its sitting next to an 06 Corolla for $16k...

Where dat Expy? Capital Ford?
I could upgrade my Eddie Bauer for a price like that...

My family has revamped the way we view and use our SUVs completely.
Wife and I are both commuting in 4 and 6 cyl Mustangs and getting 30-40 mpg during the week. We also use them for soccer camp, errands, and grocery-grabbing.
The V8 cars are weekend toys and occasional commute cars now - even thinking about dropping insurance and tags on a couple of them right now.
Yesterday is the first time in over 2 weeks I drove the 5.0 LX. :(

When we take the family (us'ns and her folks or my folks, etc) out for dinner, a trip to the beach or mountains, etc, we upgrade to the SUV for the added room and comfort. Since we are using the SUV for only 10-15% of our travel now, it is more easy to swallow the gas prices. It's also keeping the miles off the SUV and maintenance costs down too. So I have considered moving from the Explorer to a newer but used Expedition for the added comforts and room. I mean, if we are using the SUV for room, we may as well maximize that process, right? It will cost me 3-5 mpg or so, but that cost becomes marginal given the total distance we travel in an SUV now. We were slamming 30-40k/year on 2 Explorers just a couple years ago, now I have an Eddie Bauer that had 4200 put on it last year.:shrug:

I don't think we are the only ones looking at such either. I think we will see many families having two cars - one for the daily duty and another for special trips. It's kinda like a beach house or mountain villa... the second car is becoming a "luxury" item for the middle class.

I've heard of dealers up here in the PNW no longer taking SUV's on trade in and the ones that do are only offering 50% of trade in value. if this is true i am actually seriously considering buying another H2 to replace the one I traded in 6 months ago. A year from now I may be able to pick up an 04 or 05 with 60k-90k miles for less than $15k. :D

I think the price of gas will go down again to around $2.50 - $3.00 a gallon inside of the next two years. Wouldn't be surprised to see a small spike in the sale of SUV's when that happens. Might be a good time to stockpile a few now for sale later and make a tidy little profit. There's one guy in the Midwest buying SUV's today for less than $10k and selling them south of the border for double since the price of gas is considerably cheaper in Mexico.

I think the price of gas will go down again to around $2.50 - $3.00 a gallon inside of the next two years.

yeah... I wouldn't count on that, the oil companies, government, speculators (and who every else banks off gas...) know we are willing to pay $4+ without rioting, they're not gonna change that anytime soon, if anything expect to be paying $4.50-$5.00 inside of the next two years...

I think people are realizing that spending $500/month on gas is silly, when they can pay $250/month (and this will only get worse). And keeping an SUV (paying for insurance and tags) just to drive it occasionally doesn't make much sense either.

If my wife drove the liberty 50-60 miles per day (instead of 15 miles) i'd be getting rid of it for sure.

Traded the wife's 99 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited AWd with magnumV8, leather, sunroof, tow package, "in the wrapper" The dealer showed $4400 on paper but his true ACV was $2200. A wholesaler buddy of mine sold a 1999 Eddie Bauer Expedition at the sale the other day and it brought $2600.

yeah... I wouldn't count on that, the oil companies, government, speculators (and who every else banks off gas...) know we are willing to pay $4+ without rioting, they're not gonna change that anytime soon, if anything expect to be paying $4.50-$5.00 inside of the next two years...

There has been a decline in the amount of gas being purchased and the higher the price goes the more the decline will increase. I could be wrong and we could be in for ever increasing gas prices but if demand drops due to price and cost forces us to either pump our own crude (offshore, Alaska) or finally invest in shale oil, tar sand, alternative energy sources etc...flooding the market with non-foreign oil prices could come down again. Investing and physically extracting our domestic sources of oil won't happen inside of two years but a decline in demand from the largest consumer of oil (US) could drive prices down if only in the short term.

The thinking here may very well be flawed and is over simplified so let's here some different ideas.

There has been a decline in the amount of gas being purchased and the higher the price goes the more the decline will increase. I could be wrong and we could be in for ever increasing gas prices but if demand drops due to price and cost forces us to either pump our own crude (offshore, Alaska) or finally invest in shale oil, tar sand, alternative energy sources etc...flooding the market with non-foreign oil prices could come down again. Investing and physically extracting our domestic sources of oil won't happen inside of two years but a decline in demand from the largest consumer of oil (US) could drive prices down if only in the short term.

The thinking here may very well be flawed and is over simplified so let's here some different ideas.

I see what your saying and understand that point of view, but here is how I see it:

1. Offshore oil if anything might help stablize prices, but even if we start now it would take years before new rigs are up and running, plus the likely hood of discovering large scale oil fields is slim
2. Oil shale, Tar fields etc., could be a source of oil in the future, but you need energy to extract it, mainly energy from oil, so it really isn't the most cost effective way to obtain oil
3. Eastern economies are not slowing down, China and India's economies are growing by about 10% every year, their need for oil is only going to grow
4. There is only so much oil, some geophysicists say that we are already past peak production, meaning the areas that do supply oil are going to have to slowly reduce production

So the way I see it, and I'll admit anything could happen, I can't picture oil ever "reducing" in price, maybe stabilizing for time periods but I'm pretty sure $4 gas is here to stay, and $5 to $6 dollar gas doesn't seem out of question

I see what your saying and understand that point of view, but here is how I see it:

1. Offshore oil if anything might help stablize prices, but even if we start now it would take years before new rigs are up and running, plus the likely hood of discovering large scale oil fields is slim
2. Oil shale, Tar fields etc., could be a source of oil in the future, but you need energy to extract it, mainly energy from oil, so it really isn't the most cost effective way to obtain oil
3. Eastern economies are not slowing down, China and India's economies are growing by about 10% every year, their need for oil is only going to grow
4. There is only so much oil, some geophysicists say that we are already past peak production, meaning the areas that do supply oil are going to have to slowly reduce production

So the way I see it, and I'll admit anything could happen, I can't picture oil ever "reducing" in price, maybe stabilizing for time periods but I'm pretty sure $4 gas is here to stay, and $5 to $6 dollar gas doesn't seem out of question

Guess it all comes down to how much is there and how efficiently, and how quickly it can be had and these answers vary from person to person. I look forward to seeing alternative forms of energy really take off. In the mean time build Nuclear power plants. Not quick and easy but long term it reduces our oil consumption. Isn't 80% of France's energy Nuclear? My concern is being held hostage by foreign oil and the sooner we get away from it the better off we will all be.

And keeping an SUV (paying for insurance and tags) just to drive it occasionally doesn't make much sense either.

How so?
If I'm not making payments on it, and using it only when needed, how is it not making sense? My insurance rates are not bad at all - I'm not paying any premiums at all and have no points. My tags are $20/year. My inspection is $9.75/year.

Is the better opton to try to seat 7 people in a Mustang or try to pack a weeks-worth of beach trip goodies for a whole family into a 2+2 small coupe and pull a decent-sized boat behind it?

To me it makes much more sense to maximize your use of an efficient car when you are travelling alone (like commuting to work or errands) and use the MPV/SUV when you need the extra capacity.

Now granted - my personal business case assumes that you are a multi-car owner. If you absolutely must own only one car, then it needs to be an "everything to everyone" vehicle, and you will most certainly be making sacrifices in some areas to accomodate others - like fuel mileage in exchange for extra cargo space.

Maybe it depends on your lifestyle and needs as to whether it makes sense or not?

^ I suppose if you have an older vehicle...I should have specified that I was referring to peopelw ith 0-3 year old SUVs that cost $30-45k. The payment on these vehicles, plus insurance (not cheap on a new vehicle with a lien on it as you need full coverage) plus tags (where I live tags for a 1 year old Tahoe are like $800)...it all adds up. So you're paying like $700/month for a vehicle you barely drive. Might as well rent an truck/SUV when you need it.

I sold my Tahoe last November, thank god. After paying off the note, I still walked away with $1,500 which isn't bad considering I only had it for a year and a half and didn't put anything down on it. I'm sure that would be a completely different scenario if I tried to sell it today.

I think the price of gas will go down again to around $2.50 - $3.00 a gallon inside of the next two years
I'm with cmg06s on this. Theres no way prices will come back down for all the reasons he posted.

Nuclear power would be great but they havn't built a new nuclear power plant in over 20 years. They are very expensive and take forever to build. They're trying to build one here in Missouri at a projected cost of $6-11 billion with no help from the government.

I'm with cmg06s on this. Theres no way prices will come back down for all the reasons he posted.

Nuclear power would be great but they havn't built a new nuclear power plant in over 20 years. They are very expensive and take forever to build. They're trying to build one here in Missouri at a projected cost of $6-11 billion with no help from the government.

My understanding (again correct me if I'm wrong)has been that new Nuclear plants have been tied up in courts by environmentalists for decades not necessarily by the costs associated with building new ones. Similar to the recent Polar bear BS. In the 1970's there were an estimated 5000+ plus in Alaska yet they weren't endangered. Now that we are getting closer to drilling in their environment the current 25,000+ Polar bears are ID'd as endangered just to keep the oil companies out. Like all things there are two sides to every story I'm just not sure how much is conspiracy and how much is truth.

My understanding (again correct me if I'm wrong)has been that new Nuclear plants have been tied up in courts by environmentalists for decades not necessarily by the costs associated with building new ones.

Its more the Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) people. Believe it or not environmentalists are pushing for Nuclear because it is so much cleaner than coal and a lot safer than all those plants built in the 70's

My understanding (again correct me if I'm wrong)has been that new Nuclear plants have been tied up in courts by environmentalists for decades not necessarily by the costs associated with building new ones. Similar to the recent Polar bear BS. In the 1970's there were an estimated 5000+ plus in Alaska yet they weren't endangered. Now that we are getting closer to drilling in their environment the current 25,000+ Polar bears are ID'd as endangered just to keep the oil companies out. Like all things there are two sides to every story I'm just not sure how much is conspiracy and how much is truth.

Nuclear plants haven't been built because after Three Mile Island, insuring new plants have been astronomical to downright impossible.

The other item regarding nuclear power plants is that they are phenominally expensive and time consuming to build. Although the cost of fueling them is a very small fraction of what it costs to fuel a conventional oil powerplant, and they don't have to be refueled often, besides the costs of studies and planning as well as actual construction, there is the forementioned cost of insuring these things (a coal plant will never have the possibility of a meltdown that will leave the company with the cost of paying to replace an entire city or region), and finally, nuclear fuel disposal (which will need to be secure for hundreds of years) and plant decomissioning at the end of it's life cycle (can't just bulldozer a old nuclear plant and sell off the property.

I personally think we need to take another look at nuclear power and see how other countries like France, Germany, and Japan are managing and if it's feasible today with oil running $130+ probably from now on I think it's something we might want to consider, even with government financial backing or insurance.

Drilling for additional oil isn't going to actually do squat for us. First of all, it's going to take a decade before they come fully on line. Second, we use so much oil that the top 3 oil producing nations can't cover us, and the next 5 biggest oil consuming nations on the planet combined don't equal what we use. Unless we seriously cut our oil usage, we can drop wells anyplace we want, but we aren't going lessen our independence. Right now, as has been reported pretty much everywhere, there is no oil shortage.

Between the plunging dollar, increased oil demand from developing nations, our willingness to spend big bucks to feed our oversized SUVs and our powerplants (despite having the world's largest supply of coal by far), and, of course, speculation and general manipulation by refineries and oil companies if not of price then certainly by supply (we're refining at just 85% capacity as of last month).

The issue isn't supply. Therefore, the answer isn't dropping drilling wells all over creation.

^People want to drill because they think it will give them magically cheap gas, or at least keep gas around $4/gal for a long time. No only is it wrong, but if we rely on new discoveries and bringing these online (which are going to occur slower than demand increases) we will be worse off than if we focus on alternatives that can help us either replace oil, or reduce how much of it we use.

Easy: Reduce consumption 10% in the next 5 years.
Hard: Increase supply by 2-3% in the next 5 years.

I agree about the need to re-evaluate nuclear power. But I would like to point out that reactor technology is leaps and bounds beyond what was available at Three Mile Island. Take something like the Pebble Bed Reactor, where increased temperature causes reduced power output and makes it essentially self throttling. And if you are cooling it with Helium, which doesn't absorb neutrons, your coolant just doesn't become radioactive. Since it is designed to work at higher temperatures, it can make hotter steam which is more efficient at running the turbines.

I don't understand why there are no significant incentives to increase home heating/cooling efficiency. Transportation presumably is responsible for about 20% of our energy consumption. How much does home heating/cooling consume? I can't imagine having to heat my home all winter on oil! This past winter I got fed up and had my A/C replaced with a mid-range air/air heat pump. It will provide my A/C in the summer and provide at least 75% of my heating in the winter (it only provides heat down to about 25 degrees F ambient air temp, at which point my propane furnace has to suppliment). My net cost (after a whopping $300 tax credit) was $3,900. With propane at $3/gallon, I would save about $1,200 a year. Since propane is tied to oil/gas, I would guess that $3 might seem cheap in the near future. I should break even in less than 3 years; after that it's gravy. And, yes, my electric bills in the winter will be higher. But they will be lower in the summer, as the heat pump is more efficient than my old A/C unit. Long story short, for less than $4,000 I have increased the efficiency of heating/cooling my home substantially... and this is not just for a little while, it's from now on. I can reduce my driving to a point. But I will ALWAYS need to heat/cool my home.

I don't understand why there are no significant incentives to increase home heating/cooling efficiency. Transportation presumably is responsible for about 20% of our energy consumption. How much does home heating/cooling consume?

Home heating/cooling efficiency has made huge improvements in the past 30 years! It still requires about the same energy as personal transportation (each consumes roughly 25% of the US's total energy expenditure), but keep in mind that relatively little of this energy comes from oil. Most of it comes from natural gas and coal, and currently, that doesn't affect transportation prices all that much (the use of alternative fuels might invalidate this claim in the near future).

There's still some benefit to be had by improving the efficient of our homes (such as going to ground-contact heat pumps for residential HVAC), but ultimately, I don't have a lot of immediate concern about my ability to obtain stationary energy - there are a lot of options for this (NG, propane, coal, nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, hydro). Transportation energy is a far greater concern, as we've essentially got one option right now, and there don't appear to be a lot of good way to get more of it.

What were we talking about again? Oh, yea - cheap SUVs. Can't help much with that one as I haven't been shopping for one lately (already have enough gas guzzlers in the household!), but I'm kinda curious to see where the market is heading.

So, just how much of a discount should I expect to be able to get these days? Let's use a 2007 Avalanche as an example... what WOULD have I paid for a nice low mile example before the SUV purge? And how much MORE should I save NOW?

I would bet that you could walk into a dealership today and STEAL a NEW '08 Avalanche.


BTW...still waiting on those pix of the '70 http://images.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/toetap05.gif

:D

A Ford dealer here is giving out $2,000 cash cards, employee pricing, and some other incentives. IT adds up to $8,000 of incentives (this is on F-150s).

You can get a V6 for like $12-13k :lol:

There's still some benefit to be had by improving the efficient of our homes (such as going to ground-contact heat pumps for residential HVAC)
I dont understand how heat pumps work, but our lake house has one and our electric bill averages $30/month:cool:

I dont understand how heat pumps work, but our lake house has one and our electric bill averages $30/month:cool:

Sweet!
Heat Pumps are COOL:thumb: (unless you run them backwards... then they're HOT! :think:)

There's even more efficient ways to heat these days, but cooling is another story. It's still hard to beat the efficiency of a basic dedicated A/C unit. They are better than heat pumps for cooling.

In the next 5 years, this new pursuit of alternatives is going to open possibilities we can't imagine today. :yes:

^ I suppose if you have an older vehicle...I should have specified that I was referring to peopelw ith 0-3 year old SUVs that cost $30-45k. The payment on these vehicles, plus insurance (not cheap on a new vehicle with a lien on it as you need full coverage) plus tags (where I live tags for a 1 year old Tahoe are like $800)...it all adds up. So you're paying like $700/month for a vehicle you barely drive. Might as well rent an truck/SUV when you need it.

Convert your 1-year-old Tahoe to propane. You can then license it for $36 a year.......... and I would bet you could get some type of tax writeoff on the cost of the conversion also.

The only bad thing, is that GM heads do not like propane, and will not last much over 50K miles.

Convert your 1-year-old Tahoe to propane. You can then license it for $36 a year.......... and I would bet you could get some type of tax writeoff on the cost of the conversion also.

I'd like to see some numbers showing that propane will result in cheaper fuel bills. I buy enough of the stuff for my home to know that it's not cheap.


The only bad thing, is that GM heads do not like propane, and will not last much over 50K miles.

Nobody's heads like propane - ask any forklift mechanic.

My husband works for a propane company. He is the lead driver. His company does alot of propane conversions............. as all of their company trucks, and most of their employee trucks, are running on it.

Ricks boss is the one who informed him of the problem with the GM heads. Yes, it is true........... no heads truly like propane. However, the GM ones need redone the soonest by far. Why............. I don't know.

Propane is $3.00 a gallon, which is significantly cheaper than gas or diesel. The mileage difference??? Well, I should be able to tell you that sometime in the near future. We are converting the '69 Ford F250 CrewCab 4x4 to propane. We will turbocharge the 390, and convert it. We have most of the parts.

Propane is $3.00 a gallon, which is significantly cheaper than gas or diesel.

Propane also contains only 91,000 BTU per gallon, while gasoline has 124,000 BTU/gallon. That puts propane at a 36% disadvantage assuming that there's no other efficiency improvement (which I'm not sure is the correct assumption), and makes $3/gal propane equivalent to $4.10/gal gasoline :(

Good luck with the conversion - sounds like a cool project!

Current SUV incentives. Not a bad time at all to buy one.

http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/105271/Car-Makers-Lavish-Incentives-on-SUV-and-Truck-Buyers

^ $7,900 on RAM 1500 :eek:

^ $7,900 on RAM 1500 :eek:

They are getting crazy on the discounts....even with higher fuel prices....nearly $8k off is going to cover a couple years of gas :lol:

The price of oil is all speculation at this point and no fundementals.

There was a REAL oil shortage in the 70's and people were waiting in line and could only buy gas certain days of the week. Even then I don't beleive the price spiked as high as it is now (even after adjusting for inflation). Untill I see someone waiting in line for gas, I am gonna chalk the price up to rampant, unchecked speculation that is due to bust. Oil is the new housing market...

Nevermind the Yahoo article. That's too low.

I was at a local Ford Dealer yesterday checking out SuperDutys.
A 2008 250-SD Lariat, loaded, 4x4, crew cab, leather, etc - MSRP 42k.
After employee pricing, $3000 cashback, $500 loyalty cash... $32k.

Paper hanging in the window - everything on the table.
That's over $9500 reduction from MSRP before you say a word to a salesman.

I can remember not 18mos/2 years ago having a discussion with a buddy looking to buy a new SuperDuty. He was pizzed that neither Ford or GM would negotiate on their heavy trucks AT ALL. He has a Dodge 2500 today because Didges were piled-up and CHrysler was desperate to move them.

AMazing what 18 months can do to a market, huh?

Yea, but the kicker is, the $500 is only if you finance through FMC, and if you do that, and get the promotional rate (not great), then you lose the $3000.

In May, you would have gotten a much better deal than that.

PS, $42K for a Lariat diesel is not realistic, and the $3000 is only for diesel. It is $2000 for gas. An actual Lariat diesel with anything on it will run about $48K-55K, depending on options. I am VERY well versed on all of this, as we are trying to buy a truck. LOL