This article was posted on another board I frequent.

It shows that in 1991, a 1992 model Celica GT-S was $23k and included high end 'options' and features that weren't taken for granted back then such as CD player, power windows and door locks, a driver's airbag, etc. Stuff that you pretty much get standard on almost any car made today except the very most basic cars. Also performance was pretty lacking too, as was fuel economy.

And then I looked at the price and started thinking about what $23k was in 1991 vs today in 2008. So I searched google for an inflation calculator and found one that actually let you input the years and applied the actual rate of inflation experienced during that date range. It told me that $23k in 1991 was equivalent to $38k in 2008!

Am I missing something here or do we really have things that good these days? You can buy a car that is at least as good as that Celica in every single way, and in many ways far superior for less than half of 38k, and for 38k you can buy a fully loaded entry level luxury class vehicle.

What happened? Did cars just become a huge bargain in the last 20 years or what?

 

I'm guessing old technology versus new technology. Back then CD-Players, Power Windows/Locks/Seats, Airbags, etc... were all new technology and "high end options". A standard fare Celica probably had manual windows/locks/seats, Cassette player...

Alot of the new technology back then is standard fare and on base models now adays. Now the big things are Nav Systems, Rear Cameras, Object Sensors, 6-Speed Trannies, Hybrid Drivetrains... you name it.

I dunno, just a guess.

 

Well it's very true that those features cost a lot less to include in cars now, but even ignoring all of that... 38k dollars will buy you an almost completely LOADED mid sized luxury car these days.

What the Celica GT-S really considered a premium/luxury class car back then? I seem to remember it being considered maybe an everyday man's sporty but economical choice. I mean it's in a comparison with the Ford Probe and Eagle Talon which were definitely not premium cars IIRC and are priced not too far behind the Celica.

 

The cost of raw materials decreased throughout the 90s. A lot of work moved offshore. Designs have gotten far more economical with their use of materials and labor. Average industry profit margins have crashed.

 

The Celica was pretty expensive. I can remember review back then always saying how expensive they were for what you got. I mean, a 1991 Z28 was like $15,000. A Mustang LX 5.0 was under $14,000. That Celica GT-S would be in the price range of a loaded 1992 Trans Am or Z28 convertible. There probably weren't a whole lot of Celicas loaded up to be that expensive.

 

I agree, the Celica lost its way back in the early-mid 90s and became a over priced sports coupe that still had the econo-coupe drivetrain from the 80s. From what I remember the convertible Celicas from the mid-90s were stickered close to 30K. That is why the Celica virtually disappeared

So the comparison using the Celica vs. todays money is a little skued.

I remember looking at a brand new Mustang LX 5.0 notchback 5-speed back then and the sticker price was $12,900

 

That would probably be a better comparison. A 65% increase from then to now for a $15k camaro would be $24,750. I doubt we will have an entry level V8 come in at quite that price. You sure do get a lot more goodies today but technology gets cheaper as it gets older. We also have a lot more 'lean' manufacturing today.

 

My 1991 Z28 was more like $20,000 not $15,000. Granted it was pretty well loaded (everything except t-tops).

 

I owned a 1990 Celica GT a few years ago (it was my first car). The GT-S was pretty much the exact same car, except it was available with more luxury options. The drivetrains were exactly the same.

Performance was non-existent. They had 130 HP and about 140 lb.-ft. of torque, IIRC.

I'm kind of shocked that the Celica was that expensive in 1992, especially compared to cars like the Camaro and Mustang. It was an econobox with a sporty exterior. The only Celica worth owning was the turbocharged All-Trac/GT-Four model. What was Toyota thinking?

 

I think cars in general are getting more expensive -- but the addition of technology makes them appear as a better value. In terms of safety and luxury, you DO get more car for your money, but sticker prices are also higher.

Take the 2008 Ford Ranger -- that literally hasn't changed since the early 1990's. Ok, it has an additional airbag, and the front end and tail lights have changed, maybe the gage cluster. You could pick up a 4wd ext cab for about $11k sticker in 1996. Now they're almost $25k, and I think power windows and carpet are still options.

 

I dunno... remember 23k in 1991 = 38k in 2008... those two numbers are equal to each other... so look what kind of cars you could get in 1991 for 23k and look what you could get now for 38k. 38k will buy you a seriously nice car these days... like a luxury class car.

Not 11k. You must have been thinking about the price after rebates and negotiations or else the price of the absolute base model 2wd standard cab 4-cyl manual trans ranger. The 1996 Ranger 4x4 Supercab XL model (base model) with no options stickered at $17.9k. The same model in 2008 is now 19.9k.
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/pr...nger&trimid=-1

12 years of inflation go by and the 19.9k is a steal compared to the 17.9 back then.

Though yes the Ranger really doesn't offer much more for 2008 than it did in 1996... the Ranger is one of the few vehicles on the market that has received almost no attention in well over a decade... it really is long in the tooth and not indicative of the typical car.

 

I remember it being stated somewhere that the price of Cars in general hasn't kept up with inflation. My 89 RS convertible was 17K or so new. Increased competition has kept car prices low as well.

 

Threxx,
Just keep in mind that the rate of inflation (about 2.7% annual over that span) is largely influenced by the cost of food, energy, and real estate. Almost all other products that are part of the measure of inflation have actually gone down in price or increased at a much slower rate than that of inflation over that time span. Think about it... Consumer electronics, computers, cars and trucks, clothes, shoes, etc...
So, yes... You get more car for your inflation adjusted dollar... But what that really means, is that real estate, food, and energy are much less of a value than they were in 1991...
Value is always relative....

 

I ordered a 1990 Mustang GT with leather, sunroof and other options for $14,600 out the door. Sticker was 16.9k

In comparison a loaded Z-28 was stickered over 20k.I remember laughing when comparing the two vehicles.

 

My sister just replaced her daily-driver 1991 Mercury Cougar (purchased new in January 1991 for just under $18,000) with a 2008 Mercury Milan V6 for just over $19,000. These are both purchase prices, not MSRP, but still, she was pretty surprised. And, yeah, I think she got her moneys-worth outta that old Cougar!