26th Mar 2009, 21:40

It seems the dodge boys have a short memory. The quality of a Dodge has never and will ever be close to Mustang. Mustang has been around steadily for 44 years, Camaros and Challangers come and go. Enough said.

27th Mar 2009, 13:27

Yeah, the blue book says most cars are higher than they are worth. Try going to trade your car in and then tell me what it's worth. You'll probably get around $12K on trade as most dealers use the Galves wholesale book for trade-in values. Dealers scoff at blue book prices and NADA too. Even selling it outright will be tough getting book value because there are so many of them around it is easy to pick your price on them. The dealers around here are selling for less than your book value (in the $15K range for your year) so as a private seller you'd have to undercut them by at least $1,000 to sell it as people prefer to be backed by a dealer, even on a used car, in case there is a problem.

27th Mar 2009, 13:36

Well, I just blue booked the 2007 Mustang V-6 standard with average miles on it and I got $16K. I then booked my car, the 2008 Accord that you said loses so much value in ONE year. It books at $20,800 with 16K miles that I have on it in miles. Guess what... I paid $20,700 for it brand new. It is worth more than I paid NEW for it after a year and 16K miles. Now who has the better value??

27th Mar 2009, 13:57

"The quality of a Dodge has never and will ever be close to Mustang."

I agree that the appeal of the Mustang is greater, but after owning Mustangs and various Dodges I can't say I find the Dodge lower in quality. The dealer service was awful and Chrysler flatly refused to honor their warranty on my 1988 Shelby Daytona, (it came new with warped brake rotors, I paid an independent shop to replace them). However ALL my Dodges were driven far more miles than any of my Mustangs and none ever had a single problem. One was sold running like new with over 240,000 miles on it. To me that is good quality. The only reason I might consider a Dodge now IS the quality. I KNOW I won't have a warranty.

27th Mar 2009, 14:15

Yeah, those '78 Mustang King Cobras that looked like Pintos and did 0-60 in 15 seconds were super cool.

The 2009 Mustangs are cool because they look like the original, not a bunch of of chopped off Ford Fairlanes. Although the new Mustangs are finally looking good again, there is just no comparison to the Dodge Challenger. Although the Challenger is the cooler car (and was even in 1970-74), it is true that the Mustang is better positioned for sales than the Challenger thanks to its lower price tag. Still, the base V-8 Mustang isn't the car that the base V-8 Challenger is.

28th Mar 2009, 09:16

"Now who has the better value??"

I do. I wouldn't be comfortable driving an "old lady" car such as a Camry or Accord if it was GIVEN to me.

28th Mar 2009, 18:53

You can't use TRADE-IN values for comparison purposes, since you paid retail when it was new. The correct comparison is comparing new retail with used retail. You have to use the same factor for both comparisons. You also can't use a used retail figure for a fully loaded V-6 Accord to compare the resale of a bare-bones basic 4-cylinder 5-speed.

Incidentally, on the last car I traded in, I got within $30 of the KBB trade-in value. That's called "bargaining", and most people don't bother to.

28th Mar 2009, 19:09

I've been reading up on the new Camaro and I plan to test drive one as soon as my local dealer has one. I just read a couple of road tests, and I think Chevy might have a winner, though not a threat to Mustang. The reviewers say the base V-6 is the Camaro to get, as it rides better, is very affordable and has more power than the current Mustang GT.

I find it interesting that once again even the base Camaro will be comparable in power and performance to the V-8 Mustang. This was also true in the past. I test drove a 2000 Camaro base V-6 and sheepishly had to admit that it was every bit as fast as either of my 2 5.0 Mustangs. The Camaro does offer performance, even to budget buyers. Of course reviews are referring to the ride as "choppy" and "bone-jarring", especially in the V-8 models. It's sad that car makers don't build sporty cars that ride comfortably. Lots of older drivers don't like the harsh ride and no longer care for outrageous performance.

I'd love to see Chevy offer the Camaro with the 4 from the Malibu and a soft suspension. I'd also love to see Ford put the 175 HP I-4 from the 2010 Fusion in the Mustang and offer it with a suspension package that left your fillings intact. The power would be more than adequate and us senior citizens would love to have a sporty car we could actually DRIVE. Due to the harsh ride my Mustang spends 99% of the time in the garage while I use our much more comfortable Fusion or Pontiac.

29th Mar 2009, 18:17

I didn't use the loaded V6 as a comparison. Like I stated, I bought the car, an LX-P brand new for $20,700 and it now books at $20,895 for the SAME exact model, and I did go used retail so I am not sure what your point is on that one. Unfortunately most dealers are below those figures these days, so getting a retail price on any used car would be tough. As far as getting within $30 of KBB on your trade... well the dealer made it up on their car trust me. I used to be in the business... the dealer always wins, just like in Vegas.

30th Mar 2009, 18:52

"well the dealer made it up on their car trust me"

No, they didn't. I ALWAYS negotiate the price of any vehicle before divulging that I even HAVE a trade-in. I also insist on seeing the actual bid slip from the used car manager (or wholesaler) on my trade-in. In addition, I do a LOT of research on the going prices for any vehicle in my area that I'm looking at. I realize that import buyers are used to paying full list on all their purchases without any questions, but not me. My money is too hard to come by to throw it away. My last two trade-in deals were right on target with KBB trade-in values. I won't deal otherwise, and I DON'T buy Japanese or German vehicles anymore.

8th Apr 2009, 23:59

I'm still curious to see how your V6 Mustang gets 28 MPG City/48 MPG Highway. That is in effect what you are claiming by close to double the fuel mileage of the previous generation V8. Even the fuel injected and carberated 5.0 V8 from the early 1980's on up was good for at least 15 City/22 Highway. So explain to me again how your Mustang V6 gets 40+ MPG highway.

My theory is you purchased a long line of lemons (not likely), or your driveway sits at the top of a 5 mile long 17% grade (more unlikely).

Why don't you put a 75 MPH speed limiter on your car, so its full potential top speed can be used. That or buy a Yugo or Geo Metro.