CARS (Car Allowance Rebate System) AKA: cash for clunkers

[KFunk]

In fact these vehicles aren't even guzzlers. A '93 E36 (for example) with a leaking p/s pump...Hell it's a 25mpg car...But there's a reasonable credit for trading it in, as it's only worth about $3K max with the leak repaired. This program will miss the target...Imagine that!?

You sure about that? I think the CARS program is only for cars that made 18MPG or less. Maybe you mean something else like a regular trade-in thru a dealership program.

[skipsfcr]

No, I'm really NOT positive...In fact I thought, like yourself, that a car had to qualify based purely on consumption figures. The E36 owner I mentioned claims that age factors in, as well as mileage...Therefore a car that exceeds the MPG threshold still may be eligible based on its age. Antbody who's studied this enough to know all the details, please let me know. I haven't had a chance to research this myself.

[2761377]

You sure about that? I think the CARS program is only for cars that made 18MPG or less. Maybe you mean something else like a regular trade-in thru a dealership program.

if you search at m42club you wil find discussion that the e30 318is is eligible for credit under this program. current epa mileage estimate is apparently 19 mpg for this car, which i can tell you from personal experience is grossly underestimated. i get 28 mpg easy, with a heavy throttle foot.

my friends' 1996 3/4 ton 4x4 chevy pick-up was not eligible, despite avg mpg of 10. how is that equitable?

robert w.

[Pierre]

You sure about that? I think the CARS program is only for cars that made 18MPG or less. Maybe you mean something else like a regular trade-in thru a dealership program.

if you search at m42club you wil find discussion that the e30 318is is eligible for credit under this program. current epa mileage estimate is apparently 19 mpg for this car, which i can tell you from personal experience is grossly underestimated. i get 28 mpg easy, with a heavy throttle foot.

my friends' 1996 3/4 ton 4x4 chevy pick-up was not eligible, despite avg mpg of 10. how is that equitable?

robert w.

You are being misinformed.

The 318is does not qualify. It does not get below 18 MPG combined. It gets 19.

The 96 Chevy 3/4 ton does qualify.

The new vehicle must get a minimum of 22 MPG for cars and 18 MPG for category 1 trucks. The MSRP must be under $45K.

Go to http://www.cars.gov/ for more details.

I am not claiming to support of oppose the program. (it has good and bad points) I am just pointing out some innacuracies, exxagerations and misinformation that seem to spread like wildfires.

[GB]

Well, maybe your messiah will release the details of this program before funding it and allow the TAXPAYERS to review it. Too late now RIGHT?

this bill in nothing but a hoax folks.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090804/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_cash_for_clunkers_transparency

[2761377]

my friends' 1996 3/4 ton 4x4 chevy pick-up was not eligible, despite avg mpg of 10. how is that equitable?

robert w.

You are being misinformed.

The 318is does not qualify. It does not get below 18 MPG combined. It gets 19.

The 96 Chevy 3/4 ton does qualify.

I am just pointing out some innacuracies, exxagerations and misinformation that seem to spread like wildfires.

after my own research it is apparent that the thread at m42club upon which i based my claim re 318is was wrong. it is not eligible. it gets 19 city and 25 hwy, according to fueleconomy.gov.

however, i re-iterate my knowledge of the fact my friend's p/u is not eligible, either. on thursday, aug 6, he went to a large orange county ca. toyota dealer to buy his daughter a fuel efficient car to take to college. he was informed by the sales manager his truck was not eligible for a credit. this is a real world fact.

it appears from the cars site that his truck may eligible for credit towards the purchase of another work truck; nevertheless, his vehicle does not appear on the fueleconomy.gov web site.

so pierre, let's split the difference on the misinformation and exaggeration and call it even.

[Pierre]

after my own research it is apparent that the thread at m42club upon which i based my claim re 318is was wrong. it is not eligible. it gets 19 city and 25 hwy, according to fueleconomy.gov.

however, i re-iterate my knowledge of the fact my friend's p/u is not eligible, either. on thursday, aug 6, he went to a large orange county ca. toyota dealer to buy his daughter a fuel efficient car to take to college. he was informed by the sales manager his truck was not eligible for a credit. this is a real world fact.

it appears from the cars site that his truck may eligible for credit towards the purchase of another work truck; nevertheless, his vehicle does not appear on the fueleconomy.gov web site.

so pierre, let's split the difference on the misinformation and exaggeration and call it even.

You sparked my curiosity.

The truck itself should qualify. If your friend's truck does not qualify, I suspect there is another reason such as certain restrictions for work trucks as you mentioned, especially if he wanted to trade it for an economy car for his daughter. There are other restrictions such as length of ownership and continuous insurance for a year. There are other conditions for the new car too. If the truck was privately owned, it should qualify even as a trade for a car. I think we are missing a piece of the puzzle.

I don't mean to insist on an argument. I just don't want anyone reading this to assume that a 3/4 ton Chevy truck does not qualify.

[Armond]

after my own research it is apparent that the thread at m42club upon which i based my claim re 318is was wrong. it is not eligible. it gets 19 city and 25 hwy, according to fueleconomy.gov.

however, i re-iterate my knowledge of the fact my friend's p/u is not eligible, either. on thursday, aug 6, he went to a large orange county ca. toyota dealer to buy his daughter a fuel efficient car to take to college. he was informed by the sales manager his truck was not eligible for a credit. this is a real world fact.

it appears from the cars site that his truck may eligible for credit towards the purchase of another work truck; nevertheless, his vehicle does not appear on the fueleconomy.gov web site.

so pierre, let's split the difference on the misinformation and exaggeration and call it even.

You sparked my curiosity.

The truck itself should qualify. If your friend's truck does not qualify, I suspect there is another reason such as certain restrictions for work trucks as you mentioned, especially if he wanted to trade it for an economy car for his daughter. There are other restrictions such as length of ownership and continuous insurance for a year. There are other conditions for the new car too. If the truck was privately owned, it should qualify even as a trade for a car. I think we are missing a piece of the puzzle.

I don't mean to insist on an argument. I just don't want anyone reading this to assume that a 3/4 ton Chevy truck does not qualify.

why is it so hard to clarify and figure out a "cash for clunkers bill"...and you support govt run healthcare??? what a joke!!

[Harv]

I think there is a provision that you have to have owned the car for something like 18 months. In other words, I can't buy my friends 750il (that he is almost giving away) and go buy a new 3 series or whatever. I'd have to drive it for some period of time.

John

[Armond]

you have to own the car for a minimum one year John

[KFunk]

OK, so to my surprise, my parents almost did it. They don't really care much about mileage. They've got enough cars: an '00 Monte Carlo SS, '05 F-150, and the victim was almost the '85 Dodge Conversion van (w/318ci V8). It's got a lovely interior and its great for road trips, but lots of crap keeps breaking or rusting apart... and yeah the mechanical quality is really bad and many interior bits have broken by now. It hardly gets driven since they bought a pull-behind camper for long trips, and it has no real monetary value. Its mostly just a back-up hauler, that could net them $4500. It was registered as 13 MPG, so yeah it qualifies. They went to Ricart (gigantic Columbus dealership) and thought about trading it for a new Ford Focus, since they could get quite a bit of money out of the big ole van that hardly gets driven. They also checked out a Fusion, which was fairly nice, but they'd only get $3500 if they got the V6 Fusion. Mom liked the Focus better though. I'm not sure what they'd do with the Focus. Maybe Dad could use it for runnin' around town instead of the giant F-150. Mom would probably be torn between the Focus and her Monte.

Anyways, they didn't do it. Mom couldn't stand the thought of them destroying the van (running the engine till it seizes and crushing it). There's just too much emotional attachment to the van to do that. At Ricart she saw the huge back-lot filled with 'clunkers' (mostly SUVs, trucks, vans, etc.) and thought of the waste and the poor people that could've used them.

So, make your own conclusions, but thats just an example from one Ohio family.

[ray_]

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1291118

[bluedevils]

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1291118

damn! what a sad story if it is true.

[Pierre]

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1291118

damn! what a sad story if it is true.

We don't know all the details. Maybe it is in fact a decoy. Or the engine needs rebuilding and it won't smog. Or the transmission is on its way out.

The cash for clunker program pays up to $4500 plus the value of your car with a blown motor. (maybe anoither $500) The car does end up at a junk yard and will be parted out before being crushed. Those parts will end up in someone else's 6.

What is truly sad is how cheap 6s have become. Would anyone here pay over $5000 or more for this "gem" with an auto transmission that may need rebuilding, or need a cat, or has a major mechanical problem?

And the owner would still have to deal with advertising, phone calls, tire kickers, low ball offers, and, in California, it's a seller's responsibility to get a car to pass smog.

Last time I went to pick-a part, I saw an E30, an E28, a Bavaria and a E24, all in apparently VERY NICE CONDITION. And that was before the CARS program. Some are trade-ins that the dealer cannot resell even at auction because they need more repairs than they are worth. Cosmetics can be deceiving.