When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
2025 C8 Z06/7/E-Ray of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2023 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2021 C8 of the Year Finalist Unmodified
2020 Corvette of the Year Finalist (performance mods)
2019 C1 of Year Winner (performance mods)
2017 Corvette of the Year Finalist
2016 C2 of Year
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
They added 2 Billion more to keep the program going. Unfortunately, it is so poorly devised, like most of the current administration's programs, that none of the dealers are able to get reimbursement or information from the government.
A local dealer here sold 26 cars under the program and can only get funds for 1 of them and no one will provide them with any information on how to proceed. The paperwork is voluminous and confusing according to many of the dealers.
selling the cars for scrap is a somewhat good idea.. sometimes the metal in a car is worth more than the car.. but from a scrap value standpoint ususally the engine and the tranny are the only thinkg of value in the car.... why pour that stuff down the intake throat and destroy the engine...
If this program was really about energy and polution, then they certainly did not consider net cost-benefit. To get a vehicle from raw materials to a vehicle consumer requires far more energy and creates far more polution than the vehicles they are taking out of use.
Yet a nother ill-thought government program. They don't seem to ever think through the big picture over time. I've never seen so many nonthinkers as I see now in our Federal government. If the Federal government was a business in the industry I work in, we would have put them out of business years ago.
The saddest part is that those politicians reflect the population majority that elected them. For example, Minnesotans elected a professional wrestler as governor once and recently elected a Saturday Night Live writer/commedian to the Senate last election.
selling the cars for scrap is a somewhat good idea.. sometimes the metal in a car is worth more than the car.. but from a scrap value standpoint ususally the engine and the tranny are the only thinkg of value in the car.... why pour that stuff down the intake throat and destroy the engine...
thanks big brother for watching over me...
BTW, I'm not making that up. The guy on TV had a gallon Jug with the lable on it saying "Clunker-Killer" pouring it into a cars oil tube. And on the front of the red gallon jug.
I HATE government subsidies.
The scrap market has tanked for things like plastics and common metals used in a lot of cars due to the anticipated influx of tons of cheap and ready to scrap metal coming into the market.
This will likely depress the cost of new American steel, hurting an already reeling market and potentially putting more people out of a job.
I don't like that it is taxpayer funded, like ALL money the government spends.
I think it misses the mark on the era of cars it is focusing on. There are a lot of old early '70s bombers here in Michigan that wouldn't even be roadworthy in any inspection state. They are shooting smoke, burning oil and bounding down the highway at 70+ mph waiting to shed parts or spear into *** end because of drum brakes and poor maintenance. Why aren't we spending the money to forcibly remove these types of cars? Hell, replace them with the cars we are "clunking," now and we'd still be better off.
For that matter, give everyone who owns a qualifying vehicle a $500 voucher for a tune up, brake service and alignment!
Bottom line, government intervention in a so called "free market" continues to erode the principals of our economy, our democracy and our very way of life. Today I am subsidizing farmers, unemployed people who can but don't want to work, families on welfare, single mothers, prisoners and a lot of others I probably don't know about. I can make an argument FOR each of these programs as important benefits to broad portions of our citizenry. But now I am subsidizing people who want a new car? C'mon! :dupe:
You should be happy that the program excludes nearly all classics. Otherwise those of us with big blocks would be getting the most pressure to get them off the road.
The EPA wasn't even done calculating which cars would be elligible when the program started. A Preliminary list of cars was published and the dealers used it then were told after the calculations were done that 87 cars were removed from the list.
Those dealers then contacted the new car owners and told them to return the new car and take their old one back or pay the $4500 back.
Here's a good one. Finally found the car she likes and the dealer is no longer taking anything new than 2001. That is only suppose to be for Cat 3 Trucks, I'm trading a Cat 2.
The right way to do this program would have been to make you stand in a long line at the DMV, have the car emission tested, then wait 30 Days for a voucher which expired a day ago. lol
Too much government in my life as it is. Poisoning engines in running vehicles seems wasteful and maybe I'm too melancholy about taking care of machinery. Killing them can't be helping the recycled parts industry or their customers.
A federal run "clunkers" program has $1B reasons not to be effective. I think I'll just run the wheels off my old Ram and give 'Thanks' they aren't searching for my classics (yet).
well I heard their adding another $2 billion to the program to keep it going. I do know that here their not using clunker killer they just drain the oil out and start it and let it run until the car/ truck throws a rod and then will no longer run.
I'm just bitter 1 year ago donated to charity our 92 Volvo Wagon, 20mpg so not eligible anyway. 2 years ago I donated our 93 Saab 9000, 18 mpg combined so would be eligible! Currently own a 97 lexus ES300, 170k miles on the clock, 19 mpg so NOT ELIGIBLE. It's just a big giveaway for people who bought gas hogs.
Girlfriend has a 99 grand am gt biggest POS ever but not on the list. Guess I should have talked her the firebird the was $500 more 7 years ago and could have gotten a deal on the new Camaro we are buying.
Someone raised a point ealier and it's my exact argument against this program. I drive a 96 Grand Cherokee every day with 213000 miles. It gets 15-16 around town. I dont' owe a dime on it. Why would I want to trade it in on a new vehicle even with a 4500 credit? I guarantee you I'm not spending $400 on gas over and above what an economy car would get me. That $400 I'm referring to would be my guess as a car payment on a new economy car. That's what I think is what is wrong with today's society as far as money goes. My Jeep runs perfect, so why do I need a new car? My point is, why trade in something that has nothing wrong and you have no payments for something brand new and take on a 60 month or more payment term, just because you got a $4500 credit. I also agree that the credit should only apply if you buy an American car, not a Honda or Toyota.