I evidently had far too much time on my hands...

...in the next post is a chart of Corvette base prices adjusted (in constant November 2004 dollars) for the monthly CPIs while they were being built.

 

 

That is very interesting data. Source? What intrigues me is that the most expensive Corvette (aside from Callaway and ZR-1) is the 1989 convertible. The 2005 has a lower price than the 1982 CE. (BTW for non-economists, a constant dollar is the price at the time adjusted for inflation.) A last observation; the C1 and C2 Vettes were the most affordable...at the time.

 

what you are saying is that a car that cost 50k in 2004 dollars would have cost 30k in 1953 after "backing out" the consumer price index over the past 50 years. somehow that doesn't seem right. the cpi has more than double in the past 50 years.

 

No, a 1953 Corvette (~$4,000) with price adjusted to 2004 dollars would be around $28,000 new. My 1967 selling for $5,000 new would be the equivalent of $25,000 in today's dollars. Compare that to a C6 at well over $40,000. Fascinating how Vettes have gone up-market but all things considered (technology), not much.

 

Most Corvette pricing information and months produced was from the Corvette Black Book. I included required options in the base price. The CPI information is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

Nice piece of work!

 

Yup, too much time on your hands. Good info, and it confirms what had seemed to me to be the case--vettes have gone from being the common man's muscle car to being a semi-snobby sports ride (I see more 40s-ish women driving 'em around here than guys, and even the guys don't look like the type that could turn a wrench if their lives depended on it).

JB

 

Look, I dunno where they get those BS con-sumer price index BS from, BUT....
My father's house in Bethesda Md, sold in '63 for only 24 grand, a decent price, and he felt it was a killing over the 12 or so years he owned it, as it appreciated 7 grand....
Well about 8 years ago it was worth about 400 grand, MINIMUM in lousey shape....
so just where do they get those figgers from?? most all cities anywhere have had that sort of price run up, maybe not THAT bad, but at least 10x in the last 30 years.....
now compare to a car, that 4 grand vette in the 50's is now what?? 60 grand?? maybe 45 grand?? that's only 10x.....
fuel costs, 20 cents/gal back when and now 200, that's 10x....

I"m saying cars are no cheaper nore more expensive now than they were, but of course thanks to that whipping boy, the electronics industry, (hi-tech) they run far better for cheaper...allways more and more for less and less....
junk and plactic makes up for the rest of savings....

the typical govt secy made about 5-7 grand back then is she was lucky, today.....70 grand....maybe more, some of them are GS14s....but that's cabinet level, say personal secy to a cabinet officer....

now the wife's place is about 75-80 grand, but her folks paid only ten for it, back in '65....so real estate is not all THAT kind, so maybe it's more typical of the country as a whole, but still that is still 8x.....a FAR CRY from those stats of 5x for the official inflation rate...and I"m being KIND>....

I think the govt has a vested interest in understating the inflation rate, the TRUE rate that is...because it makes them look better at administering crap then they truly ARE, and it's across party lines, so they are ALL guilty as hell....
I will never forget the town house I owned going from 35 grand to 80 grand in 3 years....I picked up the last 20 grand of appreciation in 2 years....Carter was prez....so was Reagan...

GENE

 

A better number than the CPI would be what percentage of your annual income would it take to buy a Vette.

I don't have the numbers but for example, say the 53 sold for $3500 and the avg yearly income in 53 was $3500, then it is 100%. But say for '04 the Vette was $50,000 and the avg income was $75,000 then it is at 66%.

Can someone run those numbers?

tom...

 

yeah, i agree, and that, i "think" has remained fairly constant over time as it has for all vehicles.

 

just sold a 63 split window vette for 137,500 on bj

 

That's a thought - I'll do it when I have another 6 or so hours...



I'm willing to bet, though, that it would come out about the same...

 

My analysis of the numbers: The price is pretty constant for the first 25 years or so because the cars were pretty much the same mechanically. Then they started adding stuff (comfort items and electronics) and the price started going up dramatically. For the past 20 years the cars have been fundamentally about the same, only the details have changed. The slight decrease can be attributed to GM actually getting better at building them. That's pretty simplistic, but makes sense to me. Joe

 

remember this too. what did you get when you bought a car in 1953?

a chassis, a body, an engine and "maybe" a radio and heater. price a car like that today (if you can find one).

In 1953 (or generally in the 60's), no A/C, cruise control, climate control, active suspension, fuel injection (usually), theater quality sound systems, alloy wheels, 20 inch wide tires , head up display, cd players, dvd players, nintendo game players, wall to wall carpenting, power windows, power door locks, remote control starting, aluminum engines, run flat tires, built in satellitte radios, "On Star" service, led instruments or cockpit insturmentation to rival a 747.

all that stuff costs money. what we would call "stripped down" cars were the order of the day back then. now, go to a car lot and try to find one that's not optioned to the nth degree. you find few.

 

cars, like most consumer items, are cheaper today relative to the income of the "average" american worker than they have ever been. mass production, computerization, automation and competition make it so. that's why Russia and China are desparately trying to "jump start" market economies in their countries.

 

another good point. and if you look at the graph, the big jump is in the 80's. any one but me old enough to remember the 80's??
double digit inflation. mortgage rates at or above 20 per cent (yeah, 20%) no joke. real runaway inflation. those weren't real "fun" times for the average worker

 

That's a really nice Firebird, Joe! I like the first generation...would love to have a silver 69 Sprint in my garage...

 

Okay, just looked up some income figures from the US Census.

In '54 the average household income was $4,200. In '01 it was $42,228.

In '54 the base price for a Vette was $2,774. In '01 it was $47,000.

Hummmm..... in 54 a vette took a little over half of the family income. In '01 it was over 100%. Of course in '01 most families had more then one income, while in 54 most were single income. So that would make a Vette in '01 that much more expensive.

A number for the C3s, in '73 the family income was $12,050 and the Vette was $5,398. A Vette was less than half the family income.

tom...

 

Greyghost,
In the autumn of 1980 my first five-year mortgage of 11.75% came up for renewal. I was offered 13.5% for six months or 14.5% for five years. I thought both offers were outrageous but I went with the five years. In the summer of 1981 the rates were near 22%. Many people just walked away from their homes. I struggled with 14.5% and survived. That was a very difficult time. My "ride" was a 1979 Datsun 210 station wagon, 0-60 in a lengthy coffee break. Yes, I remember.