So many threads and posts about age of the owners of the C4 corvette here it makes me think a little...

The C4 is cheap and easy to get in to now, BUT the C3 IMO never seemed to have so many youngsters buy them when at the low points. I never noticed too many teens driving them at least.

Other than the frame, interior,and the lack of factory tilt front end I like the C3 better for many reasons so I am not picking on it.


I wonder if it's because the C4 is more of a technological draw (newer feel) or what? What are your thoughts? surely it's not just price.

 

Bought a C3 when i was younger the body and interior are just badass.
IMO much moreso than the C4.

But they are a pos chassis wise, and made for short people
And SLOOOOOOW. Console plate you just dont want to show off

To be honest I bought a C4 just for sheer price of entry. It was cheap and couldnt find a nice Camaro for the same money.

Handling is worlds apart no comparison
Room a little better. Totally different car cant really think of many similarities.

Nothing wrong with a cheap sports car.
Hope they stay that way look whats happened to all the other popular sports/muscle cars noone can afford them anymore.

 

I am old enough to remember when the C4 was first introduced. What fanfare and the car was so far ahead of the C3. At that time, my 73 was only like 9 years old.

I wanted one so bad, but couldnt afford it.

I love the looks of the early C4 .

Pologreen. The fact you like the C3 is your preference Sort of like in the Days of Charlies Angels, I had a huge crush on Jaclyn Smith. She is still smoking hot.

I just love the feel of how the C4 fits around you In the C3 you get into the car. In the C4 you put the car around you

Sort of off topic in a way. I loved the chrome bumpered C3 the best. From 68 to 73 . I sort of classify them as C31 and the body colored bumpers as C32 . And even today, the C31 Vettes go for a lot more than the C32 do.

I have the same feelings for the C4 , I love the looks of the 84 to 90 C4. The rearend just looks totally awesome.

 

I can remember when several of us teens in high school had c3's. It's all we could afford. Same thing now with the C4's. Just a different place in time.

 

I remember when the C4 was first introduced, it was the Vette I always wanted. Current pricing is just a bonus.

 

I bought a 79 L-82 in 1990 as an 18 year old because it was a good price (cheapest I could find at the time - $3000.00). It seemed like the plastic bumper C3's were the step child at the time - everybody wanted the C4's.
I unfortunately sold it for $6000.00 in 1995 - after a whole bunch of restoration and work (not perfect).
When I decided to get back into the Corvette family, I was looking for another 79. The abused ones were going for close to 10K.
I got my 86 ($1500.00) in 2010 and I am glad that I did. I still love the curves of the C3 but it can't compare otherwise. All the technology was a bit of a learning curve, but definitely worth it.
I always thought of Corvette pricing as an inverted bell curve that adjusts as the years progress and new models are released. Finances determines where you are able (or want) to jump into the Corvette family.
Certain years are always going to be at the bottom of the curve.

 

Buy the latest greatest Corvette you can afford. Couldn't afford a C1, C2 or C3 at the time. Finally could get into a C4. C5's and 6's look like azz IMO but I'm sure the performance/handling are superior. I don't think many teens can afford a Corvette without a little help from Mommy or Daddy. Most of the mommies and daddies will say; "What's the matter with a nice Corolla or Civic.

 

bought my first Vette 1969 Coupe for $3350. My mom co-signed for me. I had a 70 GTO at the time, so we insured the Vette as a part time pleasure vehicle for $89 per six months, full coverage. I DROVE IT DAILY. Heck, the odometer didn't even work and they never checked anyway. The GTO just sat in the garage once the Vette was mine.

 

I think there are a few reasons. Firstly its because the C4's are heading into the 25/30 year old bracket where they are just starting to hit the "classic" status.
Some of the mid model C4's are what I call in no mans land. That is, they are old but not classics and not modern or new enough to call them a good choice for a daily.

Next is the double edged sword, one hand I believe the Corvettes are cheap in the states (observation here as I am from Australia) is because it was a GM first where fuel injection was applied to the whole line up and a host of advanced electronics for its day.

Being a first there were teething problems and certainly not a car for someone who just wants to get up, turn the key and go. As a result they have developed a reputation for being a good looking car, but temperamental and only suited for those who are prepared to wrench and study the electrics. Lets face it, how many Honda Civic owners go on the forums and get advised to buy a FSM. The side of the coin is the fact that once people work around these hurdles one realises that in foundation they are quite a robust car. The more people see shiny, looked after, well maintained and excellent performing C4's it attracts and inspires people to buy C4s specially since the prices are so keen.

So the cycle keeps going, you get people who wake up one day and think gee a C4 would be nice to own and the same token you get someone who is sick of it having to throw money and constantly getting stranded.

As a result the prices are kept low for C4's relative to other models.

Cheers,
Gary.

 

Personally the reason why I bought C4s is because I love them. The money factor wasn't the issue, I always thought that they are great Vettes. The other generations are amazing Vettes as well but the C4 has always been a true favorite for me.

 

I'm on my 4th c4. I had 2 84s, 1 86, and now the 90 zr1. I was 19 when I got my first c4(it was cool and affordable). After the first one I was hooked. I may get a c5 or c6 later, but I am in no hurry. c6 would be my preference, but the c5 will probably be first for business reasons.

 

Damn, bunch of rich punkass kids in here.
I was 37 when I could finally afford to buy a Corvette ("76, 190hp I believe).


Anyway, I do recall when I was 16, my 18 y/o brother bought a '67 427 coupe. The car was 2 years old at the time. He paid $5k for it.
He ended up selling it, as he went into the Army reserves for 6 months.
When he got out, he bought a '68 327 convert. I was hooked at that point, as he let me drive it. Now, my brother financed both of his, but I never did. It just took me 20 years to save up enough cash to buy my own.

 

Bought a '77 new for $9000....sold it 12 years later with 30K on the clock for 10,500. That was the only good thing about it. That car was a 4 speed slug that couldn't get out of its own way. Fit and finish were horrible.

Never cared for the C4 fastback when it came out...it just didn't look like a Corvette. I guess I'm stuck in the C1-C2 time warp when the top had to go down. When the C4 Vert came out it was like a whole new ball game. Now it looked like a Vette...I guess its the notchback vs fastback profile.

Bottom line is its all personal and what influenced you when you were a young whippersnapper.

 

And, unfortunately, even that resale value wasn't particularly great-- remember there was a lot of inflation in the late '70's.

In 2012 dollars, you paid about $33,700 dollars for it new (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc....977&year2=2012).

In 2012 dollars you sold it for about $19,200 (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc....989&year2=2012).

That's about 57% depreciation in real dollars.

Today a new base c6 can be had in the $38-42K range, so 12 years at 57% depreciation would be equivalent today to a 2000 c5 in the $21.5-24K range.

That's a pretty average selling price today for a one owner, 2000 c5 with 30K miles, so nothing special about the 1989 resale value of a 1977 Corvette.

So I guess that leaves nothing that was good about your 1977 Corvette.

 

My first Vette was a left-over '67 model when I turned 16. Didn't have enough power so I traded for an SS396 Chevelle. Next Vette was a 72 coupe, then another 72 rollover from a junkyard to crib parts for a Ferrari Daytona project (anybody remember Miami Vice?). Now I'm into an '89 C4 and loving it. Low maintenance, nice ride, looks good and I'm too old to start another major project.

 

That's about 57% depreciation in real dollars..

So I guess that leaves nothing that was good about your 1977 Corvette. [/QUOTE]

I look at it differently. If I stuck 9K in my pocket in '77 and took it out in '89 I'd still have 9K. If I'd put it in the bank at 5% taxable I'd have had what? 13-14K? So it cost me a couple of grand to enjoy it for 12years.

 

 

I can afford a C5 or C6....I love the C4

 

In nominal dollars. Adjusting for inflation, that $9,000 you put in your pocket in 1977 would have degraded to an actual $4,400 (i.e., actual purchasing power) by 1989.

Remember, inflation actually steals your dollars-- and there was a lot of inflation in those years!

Inflation adjusted, it actually cost you $14,500 (in 2012 dollars).




How good was the resale value of a 1977 in 1989 compared to the resale value of a 2000 in 2012 (i.e., both at 12 years old)? There are any number of ways to look at it:
---------------------------------------
1. Resale comparison based on inflation only:

Base price for a 1977 was $8,647 and yours cost $9,000 (so it was 1.041 x base). You sold it in 1989 for $5,132 (in 1977 dollars). So the real change in value was -43%.

In 2000, an equivalent cost (1.041 x base) of a Corvette was $41,328. If you sold in in 2012 for $25,000 (a good price for a 12 year old, one owner Corvette with 30K miles), that would be $19,000 in 2000 dollars. So the real change in value is -54%.

So in that analysis the 1977 does a bit better that the 2000, but it's nothing huge. In either case you would have lost about half your initial investment to depreciation (taking inflation into account in both cases).
--------------------------------------------
2. Resale comparison based on both inflation and the fact that Corvettes got significantly more expensive (in real terms) since 1977:

When you sold the 1977 in 1989 for $10,500, that would have covered about 32% of the cost of a new, similarly equipped and priced '89 ($31,545 base x 1.041).

However, today if you sold a 2000 for $25,000, that would cover about 48.5% of the cost of a new, similarly equipped and priced '12 ($49,525 base x 1.041).

So in that analysis, the 12 year old 2000's value will cover a bit more of the cost of a new 2012 that the 12 year old '77 would have in '89. Again, nothing huge; in either case the used Corvette would cover about 40% of the cost of a new one.
-------------------------------------------

3. Conclusion (according to my calculations, anyway-- I could have made a mistake):

In inflation adjusted (2012) dollar terms, *any* Corvette would have cost you between $14,000 and $22,000 depreciation over 12 years.

In New Corvette Price Coverage terms, *any* Corvette would cover between 30% and 50% of a new Corvette 12 years later.




I'm not trying to say you got a bad deal with your '77 or anything-- I'm just saying that there was nothing particularly special about the $10,500 resale value of a 1977 Corvette in 1989. Any 12 year old, 30K Corvette would have given you a similar price when all price modifiers are considered as opposed to just nominal dollars.

Thus I was just ribbing you that if you thought the resale value of the '77 was the only good thing about it, then based on adjusted numbers even that benefit disappears.

 

Your analysis is certainly interesting if disconcerting. The only thing you haven't disclosed is how you keep up with inflation without taking on the risk of losing most of what you have if you guess wrong (2008-2010 equities).

As far as buying a new Vette goes they seem to be a half decent purchase (notice I don't say investment) if you hang onto them long enough (10-20 years) and then buy another new one considering that most vehicles lose half their value in the first five years.