posted by
someone claiming to be Dharvey
on
Thu Jan 29 06:02 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
Dear Brickmeisters--
I was just asking for advice re the durability of the AW70 in my 1992 wagon with 207k. Buuuuut...
Now the owner of the garage I use has a radical suggestion.
I had been thinking about swapping out the transm for an M46 or M47. He says that he has another customer with a 1989 wagon that has a 5sp and the guy would rather have an AUTOMATIC! He suggested we swap cars.
Hmmmm. Here's the comparison:
1. My car: 1992 245 w/AW70, 207k. Body in close to immaculate condition. Long-ago body work on a rear hit that was done perfectly so it all looks original.
I've had a lot of mechanical work done on mine in the 45k I've owned it. Have all the records.
2. The other car: 1989 245 w/M47, "less than 160k". I haven't seen the car yet. The other owner says his car has a "like new" body. The shop owner says he's been servicing this car, but hasn't done as much as on mine. He thinks the AC has not been converted (and it's the earlier system that doesn't convert as easily). The car does not have ABS or an air bag. Both cars are the metallic tan/gold.
Sooooo...If I want to go for this swap, who should be due cash, or is it a dead-even swap? Assume that the two cars are equally clean in body and interior. Mine is three years newer, but his has around 50k fewer miles.
Mechanically: Mine needs a rear main seal and probably I should throw in a kickdown cable and a crank sensor while the trans is out. Otherwise it's ready to go anywhere. Assume the other car has minor issues but is basically solid (or the shop owner would have told me).
At over 150k, the car would need a clutch job pretty soon, yes? AND: is 1989 as good a year as 1992?
Sorry to be long-winded, and thanks for any help you can provide.
Doug Harvey
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Dharvey
on
Fri Jan 30 16:57 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
Don't swap. Your car has better AC, ABS, and an air bag. And as much as I enjoy shifting gears, the M47 is not exactly a honey of a gearbox, and combined with a super heavy flywheel the shifting is not real slick. If you want more performance and your engine is in good shape (compression check), throw in a VX cam. The '91 244 (auto trans) I got last year for the kids always surprises me with how much pep it has.
|
|
-
|
|
|
I think that if I was you I would keep my own car. I say this, because, you know all about your car. You know how it has been maintained and what it might need in the future. You have no idea about the other car. I think that you would really have to consider the motivations of an individual who was willing to trade their lower milage car for your higer milage car. I wouldn't make that trade base on transmission types. His car might be perfectly fine, but you know your car better. Also, for insurance purposes, you are better off with the newer car, because the insurance company might be more likely to total an '89, as they try to total anything that they can.
It's your call, but I would have a hard tiem getting rid of a car that I know and getting one that I didn't.
Good luck and Happy Bricking!
|
|
-
|
|
|
Doug,
Are you f*$king madddddd? You really can't say anything about the other car... especially if you haven't driven, or seen, it. You KNOW your car. And, what are well maintained miles to a Volvo -nothing more than numbers on the odometer?
Once, many moons ago, I traded a 1970 big block Nova for a V8 Vega... a big mistake. Cash! I would opt for even up... if at all. But, really, really, covert your car because she loves you.
Peace, Jon
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Dharvey
on
Thu Jan 29 13:46 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
"Are you f*$king madddddd? You really can't say anything about the other car... especially if you haven't driven, or seen, it."
Just looking for a starting point to keep in mind for when I do see the car this weekend. You never know when a favorable moment will offer itself to negotiate the price. Could be five minutes after I lay eyes on the car. I said "assume" equal body condition based on the other owner's statement.
I also have some backup from the shop owner regarding the other car's mechanical condition.
Doug
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be 91_240
on
Thu Jan 29 10:37 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
In addition to what the others said, I think there is another consideration.
89 is 3 years older than 92.
At around 10 years or so you begin to see deterioration of the various rubber parts (like vacuum hoses etc.). A 1989 is going on 14 year old and will begin to need replacement of that stuff. Nitpicks but still a hassle if it needs to be done.
I drove sticks for 20 years. I like automatic better in traffic. The guy with the stick knows that too, now.
91_240
|
|
-
|
|
|
Doug,
Operative words, IMO: "I haven't seen the car yet."
You have to line the two cars up side by side and look, feel and smell them. Preferably at the garage where you also can have a good look at the underbody. Only then will you be able to tell which car is the most attractive one.
Good luck,
Erling
--
My 240 Page
|
|
-
|
|
|
150k doesn't necessarily mean the clutch is completely worn out. If the right driver had it, it could still have life left in it.
I wouldn't trade, but that's just my opinion. 89 was the first year for LH2.4, and supposedly it's more problematic that year. If the ECM hasn't been replaced, it'll have a 581.
I'm not a big fan of airbags in every situation, so I can discount the lack on one. However, the ABS is a big loss as far as I'm concerned.
You have the new style windshield, they don't.
You already hit on the a/c conversion issue. It'd be a much more expensive proposition in the 89.
Basically, the big plus would be the 5 speed. If it's what you really want, if it'll make you happy, go for it.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.
|
|
-
|
|
|
The 50K difference in mileage would only be a significant factor if the vehicles had been maintained as meticulously as the other, especially since the life expectancy of an M47 is somewhat less than the automatic. As we all know on this board, maintenance is such an important issue, and is not adequately reflected in any Kelly Blue Book type of estimation of market value. On the other hand, 50K is a lot of miles, equal to seven or eight roundtrips across the entire continent.
I think that in this case, each car has its pluses and minuses that either even out, or even out so closely that it would be a little silly to quibble about which is the better car. What would the difference be, a hundred bucks or so? And who would it go to? It's totally subjective here.
I think your situation is a great candidate for a dead-even swap, and would be a lot more fun for the two of you to handle it that way than to quibble about a pretty small amount of money, all things considered. And if you did it that way, each of you could essentially gift the other one the car, avoiding the tax hit that you would get if you bought it conventionally. You both would be saving so much money that it would seem kind of silly and selfish to try to milk the other for just a little bit more.
|
|
|
|
|
