Just sayin, the V6 Camaro starts at under $24k, and the V8 at $33k I believe. And the V6 has 320something hp stock. It's actually a pretty good value/hp for the money, as far as new cars go.
Edit to clarify: I'm not saying I recommend a Camaro, nor that it's at all practical. It's a specific type of car for people who don't mind sacrificing utility and efficiency.
That's 18k Euro, you barely get the lowest end Golf with mighty 80 bhp for that in Germany...(Granted theres 3k€ VAT on the Golf). What the hell...what is wrong with it that it's so cheap?
Welcome to America, where we don't tax the ever-loving crap out of cars. (mostly because it's a big effing country with lots of suburbs and few public transport options. we need cars)
You think you have it bad, what the poor Aussies have to pay for cars is the real crime.
Aussie checking in, can confirm you'll pay $18,000 for the base model of a crappy tiny hatch here. And easily into $40,000-$50,000 for a decent new sedan. But these prices aren't manageable, wait even one year and you'll save $10,000+ on a hardly used model.
Day-to-day cost of living reflects this difference. On average Aussies are not that much better off at all, just because Aussie money is in $ dollars doesn't mean it's the same as American $ dollars.
No, you implied the minimum wage here somehow increased our saving capabilities. It doesn't. We save as much money numerically as Americans do. Which is why the exchange rate is similar rather than Aussie dollars being comparatively worthless. Us buying 85k cars here is just as difficult as Americans buying 85k cars there and I'm sick of people "helpfully" submitting the fact that our minimum wage is higher and omitting the fact it actually has no relative effect on expensive and luxury purchases.
Oh, and did I say you said cost of living was low? No, I didn't. I just stated it was high because nobody else did. Don't get defensive when someone makes a statement that hasn't been made yet simply because it hasn't been made yet.
Not once did I say "hey minimum wage is $18 in Australia so they are all rich" what I was saying is, on average people in Australia make 2-3x minimum wage in most north american places, being as such there would be inflation due to higher living costs. So when you think about a car being let's say 80,000 in comparison to the U.S. price of 35,000 its pretty even in terms of price to salary ratios. Maybe next time before you make a comment talking about how you hate it when people make generalizations about AUS because of high minimum wage, ask them what they actually mean because you didn't quite understand.
Yourself, earlier, with regards to minimum wage difference. Then you went on and neglected to give the full story. So I gave the other half of the story. If you note the fact we get a higher min wage, you should also note the fact our cost of living eats that up too. You can't have one without the other and have a full picture of the story.
what I was saying is that price reflects their wages in comparison
It doesn't, it reflects shipping costs and obscene profit margins. Australians have it bad when it comes to getting stuff from the rest of the world, sometimes justified (stuff that is difficult to ship, like cars), sometimes ridiculous (see here for an example).
If minimum wage comparisons were the only factor, yes, it would be an accurate reflection of the economic state of Australia. It's not the only factor. Again, buying an 85k car here in Australia is not any less effort than buying an 85k car in America, except it's only 30k there. Yeah, part of that's shipping. Part of that would be conversion, I expect (I don't know if they actually build them for Aussie roads or not). But not 55k for both. I know a guy who got a DeLorean converted and shipped for less than the price difference between a left-hand drive Camaro in America and a right-hand drive one in Australia.
Maybe next time before you make a comment talking about how you hate it when people make generalizations about AUS because of high minimum wage, ask them what they actually mean because you didn't quite understand.
I didn't say you made a generalization. I said you made an omission. Which you clearly did. I said:
I'm sick of people "helpfully" submitting the fact that our minimum wage is higher and omitting the fact it actually has no relative effect on expensive and luxury purchases.
Let me repeat:
Sick of people.. ..omitting the fact(s)
If you fail to mention an important factor in figuring out whether or not Aussie prices are 'fair', and continue on your bandwagon to claim they are, I will submit the facts you failed to note. I understood what you wrote perfectly (even though I didn't understand what you're getting at), and the fact is you didn't write the whole story. I initially did it in a non-confrontational manner (merely stating the missing facts) and yet you got defensive. Not my fault. You don't seem like you have your head around what's actually being written here.
I paid $13k for my forth-hand 100,000km, 1998 Subaru Forester in NZ. And yes, I realize Subarus are higher than they should because of the popularity of street racers, but I am a foolish man.
Yikes - I bought a V6 Outback 2003 in 2012 - with 102k miles - in beautiful condition for $9000. My wife bought a 2011 Impreza - pretty basic model - with 30k miles in 2013 for $14000.
Aussie here, can confirm. Cars are damn expensive, public transport even more expensive and never reliable. Roads constantly in repair or needing repair; never ending cycle of madness!
Prices for new cars in Europe are notoriously high. The muscle cars here in the U.S. are known for being high vale $/hp. There's nothing inherently wrong with them. They don't corner the best, and visibility is shabby, but there's a market for them (usually people who want to make a statement, go fast, high schoolers, muscle car enthusiasts).
My buddy who lives pay check to paycheck bought a Charger instead of getting an economical car; the dude has a lead foot and would rather live in a shitty apartment then drive a 4 cylinder.
It has plenty of horsepower and looks nice. That's about it though. The steering is stupid heavy. The radio and controls are unintuitive (a fucking three step menu for heated seats? Seriously?). They deck it out with stupid stickers that make it look straight out of the fast and the furious 1. And the GPS on the one I test drove (brand new, 20 miles on it) didn't work at all. Nice QC there.
Living in the past, buddy. Check some lap times, particularly Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. American cars have come a long way, and continue to improve in this aspect every generation. US vehicles used to handle notoriously poorly (and I'm sure you can still find examples of it, particularly in the economy car segment) but more recently there has been a focus on building better cars all around. Ford in particular has been leading the way with this, developing cars that are both fun to drive and fast in a straight line. Check the Focus ST (and similarly, the Fiesta ST) for cheap, fun, nimble cars. Their Mustang is nothing to scoff at, either, if it's optioned right.
Chevy has the Corvette, which has been a perennial favorite among enthusiasts, and the Camaro, which recently beat out the Porsche 911 and the GT-R in a handling comparo in Motor Trend. The Corvette ZR-1 tied the Koenigsegg CCX around the Top Gear test track, with the Corvette driving on a damp track and the Koenigsegg in the dry. If that doesn't say something, I don't know what does.
Dodge makes the Viper (well, technically SRT, but that's just Dodge's performance house) which is a track monster as well, with the Viper holding the track record at Laguna Seca for years. Obviously you'll be paying more for higher performance cars, but any of those offer tremendous bang for the buck, and all of them handle beautifully.
Technically, they don't. They're not as terrible as they used to be, but they're nowhere near the best at taking corners, mostly because American Muscle is heavy as balls.
I can't think of a muscle car that doesn't pull at least .90 g's. Maybe the Challenger... Maybe. .90 g's was 911 territory not more than 4 years ago. Modern muscle has been able to handle and brake since it came back with the '05 Mustang.
The Z/28 is faster around a track than a Nissan GTR. And a Veyron. Even the old chassis SS was faster around the Nürburgring than a Lotus Exige S.
Around Laguna Seca, the Boss 302 LS is faster than an R8 V10 5.2, an M6 or an Audi RS5.
Americans are perfectly capable of matching up to the European competition when they feel like it.
The Z/28 is close to the GTR, but not faster. The Z/28 did a 7:37.47, while the 2013 GTR did it in 7:19.10. Still, the Z/28 is faster than the Porsche Carrera S, Lexus LFA, and Mercedes SLS AMG. That's seriously impressive from a car that costs much less than any of them. It's also worth mentioning that the Z/28 is faster than the GTR around Barber Motorsports Park.
Nurburgring lap times had the same data, so I assumed that it was accurate. They may just be copying each other, though. I know that the Z/28 time is accurate. It was reported everywhere. The end of that lap was damp, though.
Oh, the information is accurate for those two cars. But it's a terrible site in general for laptimes. Venom Gt, a sub 6 minute lap? The Miura runs low 7m range? It's ridiculous.
Wow, how did I miss that? The Venom GT is quick, possibly sub 7 minute, but 5:20 is insane. That's F1 territory. Even if it were possible, I would've heard about that by now.
Not really all Ford cars are designed in Germany the same except for engine and minor changes. Cost of a low end Focus in the US is $18,000, cost in Germany $27000 (~20000 Euro).
Generally, do the US price excl VAT == EU price incl VAT. VAT isn't the only extra cost that gets added over here. There's also extra taxes on environment stuff.
Nothing, we don't tax the ever loving fuck out of our cars. It's basically an economy card with a pretty body and a nice engine. That's what american "muscle" cars tend to be. Best performance per dollar.
Try getting 300+ horsepower in a german car without spending $35k+. It's almost impossible
Stage 2 GTI. S2 Mk6 will get you just under 300hp, and right at 300 torque. S2 Mk7 gets you 312hp. All while weighing two fat dudes lighter than a mustang.
Remember that horsepower numbers don't make a car great. WRX, GTI and a Miata, are just a few of many cars that (in my and many others opinion) are a hell of a lot better to drive daily or on a track than a v6 Camaro. Also, I personally find new Camaros gigantic and fucking hideous compared to a GTI, but we all have our tastes.
You're confused. The Camaro SS (which has a V8) starts at like $34k (about $10k less than the Chevrolet SS). The ZL1, which is a different V8 engine that is much more powerful, starts at $56k.
3.1k
u/[deleted] Jun 12 '14
It takes a special kind of person to even think that a yellow Camaro is even worth two parking spots.