Reading comprehension…must look into it…sometime.
Carmax.
3 year old Jetta for $16000, new sticker price is in the range of $28000 to $36000 depending on doodads you got to spiff it up. Mine is the upgrade, heated leather seats, sunroof, the funky auto/manual sport transmission, good sound system.
The top Jetta trim level available in 2006 (GLi) cost $24,000.00, or $28,000.00 in the most expensive possible configuration.
If you’re buying cars that old, of course used would be cheaper. OTOH, why worry about the value of your used car then?
For others I suggest this article:
http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20090624/LIFE12/90623007/1005/life
**
Really Not All That Bright**: Yes, plug-in hybrids still occasionally use gas. But electricity and thus hydrogen may well be generated by coal. Hydrogen cells just push the problem one step higher (all the time, instead of most of of the time, like plug-in hybrids do). But in any case, hydrogen cell cars are a practical no-go.
Per Edmunds, identical options , ect, 2009 vs 2007 Jetta= $22K vs 16K. 72% not 50%. Add another year and the price goes down by a $1000. If you get a 4yo Jetta, then the price drops by 50%. Now, this is national averages. Of course, some dude could get a fantastic price on either a new or used or get hosed, so one price point is worthless.
“Occasionally” use gas? They use gas nearly all the time.
FCVs aren’t practical now, and we currently generate most of our power using fossil fuels- but eventually all or nearly all our power will be derived from cleaner, renewable sources, and the cost of fuel cells will drop. That’s why I say they’re the future, even if they’re not as close a future as PIEVs.
I don’t think you know what a plug-in hybrid is. It’s a car designed to run *primarily *on electric power. The small gas engine only cuts in when the car runs out of juice, after around 50 miles or so. For most of us, 90% of driving is done in an area under 40 miles.
You’re only getting 32 mpg out of a new Insight? It’s rated at 40+, and most reviews I’ve read have said that real-world mileage is closer to 50. Do you drive it like a race car?
…unless you got power!
2006 Jetta, and not the base stripped down model, as I said, it has the leather, heated seats, sunroof, sound system and funky transmission. Not sure which package that all belongs to, but I do know it isnt the base version.
And the glove box is air conditioned 
It’s the GLi. See previous page.
It doesn’t matter which version, or which options or anything. I used the base just to get a baseline- National averages show less than a 30% reduction for a 2 yo car. Now sure, you’ll find exceptions- great deals on a used car, bad deals on a new- or perhaps a model year that became known for such suckitude that no-one wants one used. But the national average is still less than a 30% reduction in price for 2 years old, and around that for a 3yo car.
Why wouldn’t I worry about value? Does value only apply to new cars?
I think he means that if you buy a 6-7 year old car you’re unlikely to be reselling it for much more than scrap value, so there’s not much point in worrying about residuals.
The internal combustion, gasoline-powered engine isn’t going to go away anytime within the next 5 years, or 10, or 15, for the very simple reason that the technology to replace it does not yet exist, even on the drawing board. There are theories, and research is being done, but there is no technology in existence that can replace what a current automobile can do. There isn’t yet even a theoretical basis on which to pin hopes that will provide vehicles capable of competing with current cars. Nor will some magical political mandate make current cars just go away: any attempt to do so would destroy the nation’s economy far more thoroughly than anything that happened last year. The nation is entirely dependent on gasoline (and diesel) transportation, and will remain so for a good many years to come. Hybrids are a joke, fuel cells are worthless for anything more than a short neighborhood jaunt, and nobody has a clue how to make cars run on starlight and dreams. Plenty of people are working on finding a new way to power an automobile (and truck, and train, and jet liner) but nothing that’s been discovered yet is anywhere near capable of doing the trick. Barring an unprecedented discovery in physics, or aliens landing and giving us the secret of teleportation, petroleum-based vehicles will still be in use long after a lot of the people on these forums have shuffled loose their mortal coil. To believe otherwise indicates a lack of education in physics and engineering, coupled with too much belief in Sunday supplement articles about “the end of the gasoline age” and wishful thinking. If wishes were cars, beggars wouldn’t need gasoline to ride. But for now, and for the next couple of decades at least, most cars (and trucks, trains and planes) are going to run on petrol.
That’s a bit of an exaggeration. It’s hardly stupid to think that IC engines could be obsolete in fifty years when every major automaker is spending colossal amounts of its R&D budget to make it so. You really think Honda is working on FCVs with an eye on its 2055 year-end stockholders’ report?
Right, it’s price you should be worry about not re-sale value.
It is currently 2009, not 2029. When I said “for now and the next couple of decades” it’s a bit of an exaggeration to suggest I was talking about 2055. “A couple of decades” is twenty years, not fifty. Yes, there’s a fair chance that in fifty years petroleum-fueled engines might be obsolete. But in twenty years, the odds are very much higher that they won’t be.
How many of us exactly are you expecting to die off in the next twenty years?
This is just a wild guess here, but you don’t make your living as an actuary, do you?