so i got a call from my dealer today.

BrandonT

But it's not 1969, it's 2012. Had I not bought my Z I would have bought a Mustang GT. Look at all the pics people post here of their cars, a ton have a Mustang or Vette as the other car. How many pics do you see of a Z next to a Gencoupe, or even WRX in someone's driveway? The Z and Mustang are two flavors of sports car, but they are both still sports cars. In America they are directly comparable, even if their take on what being a sports car is is slightly different.

BTW how do you get a better interest rate on a longer term loan? If you are intent on paying it off in 3 years than get a 3 year loan, the interest rate will be less, AND the actual interest paid will be less. I think you are confused on how that works.

On the original topic, the ONLY reason to spring for the new car would be you simply want a new car. There is no substantive reason to get a 2013, they don't look as good IMO. If you just want a new car, work the dealer for a deal on a 2012. Same thing mechanically, no out of place LED lights on the front facia. And they have an incentive to give you a better price.

UNKNOWN_370

Its not 1969 its 2012? What's that supposed to mean??? So we are supposed to forget a huge part of Z history so you can have a rant? We can't forget 69 because the Z34 philosphy of design is the reiteration of the 240z and its the emphasis of my point. So you want to negate facts to stress opinions? Yeah ok...

The interest rate is equal through the term but finance charges are lower over the 6 year term. That's the numbers that you don't see upfront. 3 year loans typically charge $3 extra per $1000.

Anyway dude... you're going around in that useless cycle of trying to point out what people have in there garage when you haven't been to everyones house. I know plenty of people with a Z and a WRX or EVO. I don't know where you think every Z owners second car is a stang or vette. Most I know don't own both. But I do know many that have owned both... its hilarious you say that cuz I myself have been contemplating. Used EVO as a second car just because AWD sports is a different type of driving that I also enjoy. Imho buying a vetter and a Z is redundant. Even if the vette has more power.

You are stating opinions and not basing anything on fact. You are implying that because of your narrow unresearched demographic surrounding your tiny world has stangs and vettes with Z's. You automatically compare the two.

What I'm comparing is an autos heritage, design concept and philosophy and observing the country and culture of the countries in which that car came from. price competitve segments vs engineering competitions are two totally seperate entities. And if you've read my post? I said the only way the Z 2 seat sports car is comparable to the 4 seat muscle car grand tourers is by price comparison.

The description of the 2 types of cars alone prove my point. TO FURTHER PROVE MY POINT... if you own both a vette and Z or stang and Z... obviously they aren't comparable because you get totally different driving experiences, if they were comparable? ALL YOU WOULD NEED IS ONE and not the other.

You chose to buy a vette and a Z... great. But you aren't the world. Maybe you have a couple friends with a stang and Z. Guess what they aren't the world either...

You are seriously confusing the commonality these cars have as sports cars vs being competitive.

selected4car

what's the situation?

Mecinoid

I generally pay for my cars in cash... especially, if it's a toy. The only way I break that rule in on 0% financing and below invoice price on the vehicle. That way, I can take advantage of other people's money. ;-)
I keep the money in the bank or, invest it and make a little more that way.

bdbaity

this thread makes my head hurt.....

__________________
2011 370z 6mt Gun Metallic w/ Sports Package - FI 18" TDX - Pioneer P4400 - 20% Tint - Venture Shield Clear Bra - Clazzio Leather Seats

m4a1mustang

How can finance charges be less over a longer term if the interest rates are the same? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

You pay LESS in interest over a shorter term than you do over a longer term.

Just a quick NPV assumption of $20,000 borrowed at 3% shows you pay $938 in interest over 36 months and $1,562 over 60 months.

Seriously. Wtf?

__________________
- Steve

Zs & Coffee - Saturdays at 10AM in Fairfax, VA and Columbia, MD (Click the banner!)
LIKE us on Facebook!

m4a1mustang

And you wonder why our country is so f*cked up.

__________________
- Steve

Zs & Coffee - Saturdays at 10AM in Fairfax, VA and Columbia, MD (Click the banner!)
LIKE us on Facebook!

UNKNOWN_370

When I negotiated my loan... that's how I got it. The rate was 17:90 per $1000 the 3 year loan was $20.9p per $1000. The difference in interest was :09 percent which was a difference of only a few bucks. The finance charge savings added up to more than the interest savings going longer if I paid double. If I would pay in the normal amount of time of a 6 year loan I would pay more, but since I'm knocking it out in half I'm paying less.
You forgot that I'm paying my 6 in 3. Ur the one being dumb because, you're making comments and not seeing the whole pic.

Some one on a 3 year loan pays a few dollars more per month in finance and marginally lesss in interest. What kills the 6 year loan is time, not rate. Interest raked marginally higher finance charges a few lower. Knock it out in half the time and you can the overages of both loans.

flashburn

I don't think I've verbally said "What?!" so many times while reading a single thread before. Great stuff! I would totally subscribe to your newsletter.

__________________
Current Ride: 2012 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport Centennial Edition Carbon Flash 6M
Previous Ride: 2009 Nissan 370Z Sport Platinum Graphite 7AT

m4a1mustang

__________________
- Steve

Zs & Coffee - Saturdays at 10AM in Fairfax, VA and Columbia, MD (Click the banner!)
LIKE us on Facebook!

somatic

so what you're saying is that your bank is so retarded it actually gave you a better rate on a longer loan? thats then most bass ackward thing ive ever heard lol. if so, then go with it and take advantage of their stupidity

__________________

UNKNOWN_370

No... god... what I'm saying is... over 6 years you pay slightly lower finance, BUT if you pay over 6 years it will be a almost couple grand more than the 3 year. If you pay a 6 year in 3 years or less. Its cheaper than taking a 3 year loan for 3 years. Make sense?

Its like you guys forgot I'm paying a 6 yr in 2.5 to 3 years vs someone who is on a 6 year for 6. Or a 3 year for 3. You put way more money to the principle and keep finance charges down. The difference in interest is so marginal that you barely save money. Its in finance charges where therres a big difference.

somatic

oooooooo i get it now i was over thinking it lol
3 year loan paid in three years = paying all interest
6 year loan with similar interest paid off in 3 years = half the interest paid

__________________

UNKNOWN_370

Yeah... 3 year loan guy at 3 years pays 800 more than 6 year guy at 3 years.
6 year guy pays equal at 4 years to 3 year guy.
Years 5 and 6, 6 year guy begins to pay more.

Knock it out it out in 2.5 or 3 on a 6 year and pay less than both. Especialy if you make the. 2.5 deadline. Your. Second payment is totally to the principle. You save on interst, taking a long term finance and making it short term rather than paying a banks short term loan which a facad of lower payment if you do it like me. Understand?

gbrettin

People totally missed the point you double up on payments. My guess is that you can make a low payment if you don't have the extra cash. On the months you are flush with cash you put a few extra thousand against the loan.

Personally I think you should hold on to your car. Drive the car while it's paid for and save the extra cash that you would be using on the payment and then trade up later.