How stupid would it be to buy one of these?
if you can afford it and have some place inside to park it, not very. they hold value well.
In the UK they held their price insanely well for being a collectors car.Donno about elsewhere
>>28129362they weren't even supposed to be a collector's car. they're just really rare because hardly anyone bought them. they were expensive for having the wrong badge.
>>28129357I just can't imagine the dealer near me getting $55,000 for this thing. That's ABOVE the MSRP.
>>28129458if its in good condition with low miles, they will. a chevy dealer i used to go to sold a 4th gen trans am for over 30k.car was in immaculate condition, but still. there's a peace of mind when selling these types of cars from a dealer that at least probably maintained them.
>>28129373It's because most of the dealers didn't want to sell them unless you special ordered oneI don't think it's worth buying one, you can buy a BMW V8 M Car like a E92 M3 or a E39 M5 for half the price if you want your fill of manual V8 RWD sedan. They're cool cars but not at the $50k they ask for them used. Even brand new they were a good $10-20k more than a Charger 392 Scat.
>>28129329Pretty stupid. These aren't fun like a Camaro and they aren't practical like a Silverado. They're just the worst of both worlds.
>>28129495>They're just the worst of both worlds.Yeah retard, sport sedan with the same handling and power as a camaro is somehow less practical
>>28129518There is no such thing as a "sports sedan". All you're doing is making a sedan ride like shit only to still be slow around a track or on a fun road. A sedan will never handle like a Camaro. The "sport sedan" is the exact reason why there are no sedans left to buy. They killed a segment.
>>28129526It's a camaro with a different body.
>>28129526>A sedan will never handle like a CamaroThis is excellent news for sedans
>>28129329If you have the funds they're pretty nice
Just get a GTO, they're dirt cheap now.
>>28129329Extremely stupid, but car guys do extremely stupid shit all the time.
>>28129329If you can afford it, they've been retaining their value and are a bit pricey for basically an australian m5. Pretty sick car, my dad had one but then sold it and is now driving a CTSV.
>>28129329pretty dumb
>>28129329Keep in mind that they're essentially abandonware in the US. Other than the pieces shared with US production vehicles everything not salvage must come from Australia and the labor in flipping it right side up on the way is a killer. Seriously though, it basically follows the same path as the G8 and the Catera before that and both those camps are unhappy with the situation and there's no way to change it for such small numbers.
They are a solid car if you value a no-nonsense reliable NA v8 sedan that isn't a Charger or Panther body. Buy it if you're okay paying tons of money & plan to keep it for 5-10 years or more. Buy a bmw or charger v8 if you plan to get rid of it within 5 years.
>>28129993>>28130001
>>28129329Do it. I fucking love mine
>>28129373>they were expensive for having the wrong badge.They were the same MSRP as a 2SS Camaro and they're equipped like one. The "base model" was actually fully loaded except for the 4 options you got to pick from- color, auto or manual, sunroof, and full size spare. If GM actually cared about selling them, they probably would have offered a 1SS equivalent for less money with less content, but the car only existed to fulfill an export quota to get Australian gubmint gibs. Well equipped cars are more profitable in general, so that's what they brought over.
>>28129329Why not just buying a 5.7 Chally for a lot less?>same Tremec gearbox>better engine>better interior>MUCH better parts availability
>>28131056>5.7 hemi better than LS3*cam lobes wipe in your path*>that fisher price interior >betterDon't make me laugh
>>28131062gm interiors are fucking trash retard
>>28131017Honestly if the economy was good enough for men to buy themselves new cars instead of rolling in the family minivan (unibody SUV if you're too insecure to have the convenience of a lower floor and sliding door) a ct5 bw with the supercharger deleted, a body kit and a bowtie at $60k would probably do pretty well.
>>28131056Why not a 90s e-class? Oh wait
>>28131064Other ones sure, I won't argue that. VF2 is good. Just because your Cruze was utter dogshit doesn't mean everything else is. >inb4 judged from the picture off of looks instead of being able to feel and interact with it Try actually sitting in one.
>>28131000You mean to tell me that a built-from-the-ground-up sports coupe only gets a half second on a pigfat sedan? Grim.
>>28131083you're the dumb nigger who thinks a sedan can compete with an actual sports car. now you're being sarcastic?
>>28129329i wish these looked more sporty and less like a malibu
>>28131307It does compete, your post proves that yourself. The camaro's single advantage only matters to benchracing faggots, and the sad part is the margin of said advantage is as slim as a chipmunk's ballsack hair.
>>28131577>it does compete>has more horsepower and still slower>a camaro of equal horsepower blows it out of the water.also a 4 cylinder camaro on summer tires gets the same time as an SS.
>>28131590>benchracing>benchracing>benchracingGet off the bus and get a driver's license, loser
>>28129329Get a G8 gt, they're way better.
>>28131317Like this?
>>28131056>better enginelol. lmao even
>>28131069The interior of the SS is pretty poor.A CT4-V can be had with almost the same money, much better care all around, just missing the V8 noise.
>>28131062A widebody Scat Pack will outrun the SS in any scenario, but it will cost a little more (used vs used at equivalent mileage).
You people don’t want to believe but this car isn’t as fast or as special as it seems. I had one and tracked it casually. It’s okay but there’s more hype than performance in its current market value.The main thing is chassis and suspension - drive this and then jump on a Camaro/CT4 and you’ll understand.
