suspended: "I paid $2200 for mine and it had less miles."
Not to be too anal but I'm trying to get your numbers straight. You say "less miles." The car at the top of this thread has 195k. What you said
here is that you bought a car with 220k. And in the other thread, you paid $2000, not $2200. I could be making an incorrect assumption. For example, maybe you're talking about two different cars. Just curious about why the numbers don't match up.
"People will try to inflate the price but bluebook always wins"
The car at the top of this thread is a '95. Your car is a '92. The car at the top of this thread has A/C (for the moment I'll put aside the fact that it needs repair). I'll assume your car has no A/C. I looked up the two cars at kbb.com. Here's what they came up with, for a private-party sale:
Your car ('92, 220k, no A/C, one airbag):
excellent condition: $1960
good: $1635
fair: $1250
The car listed at the top of this thread: ('95, 195k, A/C, dual airbags):
excellent condition: $2965
good: $2590
fair: $2150
So the blue book value of the other car is 50-70% higher than yours, because it's newer, has fewer miles, and has some important equipment you're missing (A/C and the second airbag). All those things should probably be taken into account when making the comparison.
There's something else that should be taken into account: gas prices are up about 33% since you bought your car (8/07). I assume that this factor is not reflected in the kbb results.
I'm not saying I think the other car is worth $4900 (I already made a comment about that). I'm just raising some questions about the comparison you made.
__________________