Jump to content

Trade value for 2020 6.2 RST?

RST-stan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wiggums Senior Enthusiast

Wiggums

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, mjonesjr84 said:

Was the $42k trade allowance or cash value? Dealers like to play games with the numbers and wording. Ask them if they'd write you a check for the truck right now at $42k. If they won't, it was a "trade allowance". 

No, the dealership is not like AutoNation or CarMax, they don't do cash value. CarMax and Carvana offered less than $40k. I usually trade in every 2 or 3 years, the resale value is nice :) .

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

RST-stan
RST-stan

Carvana is giving me 42,200 will be picking it up some time this week. I can't believe how easy of a process it was  

Dunn
Dunn

The 8.4.....I dont care for 12"   Driving down the road its hard to use info screen for everything....truck is shaking and tough to hit one small icon   But they did good job of in

OnTheReel
OnTheReel

55 for an RST? I see two problems...paying a bit too much and being offered way too little.    Sell it outright. Don’t get bent by the same dealer twice. Only chance at somewhat of a recovery.

Posted Images

mjonesjr84 Enthusiast

mjonesjr84

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Wiggums said:

No, the dealership is not like AutoNation or CarMax, they don't do cash value. CarMax and Carvana offered less than $40k. I usually trade in every 2 or 3 years, the resale value is nice :) .

The dealership I buy from gives you cash value on trades. I don't like dealers who do the allowance game. That means they play with the numbers too much to make it look good for you. I prefer seeing the actual numbers.

Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted
Being debt free is the best feeling ever.  (next to marrying an awesome woman) Enjoy your freedom. 
You're a lucky man. Many of us know neither.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

It's Tim Senior Enthusiast

It's Tim

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, RST-stan said:

Really can't wait to not owe anyone anything. Wish I would have never got this Silverado honestly.

It's a worthy goal plus it's a great feeling, no one ever became rich from being a debtor.

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Wiggums said:

It's still too similar to the 2019, I am waiting until the 2022 refresh. Ford decided to keep the cheap plasticky dashboard. At least Chevy's more stylish.

See, I have never disliked my 2019's interior. I think it strikes the balance of functional and technological pretty well. The added tech features with the AT4 (rear camera mirror, HUD, digital dash) interest me. 

 

Also, I'm growing more concerned that COVID issues will cause GM to delay their truck refresh in 2022. They've already done that with the Traverse, and they are having big issues on the SUV production. 

 

If the new interiors of the trucks will be MORE computerized (which we all think they will), that does not bode well for yet another increase in chip needs, which are already hurting badly.

  • Like 1
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

I understand them pushing the Traverse off. Nobody buys them except Enterprise Rent-A-Car. 
 

I don’t think GM can afford not to get the T1 refresh out next year. There would be lots of trouble for them between the new F150, a new Tundra, and the Ram still selling very well. Ram also just counterfeited all that was left of GM’s exclusives (HUD, camera mirror) for 2021.

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

I understand them pushing the Traverse off. Nobody buys them except Enterprise Rent-A-Car. 
 

I don’t think GM can afford not to get the T1 refresh out next year. There would be lots of trouble for them between the new F150, a new Tundra, and the Ram still selling very well. Ram also just counterfeited all that was left of GM’s exclusives (HUD, camera mirror) for 2021.

Ha! Probably true. They need to stay competitive. 
 

But we probably won’t see wide availability until late Q1 2022, like we are seeing with the SUVs. 

mjonesjr84 Enthusiast

mjonesjr84

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, OnTheReel said:

I understand them pushing the Traverse off. Nobody buys them except Enterprise Rent-A-Car. 
 

I don’t think GM can afford not to get the T1 refresh out next year. There would be lots of trouble for them between the new F150, a new Tundra, and the Ram still selling very well. Ram also just counterfeited all that was left of GM’s exclusives (HUD, camera mirror) for 2021.

The Traverse's are all over where I live. I had a 2019 for a year until the wife destroyed it. The only reason we didn't get another is because it was too big for us. She was more comfortable driving the Equinox since she frequents a hospital parking garage.

 

A major refresh on a truck isn't typical. The F-150 refresh was wasn't extreme. They updated the interior and front end after 3 years of production on the same style. The F-150 interior refresh is too much. Who needs front seats that can lay perfectly flat? Functionalities are what's important IMO.

OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

Ford would resent anyone referring to the new F150 as a refresh. Even though it looks nearly identical to the old one, they claim it’s “92% new”. ?
 

The refresh on the Silverado and Sierra has been anticipated and speculated on since literally day one. I have no real beef with the current interior but we all know how it stacks up against the others.

TNTSierra Senior Enthusiast

TNTSierra

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, OnTheReel said:

Ford would resent anyone referring to the new F150 as a refresh. Even though it looks nearly identical to the old one, they claim it’s “92% new”. ?
 

The refresh on the Silverado and Sierra has been anticipated and speculated on since literally day one. I have no real beef with the current interior but we all know how it stacks up against the others.

That “junk” has been refreshed since 2004. Hasn’t changed much since then. Not a fan of their turbo six motors either. Only worthy one is the coyote V8 but they have that so high strung now that most burn oil worse than the old AFM 5.3L

 

I also like the current interior. It’s very practical and easy to use. And the more computer screens and electronics coming from factory is really going to drive the costs up.  Just put more power into the power train and maybe put a 10 to 12 inch screen within the dash. Nothing sticking up out of the dash. Must be contour and  uniform to the dash. 

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, OnTheReel said:

Ford would resent anyone referring to the new F150 as a refresh. Even though it looks nearly identical to the old one, they claim it’s “92% new”. ?

Yeah, I would love to expose the "math" they did to make that claim. 

 

I just drove to lunch and saw a new F150 parked at Starbucks on the way as I sat at the light. Literally, the only way I could tell it was "new" was by seeing the new buyer tag in the license plate spot. It otherwise looked identical to the outgoing F150. 

 

Contrast that with my backing in next to a K2 at the restaurant. I was looking out at the front ends, side-by-side, and amazed at how much of a risk Chevrolet took in the T1 front ends. Glad they did. I love it. It might be polarizing, but at least they took a real chance. 

  • Like 1
mjonesjr84 Enthusiast

mjonesjr84

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, econometrics said:

I just drove to lunch and saw a new F150 parked at Starbucks on the way as I sat at the light. Literally, the only way I could tell it was "new" was by seeing the new buyer tag in the license plate spot. It otherwise looked identical to the outgoing F150. 

The whole front doghouse is completely different. This is a surprisingly good comparison of what has changed.

2021 Ford F-150: See The Changes Side By Side (motor1.com)

 

 

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted
Just now, mjonesjr84 said:

The whole front doghouse is completely different. This is a surprisingly good comparison of what has changed.

2021 Ford F-150: See The Changes Side By Side (motor1.com)

 

 

I know they made changes, of course. But take a straight line and putting a few bends in it across the front end are hardly much change to rave about, IMO. If you glance at one driving past, you really won't immediately notice that it is different. Do the same with a 2018 Chevy/GMC vs. 2019 and it's a different story. 

 

My preference, of course. But the Ford die-hards who are jazzed to pay $75K for their "All-new F-150" are drunk on Detroit blue kool-aid. 

mjonesjr84 Enthusiast

mjonesjr84

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, econometrics said:

I know they made changes, of course. But take a straight line and putting a few bends in it across the front end are hardly much change to rave about, IMO. If you glance at one driving past, you really won't immediately notice that it is different. Do the same with a 2018 Chevy/GMC vs. 2019 and it's a different story. 

 

My preference, of course. But the Ford die-hards who are jazzed to pay $75K for their "All-new F-150" are drunk on Detroit blue kool-aid. 

I see the headlights being completely different on the F-150's. The LED daytime running lights are a totally different style. Other than that, I agree, there isn't much different on the front end.

 

I've not liked the F-150 since they came out with the '97 body style. 

Edited by mjonesjr84
  • Like 1
jlong1984 Enthusiast

jlong1984

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, econometrics said:

Starting to look at trading mine for a 21 AT4 Carbon Pro 3.0L. Good incentives this month. 

Been looking at AT4 BabyMaxes for a few months now. Honestly, I should have pulled the trigger when the employee pricing was going on, but I couldn't find a truck that ticked every box (Premium Pkg, Tech Pkg, Sunroof, 20" wheels and either Cayenne or Dark Sky paint). I'm also slightly hesitant to give up my '19, which has, so far, been absolutely perfect. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...