On the way to deliver the 2009 Dodge Challenger R/T to the buyer, I stopped to have it washed. The only problem was, there was no spot-free rinse so I arrived with a dripping car that was soon to have driving marks all over it. Before we even signed papers Matt, the new owner, grabbed a towel and dried it off. As the water disappeared, the luster of the black paint began to gleam. "This is so awesome," Matt said more than once as he lovingly rubbed down his new car. When we were done he signed quickly and I slid two sets of keys across the table to him.
Yes, sadly, the Challenger is gone. It didn't quite fetch the high price we had hoped but we still feel pleased with the result. We might have done better but there are other cars to buy and we need to keep moving forward. So here's a quick rundown on the selling process.
We began by offering the car at $29,900 -- $800 over TMV. I got several calls but no serious action. So after two weeks we dropped the price to $28,900. I immediately got two calls. Strangely enough, they were both from guys named Matt.
On Father's Day, Matt #1 arrived with his father. They took a long test drive, enjoying driving the Challenger and remarking on the shift action, the suspension and its great looks. I felt an offer coming and I hoped it was a good one.
"Here's something for you to think about," Matt said. "I'll give you $26,500 for it." It took me a second to realize that Matt had undercut the asking price by $2,400. I didn't respond at all, hoping that Matt #2 would enter the fray and make a better offer. So for now, I just thanked Matt #1 for coming to see the car.
Matt #2 never called back so the next day, I called Matt #1 and talked about how the Challenger's trunk was plenty big for his golf clubs. This led to a friendly little chat about golf, his handicap and what courses in the area are fun to play. As we talked I felt he would open to a strong counteroffer so I told him we could be convinced to part with the Challenger for $27,800, an $1,100 discount from our asking price. He bounced back with $27,500 and I accepted.
Later, when I looked at the numbers, I realized we had done well to get that much for a one-and-a-half-year-old used car with 26,800 hard miles on it. Unlike many American cars, it only depreciated 20 percent from our purchase price of $34,600 a year and a half ago. That means it lost $7,100 of its value. That's a whole lot of fun for a small price tag.
bodyblue says:
01:53 PM, 06/28/10
What a great car and a great year of posts about it.....time for a V6 Mustang now.
fuhteng says:
02:01 PM, 06/28/10
How long until it needs a new transmission? I bet it will need to be checked out before 35,000 miles, and a whole new one before 45,000.
That being said, the 20% drop looks pretty good.
lowmilelude says:
02:03 PM, 06/28/10
V6 Mustang? What's your major malfunction!?
Hold out for the 5.0
indy_mistert says:
02:26 PM, 06/28/10
"Later, when I looked at the numbers, I realized we had done well to get that much for a one-and-a-half-year-old used car with 26,800 hard miles on it."
You don't say!! Hopefully the driver never happens across the blog ((cough cough in-law clutch cough cough)) I love your long term section, but buying a car from you guys is only a few steps away from buying a former Enterprise rental car.
I just think it is astonishing - there are so many other ways I'd spend my 27.5k
desmolicious says:
02:32 PM, 06/28/10
Did Matt know the car was owned by Edmunds.com as a long term test car?
hybris says:
03:26 PM, 06/28/10
Ok now you need a 5.0 mustang to complete the set.
bimmerjay says:
04:31 PM, 06/28/10
I also think a Mustang 5.0 should be added. Loaded with a stick shift. No base V6 nonsense.
I still think the Challenger is a sloppy, oversized clown car but it performed well in this test (well, except for the crunchy gearbox) and it works for the demographic it appeals to, so kudos to Chrysler.
throwback says:
04:41 PM, 06/28/10
I believe many us said if you got 28K you would be lucky. Perhaps you need to use the BMV (blog market value) next time.
desmolicious says:
05:16 PM, 06/28/10
@ bimmerjay:
The crunchy gearbox was most probably caused by the doofus who ruined the clutch.
greenpony says:
05:25 PM, 06/28/10
Interesting that since you got the Viper and before you sold the Challenger, my two favorite vehicles in your fleet were Dodges. And I hate Chrysler products. I suppose now my second favorite vehicle is now the MS3.
campi3ell says:
07:25 PM, 06/28/10
I think they hide things well enough so that prospective buyers don't know they are purchasing a vehicle from Edmunds.com, not until the papers have been signed and they are about to drive off. Clearly the fetching prices for the vehicles would be thousands less if they REALLY knew the abuse these vehicles went through. Personally, I believe that Enterprise vehicles are treated better than Edmunds vehicles at times. I've tried, and can't begin to dog a car out the way these guys do
cr_driver says:
08:17 PM, 06/28/10
Goodbye, Old Friend
Hello, 5.0!
blueguydotcom says:
08:38 PM, 06/28/10
I admit. I was wrong. I fully expected you to sell the car for far less. Your TMV was way, way off the mark (2500 off your original price).
Still I said I was going to apologize if you sold for over 27k. You did. My apologies.
http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2010/06/2009-dodge-challenger-rt-let-the-2nd-guessing-begin.html#comments
blueguydotcom says:
08:41 PM, 06/28/10
Blast, we need an edit function! I meant to write:
"I admit I was wrong."
s197gt says:
09:42 PM, 06/28/10
you guys honestly don't think the new buyer was ever told IL owned the car?
right... because most sellers ask the new buyer to pose by the car so they can take a picture...
wrinklebump says:
04:25 AM, 06/29/10
The paint looks stunning in that photo.
lostboyz says:
04:41 AM, 06/29/10
Are people under the impression that if a private owner (not IL) owned this car that they would baby it, never drive it hard, and get the same scheduled maitenance? At least in this case the buyer can find out EXACTLY what they are buying. Even if you knew they used it hard, you at least know and can offer accordingly.
Its replacement should definitely be a mustang. 3.7 or 5.0, either way it should be a good test.
dougtheeng says:
06:44 AM, 06/29/10
"Later, when I looked at the numbers, I realized we had done well to get that much for a one-and-a-half-year-old used car with 26,800 hard miles on it."
And one horrendously destroyed clutch somewhere in there.
bodyblue says:
07:34 AM, 06/29/10
IL had a 2005 Mustang GT....why not test the V6? It has over 300 horses now......how is that "nonsense"? Nonsense is buying car trimmed out like nobody really buys them....like the man tranny Suzuki. They have a nice mix of fun/sporty/exotic/ family cars now......why get one more muscle car? Get the V6 with the track pack and nothing else...keep it light and fun.
The Challenger was far from a "clown car"...it was a big comfortable and relible coupe that was loved for the way it rode and drove. It did exactly what it was designed to do and did it perfectly.....it also was better looking than almost any car on the road, foreign or domestic.
audisport says:
07:36 AM, 06/29/10
Hard miles, but still in the warranty period. I just wouldn't want to own a car that has had 50 different butts on it's drivers seat.
chuckg says:
09:18 AM, 06/29/10
Indeed, a sad day. The Challenger is now gone. Two Dodges down (Challenger, Ram), one to go (Viper).
I know it may be hard for some to admit that Chrysler Corporation built a great car here that doesn't come along that often. The Challenger got beat-on pretty good by the IL staff and still performed to a higher expectation than most people around here thought it would. Except for the infamous brother in law and the power seat cap the car was flawless. How many other vehicles around here can you say that about?
Sorry to see the Challenger go, but I understand. Matt will have a ball in his new hot rod.
blueguydotcom says:
09:36 AM, 06/29/10
Very few drivers would be as hard on the car as the IL staff. They flat out abuse the heck out of the cars they have. You think that guy is gonna run it hard all the time? It's not like they were paying for gas, components, oil changes, tires. It's a rental driven by people who throttle the heck out of cars. Very few owners are that hard on a car (except for leases).
lostboyz says:
09:44 AM, 06/29/10
If you don't think anyone else would drive it hard, you've never bought a car like this. I thought I was going to baby my mustang and I find myself pushing it harder everyday. To do anything otherwise, you might as well have bought a camry.
1487 says:
10:55 AM, 06/29/10
if they get a Mustang it should be the V6 which offers a better mix of value, mileage and performance. Try to get one for under $30k, not some $40k V8 model with nav and all the goodies that is unlikely to represent what most people will buy.
bimmerjay says:
03:47 PM, 06/29/10
"It did exactly what it was designed to do and did it perfectly.....it also was better looking than almost any car on the road, foreign or domestic."
Yes it was reliable. Styling is in the eye of the beholder. I personally think the car is not attractive - within its direct competition I think the Mustang is much better-looking. This car was clearly designed to appeal to an older demo that prefers an oversized, lazy and cushy coupe. The khaki slacks/polo shirt guy makes me chuckle because he's exactly that demographic in my mind.
blueguydotcom says:
04:57 PM, 06/29/10
@1487, agreed.
gspfan says:
10:08 PM, 06/29/10
Get a Mustang 5.0 and see what you've been missing while driving the cheesy Camaro and pudgy (but still cool) Challenger.
toastblows says:
07:32 AM, 06/30/10
@ $28,900 they got 1 guy to call.
Shows you how much interest there is in these bankruptmobiles.
stwok says:
08:22 AM, 07/ 1/10
+1 for Mustang V6 with manual transmission.