Blake Noble

Well, I guess I'll give it one last shot: http://louisville.craigslist.org/cto/1913068561.html

35 million dollars spent and yet not one bedroom suitable enough to spank it in. Money well spent, yeah.

Huh. My dad's last Dakota did the same thing and the current one is beginning to. I just attributed it to being cheap clear coat.

Well, the salesman (men?) pretty much lied to me. When it came time to talk out a trade, he handed me off to some other guy (not the sales manager) who insisted that they give me only $2,500 for my car and me pay a $5,000 difference. I showed them there wasn't much of a difference in value whatsoever between the two vehicles (gotta love having an iPhone). It just dumbfounded the salesman who continued to think of other ways to make his case hold water. I told them if they ever wanted to move the truck off of the lot, my even-trade offer would still stand if I still had the car, to give me a call, and walked away. I'm disappointed but a small part of me expected that to happen. It's more so the clear coat whitewashing/eroding from sitting in the sun and the elements. Typical for most DamilerChryCo cars and trucks but really premature for a vehicle with low mileage like that. EDIT: Like this ...

Yep, it's the black 5.9 R/T. I was actually a little surprised when I finally noticed the clear coat on the driver's door. I can, however, overlook it because it's not exactly terrible to the point that it really makes the whole truck look bad. Not only that, it just works in my favor. I do wonder exactly who was Chrysler's supplier of clear coat during the '97 to '02 time frame? The clear coat on dad's 02 is starting to do that whole weird fading out thing. His '99 5.2 also did it. In fact, I have rarely seen a Damiler-era ChryCo product without this issue. Excellent suggestions Z and thanks.

Drove the Dakota today. Excellent pickup. Mechanically, it's been taken care of. It will, however, need two things: 1.) new speaker grilles for the door panels and 2.) the "Magnum V8" badge for the right front fender. Oh, and it has the typical shotty DaimlerChrysler clear coat fading away on the driver's side door, but it isn't too bad yet. Overall, it seems to be a pretty solid truck. As for trading even, the dealer said he would want me to pay the difference between my car and the truck. Well, as it turns out, there isn't any difference in value. You can see where this is headed ...

Used car prices are insane. The truth is, most of these prices are far above KBB values. It isn't so much "supply doesn't meet demand" as it is good old fashioned greed in most cases. The Dakota I'm going to try to walk away with tomorrow in an even swap is priced at $7,995 and that's a good $2,000 to even $4,000 bucks more than what I'm seeing other R/Ts in similar (and sometimes better) condition, sometimes two years newer, with similar miles, with more options, and an extended cab configuration selling for. Why that truck is priced that way, I'll never know. R/Ts are slightly uncommon, but they aren't as rare as a ZL-1 Camaro.

I'm glad someone else agrees on revamping our railroad networks to make them suitable for competitive passenger travel again. If we're so goddamned tired of worrying about our "gasoline economy", it's going to take the promotion of both forms of land travel and air travel, even traveling by water, as well as different fuels -- meaning diesel, gasoline, and ethanol -- all being equally offered to consumers at every gas station until those fuels can be, quote, "phased out" by renewable fuel sources in addition to hydrogen if we're going to truly set things right and make things better. It's an extremely simple concept and there is no good excuse as to why we haven't started going about making this change a reality. I would like to see that change. It would also mostly mean I would no longer have to read New York Times articles from hypocritical car hating banditos.

Parking in rear.

More crap to back my side of the case when I talk bidness with the dealer: http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/cto/1902686894.html (<-- ace in the hole) http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/cto/1889112699.html (<-- ace in the hole #2) http://louisville.craigslist.org/ctd/1885378044.html (<-- just adding fuel to the fire, I hate huge rims on a 2wd truck, but hey it can sometimes justify a higher sale price, the truck I want just has stockers) There's also all of these: http://delaware.craigslist.org/cto/1891526326.html http://nh.craigslist.org/ctd/1899781675.html http://tampa.craigslist.org/hil/cto/1895965686.html http://lincoln.craigslist.org/cto/1900104202.html If anyone has any negotiation tips, drop me a line in here. I'm determined to be their worst nightmare: the determined, informed buyer.

No, not the show with Johnathan Frakes. While hunting down some evidence to build my case to walk away from Hyundai of Somerset with an even Camaro-for-Dakota swap, I found this interesting little piece: http://knoxville.craigslist.org/ctd/1898512894.html It's an '89 Dodge Dakota with 1 mile on the clock. Yes, 1 little insignificant mile. I don't know if I believe that, but the truck sure as hell looks clean as can it be.

I'll be sure double check the condition fluids again when I go back and check the truck out again on Thursday and give it thorough test drive. When I checked the truck out today, I checked the level of the coolant and it was full, the color was a healthy Prestone green. The oil didn't seem milky, maybe just a little dirty. I'm planning to bring my dad along this time as well. He's owned three different second-gen Dakotas, one '98 3.9L, one '99 5.2L (he came close to giving it to me, but I got a S-10 instead and the rest is history), and his current truck is a '02 Dakota Quad Cab with the 5.9L. He should be able to give me a good second opinion on it. My main concern is the transmission really. I know it can sometimes be a problem area on these trucks. The engines generally are pretty bulletproof. ... I will say, though that the 5.2L in the old man's second Dakota starting going through 2 quarts of oil every other day before he traded it to the '02 5.9L. The '99 5.2L only had 92,000 miles on it. It was strange, too. You could drive that truck, say, on a 50 mile round trip, get out and check the oil and see it was very low after knowing you had just topped it off or completely changed it. As far as we could tell, there wasn't a bad gasket causing the oil loss. You couldn't smell oil burning and there wasn't smoke gushing out of the exhaust. I thought it might have been a bad oil pump. Even still, if you didn't know the truck was using oil like it was, you would swear it was just as sturdy as a brick. Sort of frightening in way, but remarkable in another.

The exhaust note on this 5.9 R/T is one of the best I've ever heard, right up there with the Pontiac 400 and LS1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmRDirm_SlA&feature=related Someone performed a six-speed conversion on that one. (EDIT: Just found out it was done by a company based out of TN. Damn. Now I really love the idea of that truck and that means I'll probably never get it.) I'm really loving the idea of that truck. There are still two huge issues to be addressed: 1.) is it as good as it seems to be in person and on paper and 2.) can I convince the dealer to be far more reasonable on what they're asking?

It's a very clean truck in person. Very clean. Ran great as far as I could tell and a visual inspection of all the fluids seemed to be okay. Actually, in my area, the truck's suggested retail value is $6,110 according to KBB.com, $400 bucks cheaper. Most dealers would price that truck a full $1,000 under that price in order to ensure a quick sell, so I'm thinking a good offer on that truck would be something like $4800 to $5100 bucks. Very reasonable and realistic I think. Actually, I'd say I may be able to walk away with that truck with very little to extra, if nothing at all, to pay in boot if I present all of the facts to the dealer. It will take a hell of a lot of negotiation. The dealer mentioned the truck was local trade, so I know they don't have more than $3,000 in it, if you can believe the KBB trade-in value. I have a little extra time to kill this week since it's going to be a while for Adobe to ship Creative Suite 5 to me and I can't complete my assignments without it anyway. The truck's also conveniently located right down the road from where I'm attending classes so ... we'll see.

They're still trying to hide one of the worst kept new car secrets? Lolidkmybffjillian

Well, this is what I went and checked out: http://lexington.craigslist.org/ctd/1900779419.html '99 5.9 R/T with 72,000 miles. It may be highly irrational, but I'm considering borrowing a extra few thousand bucks in student loans to pay for the difference. It will be a 2-year deferred loan and it is a "school-related expense" so what the hell?* *(on this thought, should the truck not work out, I may just do this to pay for some repairs to the Camaro, idklol)

This.

Or it doesn't exist at all. I have a good question: Why should I be chastised because I like to drive and choose to drive? Why should anyone be chastised for choosing to drive? In a country the size of America, the only way to get around is with something with four spinning wheels and an internal combustion engine. Let's touch base with reality a bit: are buses any better? Are they really any cleaner? Will they really cut down on congestion? Not every city in America is going to be willing to trade in a fleet of wheelbarrows full of bucks for a fleet of hybrid buses. Anyone expecting that has their head in the clouds up their ass. It would take a long while for the city government to see a return on their investment if those services are actually taken advantage of. So if they aren't going to buy those nice, eco-friendly hybrid meat wagons, they'll at least stringently maintain their nasty, polluting buses right? Wrong. I would just about guarantee that a city government funded public transit service would make simple routine maintenance take a back seat in order to keep schedules tight and to squeeze every last drop of money out of the whole thing (keep profits up). When the government is left to regulate itself with no one else around to keep it in check, it typically does a poor job of doing things right unless someone starts complaining and that can sometimes take a while before someone speaks up loud enough. (If I recall correctly, LexTran, Lexington's city owned public transit services had issues similar to what I'm talking about some years back.) Who is around to inspect and demand these buses be serviced? It's not going to happen in states without yearly vehicle inspections, I will guarantee that. So, in essence, there isn't much to be gained here. Instead of clogged streets and highways full of those nasty infernal cars, you'll have streets and highways clogged with nasty, polluting buses. I shouldn't need to bring up some of the violence that takes place on American buses. (Epic Beard Man incident anyone? There was also a video released to YouTube before that of two Asian women brawling it out on the bus sometime before that.) Public transit has negative connotations in America for a reason. You'll also need all of the luck in the world to get smaller cities and rural towns on board with having a fleet of public buses on tap and they're still going to do all of the above if you do. Preaching public transit, i.e. the city bus, is a waste of time. However, I could fully see revitalizing the railroad industry to include passenger trips once again. Make the experience like an on-land cruise. Make the tickets reasonable. Make it include small trips and cross country ones. Make it a damn cool way to see the country again. Upgrade the railways to the latest technology. We already have the infrastructure, make it the best it can be. And build some bad ass passenger trains for the 21st century. If you do it right, you might convince some folks to not take the Excursion cross-country to California again. It may not address urban traffic congestion, but it could be a start.

Corrected. You forgot to completely adhere to the subliminal logic presented in the article: 1.) Car parks in free parking space 2.) Because the parking space is free and may offer late night privacy, teenage driver and teenage female passenger hop into the back seat 3.) Because the parking space is free, and the driver and passenger in the back seat engage in reproduction 4.) As a result of step three we have one more new eventual driver 5.) New driver = more cars = more free parking = more new drivers = more new cars = endless cycle of madness It's not only an attempt to cut down on new car sales and new places where we can park, but an attempt at population control as well. [/asinineridiculousbullshit]

I want to punch whoever wrote that article square in his balls. The same goes Professor Soup-for-brains. You want to support expensive, paid parking right as our economy teeters on a tightly stretched piece of filament line? You're also choosing to support this knowing it would further add to our already expensive cost of living? Hurr-durr, real smart a-hole.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ELrXUSDrcM If I ever get an actual band together, I'm going to name it Eminence Front because it's something of a triple whammy: 1.) well, obviously, the song is awesome, 2.) Eminence, KY (no, as furr as I know dere ain't any rich folk up there with any cuhcane problums), and 3.) Eminence Amplifier speakers (which are made in Eminence, KY which I also have in one of my Fender amps).

I've found one car to trade the Camaro to that might hold some promise. I'll know more about it tomorrow.

Ha, yeah. Considering that particular car was out of "gotta have a 2nd-gen Firebird" desperation. It would have made a neat project, but it would have been a horrible DD.

I'm just going to leave it up to fate to decide what happens to the car. If the car sells in a few weeks after I get it back, it sells. If it doesn't, I'll keep it and tough it out.

Well, I know I'm at a definite crossroads here: keep the car and deal with something new breaking every other week? Or sell it and try getting this right one last time? I've thrown together a list of what I've been out on the Camaro so far: $115 for exhaust issues/upgrades (that still didn't address/fix the main problem) $375 for plugs, wires, and a coil pack I didn't need (how I let myself get taken for a ride ... I'll never know) $325 for a new ICM + labor $125 for a new catalytic converter $225 for a new clutch master cylinder $20 dollar pressure test That totals up to $1,185. Add that on top of the $3,800 I paid for it and it totals up to almost $5,000 dollars, which is a little extreme for a V6 Camaro. $5,000 would have bought me a reasonable-mileage Z/28. Then there's the list of what it still needs: New pads and rotors at all four corners New O2 sensors New lower intake gasket New oil pan gasket and drain plug New tie rod An alignment Not to mention the clear coat is starting bubble in a few small places, so I'd have to have a new coat of that sometime soon. So a rough estimate of what I would have had dumped in the car rises somewhere between $1,800 to $2,000. I suppose my main reason of wanting to get rid of it is because all of these little issues are adding up and that I haven't been able to really enjoy my daily driver. I bought it thinking I would finally have a car that I could just dig right into with upgrades and whatever, but that hasn't been the case. I just have a very sour relationship with the car and, because of that, I'm sick and bored with it. I'm also frustrated that I don't trust myself enough to work on it nor do I have the proper space to even attempt some of this stuff in the first place.