Also, as to dog park behavior - don’t be a helicopter parent to your dog. Dogs mount each other as a show of dominance, it’s not really sexual. Your dog can take care of herself.

Wait...”have” to eat a whole box of cookies? Don’t you mean GET to eat a whole box of cookies?

Ok, well, Hagerty bases their valuation on what many, many people have actually, willingly paid for it:

Okay...stick with me here. Yes, the scoops on the roof are ridiculous. No, I don’t care about the Von Piranha BS. With all that said, however, this is actually priced 100% correctly. Hagerty says a ‘68 AMC AMX in this configuration is worth $36,300 in “Excellent” condition, and I’d say this one definitely fits that…

Amen to everything you just said.

History (Google) doesn’t record the 0-60 of the Volvo, but the 280Z does it in 9.3 seconds. That’s pretty close, despite having two fewer cylinders and 3/5ths the displacement.

No, I don’t get it. We aren’t judging these cars in 1978. Did Ford do the best it could with 1978 technology? Sure. But today, in 2016, if you want a classic muscle car at a reasonable price, I’m thinking very, very few people’s first choice would be a 1978 Ford Mustang II - even the King Cobra.

Sorry, but you’re applying mid-’70s logic to something being sold in 2016. All of those conditions you list - crappy gas, lack of traction control, simpler transmissions - applied equally to every car maker in the world at that time. Yet somehow Datsun managed to get 150 horses out of 2.8 liters in the 280Z. Volvo (!)…

Sigh...just when you think you’ve seen the end of the malaise-era apologists.

I, too, can think of many cars more awful than this. That doesn’t make this care any less awful. For me, it just has a kind of loveable loser vibe.

Yeah, my first car was a '78 T-bird, so I get it.

Sorry to be that guy, but looks like this is Daytona, FL; not Dayton, OH.

God, this is just the best.

I’m definitely one who would love to see the Dane get a shot at the race seat. While I was happy to see Jenson retain his seat at McLaren, it was sad that it came at Magnusson’s expense.

Crack Pipe at any price.

Ok, but this one isn’t just “decent” condition; it’s in very good condition judging by the photos. Plus, it has a more powerful, lower mileage motor under the hood.

Not saying I'd pay $5,400, only that $3,750 is well under what the "industry" thinks the value should be, before considering the extra ponies under the hood.

Holy crap, how did this thing not sell at $4k? Average retail on a ‘91 190E 2.6 is $5,400 according to NADA, and this one looks to be in very good condition. Add the 3.0 swap, the fact that it’s manual, RWD and brown...it’s Jalop bait!

Management. Financial Portfolios. Insurance. Computers. Black Leather Gloves.

As always, the salesman's credo applies here: it's easier to sell a want than a need.