And for some years after their introduction I would have been correct.
mdensch
mdensch
I voted Nice Price. As Mr. Regular said, this is the perfect enthusiast’s car, even at this price. When you are done with it, sell it for more money.
Parts were a nightmare when they were new, and ‘supported’ by AMC
Googled the VIN, and seems like this car has had a lot of work done somewhat recently: http://davidsclassiccars.com/renault/432095-1982-renault-le-car.html
Non, non et NON! Le Car est Le Merde!!
If it makes you feel any better, nearly every comment on that video is a pilot of some stripe absolutely sandblasting the guy.
If you do, there’s a dislike button. It’s very out of character for the times to have such a thing, but there to go - YouTube does.
This. Always blows my mind how far the “this tastes horrible... here you try it” mentality goes.
Now playing
Yeah, better to link to videos revealing how incredibly likely it is that this was faked like:
I bought a 4-door 2004 new in 2005 for $11,000. Paid for the extended warranty which came in handy when it stopped running four years in and according to the Chrysler Guy, he replaced the entire computer system at no cost to me. I put 80K New York City miles on it in 15 years with nothing but sporadic oil changes…
$0.44/kwH isn’t awfully expensive? At that price, “filling” a 100 KWh pack would take $44, which is more than filling a 10-12 gallon tank with gas is. (Which would get the same size car about the same distance)
Wipe your chin. It’s embarrassing.
https://www.oscarmayer.com/wienermobile
Low income workers normally buy new cars?
Yeah, efficiency still isn’t standardized: my eGolf used mi/kWh, my Tesla is Wh/mi. Either way, these behemoths are significantly more power-hungry than either of those. They’re ~450Wh/mi, or about 2.25 mi/kWh, whereas the Tesla is 250-300 Wh/mi (3.5 mi/kWh) and eGolf <250Wh/mi (>4 mi/kWh).
Yeah. They really need to.
Or, “Pour hot water on your windshield to melt the ice”. Crack!
The F150 Hybrid with the FX4 is the right answer here.