An example of inflation in the automotive world.

Cujet

Cujet

Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
15,683
Location
Jupiter, Florida
I read the writeup and was a bit surprised at how a top of the line, absolutely full size 222" long 80" wide, up to 125mph, 4400lb, Chevy Caprice with a good sized V8 engine (400 or 454ci) and a 20 cubic foot trunk capable of fitting about 10 people! It converts to only $24K in today's dollars.

By today's standards, for that money you get a Honda Civic with the normally aspirated 158HP 4cyl, 184" long, 70" wide 3000lb base model compact. Really, that Caprice was full of features and we are not getting more features for the money today.

From Autoweek:

The Caprice was the king of the full-size Chevrolets in 1973, and a car buyer could easily spend more on a Caprice than on its Pontiac or Oldsmobile platform siblings. MSRP on the '73 Caprice hardtop coupe was $4082 (about $24,142 in 2023 dollars), while the Pontiac Catalina hardtop coupe started at $3869 and the Olds Delta 88 hardtop coupe was $4047. Hell, add a few options and you could get a Caprice price tag up past that of the swanky $4125 Buick LeSabre hardtop coupe.

www.autoweek.com

Enjoy 1973 Chevrolet Caprice Luxury While You’re Still Young Enough

Why wait to climb the GM Ladder of Success?
www.autoweek.com www.autoweek.com

1973-chevrolet-caprice-magazine-advertisement-3556x2000-car-648c9b89b55dd.jpg
 
Last edited:
This was always said about college tuition, at least it was the first area I became aware of where the escalated cost went far beyond inflation.

How about pork chops at $1.99/lb in 2023 and that price for 2 years? How about bacon today? Complete opposite than other goods. That’s why it’s economics and inflation is a basket of goods. We can cherry pick goods that would not fall into the basket. I prefer to use median not mean.

How about the avg school teacher making 97k in MA and 87k where I live? That teacher in Boston should get an award. They work for much less pay due to the cost of living, yet their schools are often top 200s nationally. Ours is 700s.
 
I think there are a whole lot of factors besides inflation that contribute to this scenario. A vehicle from 1973 and 2023 are both classified as vehicles but other than having 4-wheels and the ability to carry people they are really different beasts as far as technology. Imagine we could produce a vehicle in 2023 with no safety systems other than a seatbelt, engines and transmissions with little to no thought put toward mpg/emissions, and body structures with little thought to weight or crash testing. There'd still be inflation but it wouldn't be what it is in the above example.
 
There's more to it than inflation.
The '73 Chevy didn't have fuel injection, an overwhelming batch of sensors and a central processor to digest all the inputs, an array of airbags, sophisticated automatic transmissions, ABS + Stability systems, SNE (Stupid Needless Electronics), cruise as standard, tilt wheel as standard, alloy wheels as standard, likely a sunroof as standard, self tensioning seat belts, actual designed body cages.....

Three cheers for power and roar but I don't miss Detroit pig iron as part of the landscape.
 
It’s an interesting thought. Most Americans have switched from station wagons to F150’s or minivans. Arguably not the same vehicle but each does something better than the station wagon (move people or trailers better). But clearly at a nice price bump today.

I wonder if we go back to 2005 or any similar time before the Great Recession (have we really recovered since then?) does the same comparison stack up?

OTOH I was watching some youtube last night about how dealer lots are piling up, and auction sales are failing to make sales. That doesn’t mean MSRP on new will drop, but maybe some of the market is going to come around? Heck, if we finally get the recession, maybe we’ll get some cheaper new cars again?
 
Interesting too how the same model can range from 39k to 62k. I was just looking at that Mazda cx90 online. Would we be smart to go for a 39k one? Imagine 23k of options?

Ps in the phila metro area there is only 1 on the way to a dealer, and it had the $62.2k list.

I saw one in the garage at work on Thu…maybe over time the base models will appear

Edit expanded the search and there is qty 1 at $41k on the way and 3 more < $50k….

The base model is packed with features believe it or not…rain sensing wipers. I don’t think it has NAV but we would all likely connect our phones nowadays. Only comes in 2 colors and 1 interior color, black leatherette.
 
Last edited:
John105 said:
Interesting too how the same model can range from 39k to 62k. I was just looking at that Mazda cx90 online. Would we be smart to go for a 39k one? Imagine 23k of options?
Click to expand...
My first thought is, the cheapest must be a loss leader, they don’t plan to sell many, just be able to advertise a low base cost. I‘d wager, the cheapest model can’t be found on lots.

We’ve been pretty happy with base models. I think the trick is to avoid the high end ”always”, then you never know what you are missing out on.
 
Those 1973 Chevrolets had the GM rust problem that was so common in the 1970s. They were also utter gas hogs, getting typically no more than 12 or so miles per US gallon with the larger V-8s in the real world. Most 1973–1974 cars regardless of manufacturer ran poorly because of the various band-aid pumps (etc.) added to meet pollution standards just before catalytic converters came with the '75s.

1973 was not the good old days. :LOL: Lots of imports were garbage then by today's standards too. There are reasons you seldom see cars that vintage even at car shows. For many vehicles the 1970s–early 1980s were the last gasp for 1940s–1950s engineering and drivetrain design.

The cost of new cars has gone up higher than inflation because of various pollution, safety, and fuel economy mandates between 1973 and now, and also because buyers prefer SUVs to cars today.
 
John105 said:
Interesting too how the same model can range from 39k to 62k. I was just looking at that Mazda cx90 online. Would we be smart to go for a 39k one? Imagine 23k of options?
Click to expand...
That's crazy since I don't think you can get a Grand Highlander Max Hybrid above $58K unless you start checking off more expensive floor mats etc.
 
Agree with much of the above comments, there is also another factor at play in addition to those.
Easy money, no place on earth is it more easy to get an auto loan than the USA. Most times in car ads they dont even list the price anymore, they list the payment. So in addition to all the government mandated pollution and safety systems which is costly we as fat Americans are sold on every single option they can pack in a vehicle. I love the new one every one is excited about, automatic pick up truck tail gates! Gotta love automatic SUV hatches too! Are you kidding me? People wont even lift their arm and pull down a door anymore, These two things are just the very tip of all the garbage we buy in a vehicle.

Ok, let's go overseas, overseas models do not have the level of options American cars do from all the makers around the world, American cars are loaded up much more then overseas models. Why? Easy money, irresponsible spending habits of Americans and easy profits for those companies. Bottom line, the manufacturers build what people will buy and what sells people on a product.
When was the last time a consumer said, why do I need a powered lift gate? Answer, like NEVER *LOL* (except me)
Power seats? Power everything, temperature controlled interiors, fold in mirrors, self adjusting mirrors, auto rain sensing wipers, touch screen everything, Bluetooth, Wifi, driver assist cruise control, driver asset lane control, on and on and on... then we talk about price? *LOL*

Darn it, it's hard to buy a base model car now, no one wants them nor does the manufacturer want to sell them. A base model today is a fully loaded and more model of less than 20 - 30 years ago. All because people are more than every to borrow more money and longer terms.
 
Last edited:
The only exception is the Subaru Outback, the next up is a **** good value, the Premium Outback is the best bang for the buck out there.
 
PWMDMD said:
I think there are a whole lot of factors besides inflation that contribute to this scenario. A vehicle from 1973 and 2023 are both classified as vehicles but other than having 4-wheels and the ability to carry people they are really different beasts as far as technology. Imagine we could produce a vehicle in 2023 with no safety systems other than a seatbelt, engines and transmissions with little to no thought put toward mpg/emissions, and body structures with little thought to weight or crash testing. There'd still be inflation but it wouldn't be what it is in the above example.
Click to expand...
On a side note but related to my comment above, we are currently talking about government regulation and the unintended consequences of regulation in my economics class. I'll preface this with in spite of being told I go to a liberal university where I'm being indoctrinated into lunacy, the text we use was written by an economist who worked for George W. Besides the usual supply-demand curve stuff my takeaways so far are: 1. Rent control doesn't work and makes housing worse; 2. Printing too much money is the reason for inflation; 3. Government regulation usually backfires; 4. Government handouts eliminate the motivation to work. All this and I'm only 1/3 the way through the textbook.

My example related above - When seatbelts were first mandated it did little to reduce overall deaths because while it did save some lives of people in the vehicles, the people driving the vehicles drove more recklessly since seatbelts made them feel safer and the magnitude of the crashes were greater (people would speed more) and more pedestrians were killed. The example discussed in the book was just about seatbelts but it would be interesting to know how much of the safety systems we pay for now actually reduce fatalities since we spend A LOT of $ on these safety systems.
 
Last edited:
PWMDMD said:
My example related above - When seatbelts were first mandated it did little to reduce overall deaths because while it did save some lives of people in the vehicles, the people driving the vehicles drove more recklessly since seatbelts made them feel safer and the magnitude of the crashes were greater (people would speed more) and more pedestrians were killed.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard of that effect; did it get a name or does it remain nameless?

I am quite guilty of it myself… if the seatbelt were to be disabled in my car I’d drive much differently! I know I drive harder when I have snow tires on than when I have my all seasons, in winter time.

That said, I’ve read of accounts (short stories) of how people drove in the 50’s. I get the impression while some drove slow, the speed limits were higher, and some drove quite fast, perhaps rivaling what we do today. Maybe average speeds are higher, but we’ve always had those who bent the limit.

I suspect today’s safety systems are cheap. High R&D cost, but mass production drives the cost way down. Yes, more wiring is more cost, and much more debug cost if it has an issue, but some of it overlaps. The ABS sensor can be used for VSC and now even tire pressure monitoring. Just a bit more code.
 
A Caprice in ‘73 didn’t come standard with power windows, cruise control, or even a/c. Those were all extra cost options.
You did get a roomy interior, huge trunk, and ability to tow a trailer though. Pretty much what a crew cab pickup ($$) does nowadays.
 
PWMDMD said:
I think there are a whole lot of factors besides inflation that contribute to this scenario. A vehicle from 1973 and 2023 are both classified as vehicles but other than having 4-wheels and the ability to carry people they are really different beasts as far as technology. Imagine we could produce a vehicle in 2023 with no safety systems other than a seatbelt, engines and transmissions with little to no thought put toward mpg/emissions, and body structures with little thought to weight or crash testing. There'd still be inflation but it wouldn't be what it is in the above example.
Click to expand...
Your point is valid with regard to tech/airbags/abs etc. But by the 70's the better cars were very comfortable and reliable appliances, just like today. A tool to transport people to desired destinations. A car then is a car today.

We can't simplify the similarities to 4 wheels and the ability to carry people. The Caprice mentioned had good tech for its day, could carry 2+ more people, more cargo, could tow a boat, had powerful AC, and was big enough to sleep in when your camping spot flooded (ask me how I know). The fact is, you got twice the vehicle for your money back then. It may not all be inflation, but the fact remains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top