buying a salvaged car?

[themadness]

what do i need to know about buying a car from a salvage yard? i think i have found a car that "runs and drives" but it isnt clear (yet!) what the title status is. its going to be a few days before i can get to the yard to look at it because it is over 2 hours away. are there any red flags to look out for as far as ownership of the car and paperwork to be filled out?

i have always been told that salvaged titles and cars are a no-no unless you plan on keeping the car for a loooooooong time

[Rettax3]

I've bought two cars from the junk-yard (and sold them parts ), but neither of them had salvage titles. I've also owned a few salvage-title cars, and sold one of them without any problems -it definitely detracts from the car's value so far as resale is concerned, but most (or all?) states have no restrictions regarding their sale, aside from disclosure. So long as the salvage yard issues you a legal, clear title and the price reflects if the title is "S" or not, you shouldn't be stuck in a bear-trap. Think of it this way, if you are willing to buy the car with an S title, someone else will be too, it just won't be for as much $$, and it won't sell as easily. But it doesn't mean the car isn't okay. Just check it over VERY carefully, if you aren't prepared to sink some extra money into it if there are problems with it that crop up later. Don't be afraid to assert your right to know what you are buying, and be ready to walk away if something isn't right. Good luck.

[themadness]

well to update......

the guy told me he couldnt sell me the car because he was a salvage yard and could only part it out then crush the rest. i have no idea why he wouldnt sell it.....maybe a title issue?

[speedy]

I've bought two cars from the junk-yard (and sold them parts ), but neither of them had salvage titles. I've also owned a few salvage-title cars, and sold one of them without any problems -it definitely detracts from the car's value so far as resale is concerned, but most (or all?) states have no restrictions regarding their sale, aside from disclosure. So long as the salvage yard issues you a legal, clear title and the price reflects if the title is "S" or not, you shouldn't be stuck in a bear-trap. Think of it this way, if you are willing to buy the car with an S title, someone else will be too, it just won't be for as much $$, and it won't sell as easily. But it doesn't mean the car isn't okay. Just check it over VERY carefully, if you aren't prepared to sink some extra money into it if there are problems with it that crop up later. Don't be afraid to assert your right to know what you are buying, and be ready to walk away if something isn't right. Good luck.

in pennsylvania once a car is "junked" its junk. they claim its because of "safety concerns" and people may have junked it regarding that ect. so in pa, once you sign the title over to the scrap yard its done. no getting it back whole anyways.

[Rettax3]

in pennsylvania once a car is "junked" its junk. they claim its because of "safety concerns" and people may have junked it regarding that ect. so in pa, once you sign the title over to the scrap yard its done. no getting it back whole anyways.

Not sure it is any different here. One of the cars I bought, they didn't want to sell to me at first because the owner had signed the title off to them in the wrong spot, then corrected. Legal is legal, I argued... But that particular yard also had a used car sales license, so they had the leeway to make those decisions. There was no way I would have gotten the car if I wasn't a regular there though, they barely let me take it at all. There was a black '92 GTZ that hit the yard, probably hours before I showed up, and it was too late -they had already stamped the title, cut the catalytic converter and punctured the fuel tank. It was a sunroof car, Quad/5-speed (of course), with nice wheels and very good tires with warranty paperwork (transferable). I would have happily put the car back together, but because the title was already stamped, it was too late. I took the wheels, the doors, I think one of the fenders, and the shift-plate for my '95 Z-26's eventual five-speed conversion (which still hasn't happened). I would have liked to have gotten the muffler, FE7 suspension, transmission and mounts, and maybe the Quad too, but I didn't have a lot of cash, time, or space to store it all safely. Those wheels are still on my GTU until I can replace its' wheels that were stolen. The nose and rear bumper-cover were a little too beat-up to pull just to have, so I left them, but I did grab the side-skirts, I think. Oh well, can't save 'em all, I guess.
It is just going to get worse too, nobody wants us to keep our old cars. It is better for the economy (they say, or at least the IRS) if we spend all our money on new cars, with lots of taxes on them. They also push that it is better for the environment, because so many new cars get slightly better MPG and have slightly less emissions -but they never want to talk about the 'carbon footprint' resulting from manufacturing a new car. Reduce, re-use, recycle does not seem to apply to the automotive world, especially when the government uses our tax-money to fund crap programs like 'Cash for Clunkers' that destroys everything useful on the car. Just another reason why Little Johnny out to buy his first car can find a Beretta on craigslist for $500 running and driving, but ends up getting something brand new to drive into a tree while the Beretta just sits for sale until the owner gives up and scraps the car, and those of us who would save it are told no...
Sorry, I am a little pessimistic lately, like for the last twenty or thirty years.

[speedy]

ha, enviroment, fucking tree huggers, they realize china and japan could care less and are buying all our coal and burning it? guess what! its the same dam ozone and air were breathing!!!

[3X00-Modified]

Reduce, re-use, recycle does not seem to apply to the automotive world, especially when the government uses our tax-money to fund crap programs like 'Cash for Clunkers' that destroys everything useful on the car.

Um last time I checked vehicle salvage yards crush and recycle almost the whole car and resell the bits as scrap to be re-melted or reused in production elsewhere... Including those Cash for Clunkers program vehicles... Just because YOU can't buy the parts for your older car doesn't mean they are going into a heap, they are getting chopped up and re-used.

[Rettax3]

Reduce, re-use, recycle does not seem to apply to the automotive world, especially when the government uses our tax-money to fund crap programs like 'Cash for Clunkers' that destroys everything useful on the car.

Um last time I checked vehicle salvage yards crush and recycle almost the whole car and resell the bits as scrap to be re-melted or reused in production elsewhere... Including those Cash for Clunkers program vehicles... Just because YOU can't buy the parts for your older car doesn't mean they are going into a heap, they are getting chopped up and re-used.

Getting chopped-up and no longer usable as the parts they were is what the phrase 'going into a heap' means Jon, unless of course a recipient vehicle is so rough that it would be referred to as a 'heap', then...

When I said 'reduce', I meant reducing the amount of materials/energy wasted or consumed in manufacturing a replacement unit (car). They sure as fun don't put used carpet-fibers into a new car.

When I said 're-use', I meant re-use the complete car that was functional as it was or with some repair, and didn't need to be replaced.

When I said 'recycle', I was specifically complaining about the 'Cash for Clunkers' program that destroyed the engines in the cars by deliberately pouring chemicals into the engines (that is great for the environment too, I'm sure) that ruined them and kept them from being re-used. NOBODY (not just 'me') got to use those parts.

When I said 'recycle', I wasn't referring to the fact that the cars are chopped-up and SOME (or even most) of the materials are re-used (a lot of the parts are simply shredded and either burned-off or sent to land-fills).

Sorry I had to explain that to you, I thought it was pretty clear what I was talking about.

Some cars are just junk, and should be scrapped. They are no longer safe, reliable, or economically feasible to repair, and things do wear-out and need to be replaced from time to time, including entire units (cars). I don't have a problem with that kind of scrapping, but from what I've seen (and I live where vehicles are not consumed by rust), most of the cars scrapped are still perfectly serviceable, if people would invest the price of a down-payment on repairs and even 25% of the cost of a monthly payment on basic maintenance. What bugs me is that there is so much pressure to scrap the old vehicles that still have a lot of service-life left to them, and are often better quality than the new stuff been pushed on us. The environmentalists often push it, because of the better numbers from new cars, but ignore the environmental ramifications of new-car manufacturing, and old car disposal. The government pushes it (because of lobbyists, largely), because it helps generate jobs in that industry and gains them tax-money on vehicle sales, but ignores the fact that it is a financial burden for many families to replace their vehicles frequently. Economists and financial analysts often push it because people who buy new vehicles need to work harder just to pay for them, but do not acknowledge the fact that people who are strapped to a new car payment have less 'disposable income' that would be used elsewhere in the economy. Society pushes it because they want to see 'new, bright, shiny' but they ignore the fact that harder working people are under more stress, which causes more health issues, and they have less time and money to devote elsewhere, like with their families or perhaps on recreational activities that actually improve quality of life. Friends and neighbors push it because they want to go buy 'new! bright! shiny!, and if YOU do it, it must be okay to do, so it helps justify giving it to the 'see, want' factor. Okay, so I am dramatizing this a little, and it isn't my whole life (or my whole day) to sit around and think about the Great Conspiracy that is the new-car market, but it doesn't mean there isn't truth here. That is just my view on it, and it shouldn't be too out-of-perspective on an enthusiast site for a low-priced entry-level 'disposable'* car produced for only ten years that is now +/- twenty years old.

*Just to clarify for someone who might take this wrong, I don't view any car as truly 'disposable', I like having things that last, I dislike change for its' own sake, and quality is an important part of value to me. One of the best things about the Beretta is how cheap and easy it is to work on (and modify ). But these cars, as many others, are basically viewed as disposable -meaning "keep it for ~100k miles and crush it, it isn't anything special". That view-point just annoys me.

[themadness]

"keep it for ~100k miles and crush it, it isn't anything special"

thats exactly what a used car salesman said about a beretta i was looking at on a lot a few weeks ago. it was in horrible shape but not scrap worthy. also said pretty much the same thing about CFC program and how it hurt his bottom line as a used car dealer.