are comets worth more???

And I like them both

 

I think the demand for these cars are growing. Being relevant has a big bearing on value. I would like to see ford make a new Maverick like that 2011 concept car. Ford makes an economical, sporty,speedy new car. I feel it would create interest in the older cars,increasing their value.
So for value, I would say that the Maverick will always have more potencial than a Comet. Time will tell.
Right now, I can't believe I have to spent more money on a flat deck trailer than the cost of my Maverick. We get to enjoy the ride.

 

Using that logic ... Lincoln ought to out-sell both of them.

Can you see how this works?

A lot of people give the most weight to price when making buying decisions ... Walmart is the #1 retailer that there is ... why? ... price!... it certainly is not due to the quality of what they sell there ... it all tends to be pretty low-end.

To some consumers, extra features are given importance in purchases, and they are willing to pay a bit more.

Historically, Fords were most basic, Mercs were a bit more comfy and trimmed out nicer, and Lincolns got every option and convenience loaded in them. ... also made them more expensive.

Sometimes the lines here were blurred a bit and Mavs and Comets may be a bad example ... except that getting a V8 Comet in 71-72 was a lot more common than getting a V8 Mav (proportionally).

 

absolutly nothing

 

Exactly!

To prove this guy's point, I have 2 6 cyl. Comet GT's in my short list Registry of '71-'75 Comet GT's. There are a ton of 6 cyl. Grabbers even still around. It's hard to find a 6 banger GT. Even at that, I still think 10 perfectly restored equally equipped Mavericks will outsell 10 Comets.

Seth

 

Back to the original ? I believe most think of the 60s Comets when they think of Comets, not the precious and sometimes fast pretties from the 70s. Worth? Depends on the buyer/seller, just like everything else with our cars.

 

Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg??

 

In 1971 I went to my local Ford dealer to buy a new Grabber. It was in Feburary and cold with snow flurries. I looked at the ones on the lot. No salesman came out as I went by the door a salesman stuck his head out the door and asked me if I wanted to buy a Maverick. I told him no I was going down the street and get a Comet. I went to the Lincoln Mercury Dealer and I did not get out of the car before a salesman was there. We went into his office and I told him what I wanted he didn't have it so we ordered a new black Comet GT. 302, C4, am radio and handling suspension package. $2888.00 and I have liked the Comet GT ever since. Sorry for the long post. As for which one is worth more I think probably the Grabber is worth more. But i'll take my Comet GT any day.

 

a new maverick would be pretty neat, but, in a way, i think it'd be bad. my maverick cost me less than my class ring. and it ran. if they made a new mav to sell alongside the mustang, well, those who like the 70s mustangs might think the older mavs are just a cheap mustang, and they'll become popular, and expensive. i like having a car nobody's heard of. and the comet, well same story, it'd just cost more from the dealership. Anyways, like has been said before, the buyer determines which is worth more. so no amount of point-making will have much bearing on the real market value of them.

 

Not to diverge, but one of the possibly >smartest< things that Ford ever did was to "resurrect" the Mustang and repackage it. Sales of the Mustang alone are probably responsible for Ford staying afloat in the current economy.

GM on the other hand completely waffled, and the Camaro is too late (I'm not saying it's not a neat car, I'm saying it's not going to "save" GM). Chrysler also played around with stuff for a few years (HHR and such ), but they didn't hit a big one until the release of the Challenger. They sold a BUNCH of Chargers, but, not the same thing.

Lesson? Perhaps the car manufacturers should realize that marketing >IS< important to specific age groups (or, "cross-generational" groups). Cars like the Mustang have had appeal for years; sure, Ford tripped and fell over the MII and 80's offerings, but the idea of a "new" Mustang as a repackaging of the old body style was ingenious. Young people like it, and older folks with disposable income - well, they DEFINITELY like it, because it draws them back!!

I do not believe that Ford would ever consider any other past line as a possible revisit. Why? Even though certain lines sold millions, no lines have survived like Mustang. GM can only claim Corvette as a survivor, and Chrysler? Well, the K-car ain't coming back soon :bananaman

Chris

PS - I selfishly admit I would have liked to see a modernized Tri-five Chevy, only because I owned a '57 for some years.

 

Rayzorsharp stated: I read today where Chrysler is going to "FIRE" about 2000 dealerships.

I read where it was 789 of 3200 that are slated to be axed - actual mileage may vary.

Chris

 

Yes, I read the same thing today...yesterday I thought it said 2000 but that was obviously GM's portion. Guess I better read a little slower next time. Sorry bout that.

 

I corrected my post above Chris, thanks for pointing that out.

 

350K FORD? WTF happened to all of them? you cant hardly find a part...i gotta admit if it hadnt been for this site and seeing all the art that the members of this site have rebuilt and continue to work on i might not have spent the money and time to rebuild this 73 MAV...im glad i am and thanks to all of you members, you have been an insperiation.

 

Hope you don't think I was >policing< - I had just read that on Yahoo, and I figured I'd jump in.

Besides, I don't own a Maverick or Comet ...I'll just go away now....

Chris