kimmer

c4cruiser

Given the details of that '90, I would expect that it would be gone long before you are ready to buy a C4. While 27K miles sounds good, I would expect the car to have some issues once it starts to be driven such as dried out weatherstripping, some oil leaks due to seals drying up, coolant hoses that may have gotten hard an cracked.

Also, have you considered a later C4 like anything from a '92 to a '96?? For that same 10K in price, there will be all sorts of nice cars available. The LT1 motor was an improvement on the L98 with a 50HP increase in power. As the model years went on, GM added a number of engineering improvements to the car.

I would suggest you look at the latest model year and best overall condition you can find for your budget amount. And look at lots of cars! Try not to focus on just one or two.

Greg Gore

Good advice above... I would also be careful to take note of anything that is leaking, not working or parts you will definately want to replace. The best advice I can give is a new prospective owner will always underestimate refurbishing costs when buying their first Corvette. Whatever you think that figure is you will be closer if you double it.

Couple of examples:
Leaks in the rain- C4 weatherstripping, (look under the seats and under the floormats by the way). C4 has a very complex system of weatherstrips and if you need replacements and have it done for you the job could easily exceed $2000.

C4 windshield- highly specific type of installation, a job which only an experienced Corvette C4 glass technician can do without damaging weatherstrips and retainers. Requires C4 windshield experience and today's glass shops can no longer do it correctly. Remember, the newest C4 will soon be 20 years old and the technicians with experience are retiring and not around anymore.

You should be prepared to handle most of your own work.

GREGGPENN

I like 89 as the best MAF year. No CSI, 17" wheels, and they included the choice of the ZF6...with Dana44 rear. (Are earlier models Dana 44?) The MAF system is the easiest to tune -- if you'd ever consider modifying the engine.

Can't remember whether it was 90 or 91 when the wiring quality was improved. It was designed to last longer. If you plan on keep the car for another 10+ years, this is something to consider.

90 has the new interior -- which I like. And, 91 had the new bumpers and wheels -- which I like even more (but that's not a choice, right)?

Seriously, dude, that 90 with 27k is something you better not let slip thru your fingers! Assuming it's a style/color/etc...you want.

For a car that age, don't worry about picking one with 50, 60, 70k miles. They will have done more repair (making it effectively newer) and you'll see more of what the car will do in the future. (aging issues). Plus, the engine is still not so "worn out" you'll have to rebuild it. Most people drive 5k or less per year which means a 70k car will only have 120k in 10 more years.

If you find a 60-70k car though...they'll probably want $8k. And, I'll bet that 27k car you're looking at now will look more than $2k better.

So think carefully, before letting that 90 slip thru your fingers!

Good luck!

Oh yeah...later DMFs are better. Seems like the seal was revised in 91...which is another reason I might point you to that year or newer. There's also the head gaskets...but I can't remember if/when they resolved that potenial. I think that was also 90 or 91...but then again 92 brought the LT engine -- and the torque monster was gone forever! LOL (inside joke)

aklim

I'd try to negotiate it down. Not sure why you want stick that badly to let this slip thru your fingers but if you are not autocrossing or cruising for long distances in the country on a daily basis where it might give you better mileage, stick isn't the advantage many think it is. The 700R4 isn't bad as a transmission and if you get to it, there are MANY mods out there when rebuild time comes along that will make it much more bulletproof.

Alan777

it's not always about the technical advantage, it's about fun. i had an 88' Auto and now a 91' 6sp and I'm really glad i bought a stick. Even when driving to and from work it's more enjoyable.

If I'm looking at 89-91's, I'd decide what interior/exterior I wanted. (pre facelift, post facelift). I prefered the later style bumpers so i bought a 91. I like the later style interior much better as well. If you're not concerned, or don't prefer one over the other find the nicest condition, best kept car.

Keep in mind low mileage isn't always better. I bought a stock (aside from muffler delete) 44k miles car and I had to invest in replacing a lot of the stock parts because they wore out from age.

aklim

I'm not sure how to rate "fun". I had a 91 Firebird that was getting some engine work done and shut down for a while and I thought I'd try a manual unit. It was the worst money I spent. I got used to shifting it but it was a royal PITA for me since it made it harder to eat and drink, make calls, etc, etc in the city. Out on the highway, no problem. Yes, they cost a little more and are more complicated to fix when they are broke and they used to be weak but many things have been done to strengthen them. Thankfully, I managed to sell the damned thing off for no loss to some kid who insisted that he wanted a manual since that is what all sports cars have. Who was I to argue? Let him have it. It was better for autocrossing but since I gave that up, to me it is not worth the hassle of being unable to do what I want to do. Definitely not more fun for me. If I lived in the countryside, it would be ok, I think. I also experimented with a ratchet shifter and a manual valve body. Again, didn't do it for me after the newness wore off.

True but the more the PO drives it, the more "modifications" they make. The seller of my current Vette tried to tell me that he installed a "safety feature" in the car. It wouldn't crank. You'd be turning the key to "run" and pushing the secret button to crank. Turns out that the starter relay failed and melted the holder. Instead of fixing it, he bypassed it. Just like the shocks. Instead of getting the correct shocks (FX3), he threw away the adjusters and removed the bulb and used cheap crap.

Check Engine Light? Nah. Not necessary. One of the runners was even dented. Fortunately, I didn't need all that stuff and would fix it myself and toss the current engine. Another surprise was an ECM that died soon as I got it off the ramp. So yes, the less you drive it, the better I feel.

auggy

Get a 91 or 94,95, or 96.

Docderek05

for the cash you are willing to spend..a 95, or 96 would be my search priority, most C4, least bugs, for the money, and fairly low mileage, well maintained cars can be had.

Joe C

my vote - 1990, convertible, white over red, black top, auto, low mileage, garage queen-cream puff. if found, PM me immediately!!!

Docderek05

Or, if you Live in Florida, Go with Joe C's description,...sounds about right!

ricasso

ricasso

[QUOTE=aklim;1583397067 I got used to shifting it but it was a royal PITA for me since it made it harder to eat and drink, make calls, etc, etc in the city.

suppose it must be a pain when a little thing like actually driving a car gets in the way of eating, drinking and making calls..

aklim

When there is little to no tangible payback, you bet. When it comes to accuracy and consistency, if you think you can best a machine in a fair contest, feel free to say so. I have done the "actually driving" thing and I'm not as consistent AND accurate as my auto trans 100% of the time. Barring mechanical failure which can affect both systems, are you?

The advantage of stick comes mostly on autocrosses where the track changes each time (unless it is a set road course). The other time I see it is when the car is a low powered unit and it uses less power than an auto to run it. Beyond that, I fail to see that many times (when I datalogged with DIACOM) that it was superior. A push, mostly. My 700R4 shifted about the time I would have shifted along the same route as when I drove the stick, give or take a bit.

So what does the stick really contribute to my drive? Just saying "I'm in control" doesn't do it for me unless there is some advantage. I don't need to have a stick to show the boys how manly I am, do you? I need something to perform better though. Like any employee, if you cost (even a little more) than you bring in, you will get fired, I "fired" the stick. The 6th gear gives me a little mileage savings at higher speed if it were wide open but I drive mostly in the city an would probably be able to have the 6th gear engaged very little. So how did it benefit me when I drove a stick Camaro that the auto Firebird didn't? What did I miss?

ricasso

Well, I can only apologize if my post in any way upset you, that wasnt the intention.
Ive had several Automatics, Jags mostly,(ZF 'box's) yeah their good but well,its kinda lazy driving, just my opinion
I, like most British, learnt to drive in a stick shift, many many years ago, because you'll find the vast majority of cars in Britain ARE stick, I suppose its just natural to us and we know how to get the best out of one, Ive certainly never thought it makes me any more "manly"!! its just a way of changing gear after all..
as I said, no offence intended, just trying to be a little lighthearted, thats all.

aklim

No! No offense taken at all. However, if you hang around the kids here, they will tell you "A real sports car must be stick shift.". We have the "Monkey see, Monkey do" with no real knowledge of the "Why" behind it. There are those who will openly tell you that a stick shift is a "Man's car", etc, etc. I don't know what the english equivalent of that is but I'm sure that across the pond you have your own version of that for all kinds of things.

So why are most British cars stick? I think they are better if they are low performance where the percentage of power the trans sucks up is greater if auto but not more beyond that.

ricasso

You know what, I honestly dont know, I suppose we have a history of smaller capacity engines in general, or maybe its because our road system historically has tended to be more narrow and twisty, therefore the need to keep the 'box "cookin' " things like cruise control are a total waste of time here!

Larry/car

There must be something that is keeping the price that low. That car should sell for 14,000 or 15,000 dollars. Check www.usedcorvettesforsale.com that will give you an idea where the prices on various years are.

Netfly

As an owner of an 89 Z51 since new, I'm a bit biased toward them. The 6-spd was a big advance over the 88's 4+3 and the FX3 adjustable suspension is a blast. I found the 89 adjustable sports seats nicer than the 90-91. The 90-91 dash was hard to see in bright sunlight causing many complaints from owners at the time. It was revised in 92. The later steering wheel I never liked, but you do get an air bag and data recorder (is that a plus?). As for the 89's tach, I never found it to be problem. The analog bars are easy enough to follow once you get the hang of it. Then there is the wheel style, the locking caps on the 89 I think are a cut above the plane nut look. To each his own. I'm sure you'll enjoy whichever you pick.

JrRifleCoach