Why they're called 'salesmen' and not 'product specialists'

[plev72]

Sent an e-mail to one of those car finder things stating that I was looking for a '98-'00 Ford Contour SVT 5-Speed. I received responses from 5 or 6 dealerships, several saying that they would look, and a couple saying that they had other things to sell me. Obviously as my description of the car I was looking for was so general I didn't have anything specific in mind... Anywho, to the two dealers that wrote me back offering me other things, I sent e-mails requesting that they remove me from their e-mail lists. This is the response I got from one particularly enlightened salesman (whose manager I'm thinking about calling...)

-------------------

Hi Paul,
Thanks for your reply. I offered those choices to you so that when you go to trade it in you will be better off financially, as Ford no longer makes the Contour due to the fact that Ford upgraded. They built a better product with the Taurus and that took the place of the Contour. If I get a Contour in, I will let you know.

Jeremy Howden
Internet Manager
Desert Toyota
866.390.3821

------------------

I r smurt and I doesn't knows caaas!

[Andy 94SC]

You'll probably do no better with his manager. In my experience the Managers are the ones egging the sales people on with their foolish antics.

I just recently bought a truck, I went to several dealerships shopping. I've got two weeks worth of car salesmen stories from that experience. What happened at a GMC dealer was pretty similar to what you are facing - essentially if they don't have what you want they will try anything to sell you what they have.

I told them I wanted a manual transmission, man, did that get some strange looks. They had none on the lot, and the salesman wasn't sure how to search for one on the computer, so he went to get his manager. As they were walking back towards me I heard the manager whisoer to the salesman "Don't let this guy out of here without a new truck." Then they spent 20 minutes explaining to me over and over that the "powerpack" discount of $1000 effectively paid for the $1000 option of the atomatic trans. so I was getting the Automatic for free..... and I spent those 20 minutes explaining that I didn't care if it was free, I didn't want an Automatic.

I finally just walked out, but not before they shoved a complimentary shoe polisher at me.... :rolleyes:

[Scott Long]

What a nimrod, ford offered the Taurus and the Contour the same years, its not an upgrade. Plus not many people are "enthusiasts" they see a car as transportation. Hard to explain why you want an SVT or why you drive a Thunderbird SC. To most, its a 10+ year old ford car with out dated looks. Makes me sad, people don't enjoy cars the same now the way they did in the 60's-80's. Now its all about good on gas, small size, low noise, couldn't break the tires loose if it wanted too. I saw bring back muscular cars, and lower gas prices. Guess I sound old huh? I'm only 21.

[XR7 Dave]

Now its all about good on gas, small size, low noise, couldn't break the tires loose if it wanted too. I saw bring back muscular cars, and lower gas prices. Guess I sound old huh? I'm only 21.
And it shows. :rolleyes: Having not lived through those years, I would have to say that your perspective is very romantic but hardly accurate.
Makes me sad, people don't enjoy cars the same now the way they did in the 60's-80's.
In 1980 Car and Driver listed the Citation X/11 as the "performance car of the future." They weren't joking. In 1981 they also took a Mercury Capri (remember those - you know rear wheel drive, V8 power?) and after a whole bunch of warming over (headers, exhaust, intake, carb, cam, etc) got it to run a blistering 16.2. Let's see, 1978 Car and Driver does a comparison of the fastest cars in America. How did a p/u truck and a Ford LTD make it onto the list but a Mustang did not? None of the cars could manage a 13.99, and the truck was the quickest in the 1/4.

No, I think you are mistaken. Try burning rubber in a 1974 Ford (take your pick, none of them would do it). Now try it in a 2004 Taurus. Hmmmmm. Sad thing is the Taurus probably has wider tires than the 74 LTD did.

Wanna talk about gas prices? Try working for 1970 wages for awhile and see how much gas you can afford in a 1969 GTO with 4.11 gears and no overdrive. Yep, them were the days all right. Or how about tyring to deal with ignition points that keep bouncing at 5800rpm. One of the biggest problems with high rpms at the time were ignition systems that couldn't fire a .030" gap over 5000rpm.

Funny thing is just about the only performance car made during the 70's is largely forgotten. Anyone know what it was?

[1FASTSC]

Funny thing is just about the only performance car made during the 70's is largely forgotten. Anyone know what it was?


My guess goes to: Corvette.

[Andy 94SC]

My guess goes to: Corvette.

Hmm. I'd guess A Super Duty trans AM for a domestic...

Or a Pantera for a semi-domestic.

[FearThis SC]

PACER or GREMLIN would be my guess~ :D

[David Neibert]

I'm pretty sure your talking about the AMC Javelin SST & AMX and not the honeycomb wheeled Trans Am that was in Smokey and the Bandit.

David

[Andy 94SC]

It's tough to imagine what Dave has in mind. Technically there were all kinds of kick *** cars made in the '70s if you ask me. The fun didn't really end until the 1974 model year, so I was trying to think of something made after 1973.

And no I wasn't thinking Smokey and the bandit style TA. I was thinking the 455SD.

[92TBurnSC]

The Bricklin SV1? Those were pretty sweet. Started with an AMC 360 but then switched to the 351W.

[XR7 Dave]

Andy is right. Chevy pretty much ditched high performance after 1970. There were a couple of holdover low compression motors (LT1 and the 454 Vette) in 1971 but by 1972 Chevy was out. Ford held on to high compression in 71 but by 72 the only performance Ford left was the low compression 351CJ in the Mach 1.

By 1973 only Pontiac was still offering a true high performance package in the 455SD. Those cars ran 13.5's @ 105 as late as 1974. After that Pontiac kept the true Pontiac 400 and 4spd available through 1978. A 400 4spd car was good for mid 14's @ 100 which was still faster than the Vette. For those who may doubt, I had my arse handed to me by one such 1978 Gold Edition TA when I had my 1970 429CJ Torino. They were no slouch.

Unless I am mistaken, the first Smokey and the Bandit TA was one of those 400 4spd cars whereas the later ones were all the 403 auto versions that performed - well - a lot like a supercoupe..... :p

Other than the brief but notable appearance of the Lil Red Express in 78-79, that was the only car in the mid 70's capable of a 14 second anything quarter mile.

[Scott Long]

I know all about the T/A. My mom had a 74 SD455 until I was born and my dad made her sell it for a honda accord wagon. THANKS DAD!

I meant that even in the 80's you could still find, buy, and be enthusiastic about 60's and early 70's muscle. My personal favorite car would be a 69 Dodge Charger R/T 426 hemi 4-speed. But try to find one, and then try to afford it. My uncle has a 69 Charger S/E w/ a 383/727 and its a nice muscle car, moves pretty damn good for the smaller big block. Would like to track it but its a garage queen. Haven't ridden in it since I was about 16.

I know in about 72 most of the true muscle cars were gutless and were just there for namesake of a model. Thank the insurance companies and the federal government for neutering muscle cars. Now even a stock Mustang GT lays down decent numbers from a performance perspective, but there's so much rice around now and bland looking 4-door sedans that it seems to me people don't enjoy cars anymore. They see them as transportation from point a to point b. I work at Auto Zone and 99% of the people I deal with don't feel embarassed to tell me that they drive a hyundai, toyota, honda, mitsubishi, etc.... I personally can't see driving anything other than an SC or a big v8 powered rear wheel drive muscle car, but I would make a few exceptions. However, every once and a while you get some gear head who will actually come in and talk to you about REAL cars.

Just the other day I was getting out of my SC and this older guy pulls up in a 70's Ford F-250 4x4 (lift, rims, nice paint), he says "hey, thats a nice looking SC you got there" and we started talking about his friends old 35th that he used to drive. We turned the topic on to my big block project and he shows me the built 460 in his truck. Kinda made my day to get a compliment about my car, especially my silver one with the primer hood.

I know from the 80's "performance" cars were lucky to run low 16's except for the bad black buicks. In the late 80's early 90's we got the SC and at the time it was an *** KICKING car. You could break off a GT or Z28 in style. Now adays though performance cars are starting to actually perform, but the prices of gas are high, insurance is high, and car prices are high, so we lose again. I am glad to see ford not killing their pony car like chevy/pontiac did. Still 85% of the public would rather drive rice than muscle, so I guess between the SUV's, Mini-vans, sedans, and ricer cars, you have a small movement of performance car owners. Sad to drive through a neighborhood and the only V8 powered rear drive vehicle you can point out is a pickup. Ok rant off.

[Still Crusin]

I agree with you to a point. A lot has changed since those days. But if you look at the hp nr's since the SC was introduced, they are getting higher all the time. When the SC came out, it had respectable hp, but more cars are produced now with similar or better hp on n/a cars which is surprising considering gas prices.
Granted, most of the customers you see may not really care, but I believe enthusiasts are just as many as ever. It's just mostly ricer stuff now. A 60's or early 70's muscle car still turns heads and are classics. I think our cars will be looked at similarly in another 10 yrs, when they are more of a novelty.