<p>Has anyone out there done this - I’m thinking of taking the plunge and turning in my van with 140,000 miles on it (with a 2nd transmission in it) but just cringe at the thought of taking on a car payment again. However, it’ll be my luck that I wait because I’m afraid and as soon as there is no money in the program, my van will die. I’m thinking of going real cheap - like a sentra or focus - possibly get it for like $10,000.</p>
<p>How did your deal work out??</p>
<p>Did you check to make sure your van qualifies? My 1998 van with 146000 miles on it did not qualify because the gov’t website claims the mileage is too good LOL You have to go to their specific website to check the figures they are using…not your actual mileage. </p>
<p>We actually just got a Sentra and are pleased with what you get for a reasonable price, so even without the cash for clunkers you might decide it’s worth it!</p>
<p>I haven’t done it because my old clunker just misses the mileage cutoff 
. I would have otherwise. So annoying. Let us know how it works out if you do. A lot of dealers seem to be offering additional deals so you will probably never get a better deal! Let us know how it works out if you do it.</p>
<p>Yeah, our 1994 Caravan just misses. Really annoying. If I had some single digit SUV, I could trade it in for another single-digit-plus-two-mpg SUV, but I can’t trade my mildly low-mileage van for something with much better mileage.</p>
<p>kleibo - go shop and strike your best deal without discussing a trade in or cash for clunkers.
Otherwise you will probably get screwed. good luck.</p>
<p>I looked into it for my mini van - 6 years old and 140,000 miles on it, but it’s mpg is too high. <em>sigh</em>. and the air conditioner quit working. but it’s paid for.</p>
<p>here is the website:
[CARS.gov</a> - Car Allowance Rebate System - Home - Formerly Referred to as “Cash for Clunkers”](<a href=“http://www.cars.gov/]CARS.gov”>http://www.cars.gov/)</p>
<p>We had the same “problem” all of our clunkers get too good mileage! Two of our four cars are old and falling into disrepair and it’s very doubtful that they currently get the mileage it says they do. I really wish they had done this on a sliding scale and upped the miles per gallon that the new cars should have.</p>
<p>I agree. I think they should have made the MPG on the clunker flexible but made the mpg on the new car more stringent - like that it had to be 8-10 miles better than the old car. I would happily have gone for a new car with really good mileage.</p>
<p>kathiep - my AC is out as well - not fun on 100+ degree days. So we use my husbands diesel truck which has really bad mpg but working AC. That thing has 250,000 miles on it and still runs well (we used to travel with a camper a lot when the kids were young). It would qualify but he likes his truck. Plus I think it is actually worth more than the ‘cash’ despite its age and mileage.</p>
<p>I looked up the caravan - it looks like the 4 cyl ones do not qualify at 19 mpg but the 6 cyl ones do qualify at 18 mpg. Unless I’m doing something wrong. Mine is the 3.3L 6 cyl one.</p>
<p>when I ran my Caravan through here:
[CARS</a> - Car Allowance Rebate System](<a href=“http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/CarsSearchIntro.shtml]CARS”>http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/CarsSearchIntro.shtml)
it didn’t qualify it’s a 6 cyl.but it is not a grand caravan. I lose by 1 mpg. :(</p>
<p>My parents just traded in our 1994 Toyota Previa in–got the full $4500 rebate. They got a 2009 Honda CRV for under 20K. Our minivan just barely hit the 18mpg combined.</p>
<p>Justamom–same here.</p>
<p>I guess maybe it depends on the year. Mine is a 2002 and it seems to qualify.</p>
<p>2002 Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD </p>
<p>Fuel Type Gasoline or E85<br>
Engine Size 3.3 L<br>
Cylinders 6<br>
Transmission Automatic 4-spd<br>
Drive Front-Wheel Drive<br>
Options FLEX-FUEL, CLKUP<br>
Vehicle Category Category 1 Truck<br>
Combined MPG 18<br>
Qualifies for CARS? Yes. You may qualify for the CARS program.</p>
<p>well then, be that way ;). mine is a 2003. the kbb trade in is $1895 so I would have made out pretty well.</p>
<p>I read that some vehicles, the example was a Caravan, can qualify or not sometimes even with the same engine depending on the transmission the particular vehicle has in it - i.e. 4 sp auto vs 5 sp auto. </p>
<p>Kleibo - Assuming your vehicle qualifies, really check the deals at the dealers. Someone down the street just traded in their Excursion for a Ranger pickup where the dealer ‘matched’ the $4500 rebate so they effectively ended up with about $9K off of the sticker price. I’ve seen other dealers advertising about the same deal.</p>
<p>I have a 2000 Caravan 3.3L V-6. EPA says it gets 19 mpg and doesn’t qualify for the CARS rebate (though in fact I calculate it at more like 17). If I had the 3.8L V-6 it would be rated at 18 mpg and would qualify. Grrrr . . . I went with the 3.3L because I figured I didn’t need the extra horsepower and wanted the best gas mileage I could find in a vehicle with that much passenger and cargo capacity. If my math is right, that extra 1 mpg has saved me about $800 in gas costs over roughly 10 years of use, for which I’m left with a low-value trade-in (about $1200). So I come up about $2500 short against what I could have gotten with the CARS rebate. Oh, but the 3.8L cost a little more new, as I recall, so that narrows the gap even more. </p>
<p>But of course, no one could have anticipated the CARS rebate back in 2000. </p>
<p>There should be some good deals available on remaining 2009s with or without CARS, though. Inventories of popular models are running low (this includes both the Focus and the Sentra, I think), but dealers will be motivated to move the remaining excess inventory of less popular '09 models. Shop around.</p>
<p>it sucks, my 1991 Honda civic is too efficient (23 MPG). OTOH, my friend can trade in his Jimmy that is rated at 16 and get a car with 23 MPG rating and get 3500.</p>
<p>I think they should have done it COMPLETELY differently. If you increase your gas mileage by X MPG then you get X amount of $, no matter if it’s 16-23 or 23-30 mpg.</p>
<p>A 2003 vehicle can be classified as a “clunker”… Sad.</p>
<p>OP, take a look at this article where some successful clunker trade-iners explained their strategy (first agree on the price of the new car, then toss the clunker into the deal).</p>
<p>[what-i-got-with-cash-for-clunkers.html:</a> Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance](<a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/107474/what-i-got-with-cash-for-clunkers.html?mod=family-autos]what-i-got-with-cash-for-clunkers.html:”>http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/107474/what-i-got-with-cash-for-clunkers.html?mod=family-autos)</p>
<p>One of the guys mentioned in that article got a new Hyndai Elantra for his college kid for $10,500 after the rebates and incentives - sweet.</p>
<p>We traded in our 1990 grand voyager and got a 2009 RAV4 and the $4,500 credit. Of all voyagers/caravans for that year, the 3.3L models were the only ones that qualified. Our voyager lost it’s 4th gear, had to remove interior bulbs because they wouldn’t turn off and the radio worked only under the right conditions. We figured it would have cost us to dispose of it when (not if), it stopped working. So, we did well on the deal.</p>
<p>I saw an ad in our paper advertising Nissan Versa for less than $6000 after the clunker deal.</p>
<p>Our friends just did the clunker deal. They traded an ancient (more than 20 years old), falling apart BMW for a Hyundai Tucson. They were thrilled. That BMW could not have been worth more than $800.</p>
<p>suinphilly:
I agree that the entire program makes no sense from a logistical implementation perspective. Depending on what vehicle one has they can trade it in for one with an mpg rating only 2mpg better than the one they’re trading in and have the new vehicle get only 18mpg (15mpg in some cases) and get some free taxpayer cash. Meanwhile, another party wants to trade in their 23mpg vehicle for one that gets 40mpg but aren’t permitted the taxpayer cash. Obviously the latter would be ‘better for the environment’ in terms of fuel used than the former.</p>
<p>Not only that, but they the car I drive daily (a 1966 Mustang) isn’t permitted to be traded in on a Prius or something even though there’d obviously be a big improvement in mpg. The traded in vehicle has to be < 25 years old for some inexplicable reason. It’s moot I suppose because of course, I wouldn’t do the trade with this car.</p>
<p>They should have simplified it and either had no mpg requirement, which still provides the boost to vehicle sales for whatever that’s worth, or they should have just had a simple mpg improvement value regardless of the mpg rating or the age of the old car. But I don’t think the government generally understands the term ‘simplify’.</p>