Cars in L.A as an insight into poverty/wealth of residents (Orange: for sale, to rent)

[coltoncity]

So where is there more hybrids? Cars for the environment?

[UKWildcat1981]

Originally Posted by jamills21

I honestly can't tell...There are poor people with Benz's and Rich people with Buckets. If you judge people about how they dress and what car they drive you should really think about how you view money.

True, lot of professional athletes are broke because they buy too many expensive cars and boats. Cars are a losing asset unlike real estate and higher end stocks like Apple that can make your a fortune, listen to my dude Charles Barkely on why professional athletes are all broke five years out of the NBA lol

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by True Freedom

yeah, BMW's, Mercedes, Lexus, etc are dime a dozen out here. I'm starting to see too many Maserati's and Bentleys these days, which kind of make them seem a little hackneyed. You have to get a real exotic to stand out (if you want to stand out) .. a Ferrari, Lambo, Maclaren, Bugatti. Of course, again, just one man's opinion.

I still drive my 20 year old beater truck.

Apparently a Bugatti costs 300k a year to own, crazy!
The cost to own a Bugatti Veyron - Fresno Car Buying | Examiner.com

[Monkeymike]

Originally Posted by svicious22

You must not have been in Chicago in a while-in Chicago PROPER in any neighborhood you'd actually want to live in 550-650K is condo territory or small, bling-free starter home, anything resembling a "mini-mansion" is going to be in the millions.

Arlington Heights, Palatine, etc. In Chicago I can live in a VERY nice condo for 550k. I just moved from there 18 months ago. I haven't completely lost touch. Plus I've been shopping for a house to have there when we go to visit family.

[Monkeymike]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

Another thing I've noticed is a number of high end performance cars with auto tranny, such as AMG Mercs. It seems a lot of people want the performance look from afar, but not the actual experience. Not surprising in this sort of city, actually.

Are you a car guy? I'm not being facetious but auto transmission cars are really competent these days. I've had a manual transmission BMW 550, an SMG transmission M5 and most recently a standard auto in my 535. My 535 is by far the favorite of the three and the transmission is lightning quick, blips the revs on downshifts, will let you bounce any gear off the rev limiter, etc. It's not an F1 transmission like the M5 had but you tell it to upshift and it does it right away. Tell it to downshift and it's more of the same: instantaneous.

10 years ago you could look at a performance car with an automatic transmission and question whether or not it was a true performance car. Those days are long gone though. The ZF transmissions BMW, Mercedes and Audi are putting in the cars now are serious business.

The case for the auto transmission is even stronger than it's ever been with many performance cars now having turbo engines. Manual transmission cars tend to bleed boost between shifts unless you're really beating the snot out of them.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by Monkeymike

Are you a car guy? I'm not being facetious but auto transmission cars are really competent these days. I've had a manual transmission BMW 550, an SMG transmission M5 and most recently a standard auto in my 535. My 535 is by far the favorite of the three and the transmission is lightning quick, blips the revs on downshifts, will let you bounce any gear off the rev limiter, etc. It's not an F1 transmission like the M5 had but you tell it to upshift and it does it right away. Tell it to downshift and it's more of the same: instantaneous.

10 years ago you could look at a performance car with an automatic transmission and question whether or not it was a true performance car. Those days are long gone though. The ZF transmissions BMW, Mercedes and Audi are putting in the cars now are serious business.

The case for the auto transmission is even stronger than it's ever been with many performance cars now having turbo engines. Manual transmission cars tend to bleed boost between shifts unless you're really beating the snot out of them.

I understand, but when you downshift to gain speed, and you catch the clutch's biting point just as you throttle past a 1,000 RPM difference, it's a little more satisfying to have done the perfect rev match yourself rather than just letting the computers do it. And just climbing up the gears, I like being able to do it as smoothly as a Caddie tranny. And I like doing the power blips slowing down as well -- there's just something particularly satisfying about stabbing that throttle pedal as I row into a lower gear.

Just as I like to steer the car myself, I also like working three pedals with two feet. It's just more fun that way.

Also, I can easily skip-shift with a manual, which makes good sense at times, especially with a turbo that cranks out a healthy amount of torque.

[Monkeymike]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

I understand, but when you downshift to gain speed, and you catch the clutch's biting point just as you throttle past a 1,000 RPM difference, it's a little more satisfying to have done the perfect rev match yourself rather than just letting the computers do it. And just climbing up the gears, I like being able to do it as smoothly as a Caddie tranny. And I like doing the power blips slowing down as well -- there's just something particularly satisfying about stabbing that throttle pedal as I row into a lower gear.

Just as I like to steer the car myself, I also like working three pedals with two feet. It's just more fun that way.

Also, I can easily skip-shift with a manual, which makes good sense at times, especially with a turbo that cranks out a healthy amount of torque.

I don't get the holier than thou attitude that seems to accompany manual transmission car ownership. I've owned to performance car companies, countless high performance cars, etc and I still catch crap from some people like I'm not a true enthusiast because my 470hp car has an automatic transmission. I miss my manual transmission maybe once a month and for a very short amount of time. It sucked to drive in traffic.

No doubt that it takes skill to hit a perfect downshift but there's also something to be said about it always being done for you and being right every time, especially when you already have amazing roads to test your other skills.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by Monkeymike

I don't get the holier than thou attitude that seems to accompany manual transmission car ownership.

Is that the way you perceive me?

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by BRinSM

I've always noticed that when I leave LA I see a lot less BMWs and Mercedes on the roads. They are relatively cheap to lease for their entry level models, so they aren't much of a status symbol these days. Also, I make enough to afford a considerably nicer car than I actually drive and work with many folks who are in a similar situation, so for me personally, I am very hesitant to judge someone's financial situation by what they drive.

Yes, I always notice this!

LA/OC have the highest proportion of high end cars I have ever seen anywhere on the planet. I have lived in very wealthy areas of New York and Connecticut, places that can easily match or surpass places like Bev Hills, CDM, and the like, and yet I have never seen the parade of fancy cars like in LA/OC.

In places like Greenwich, CT, or Scarsdale, NY, or the Hamptons, there are TONS of rich people driving around in old Volvos or Jeeps, yet they are among the .01%. Lots of rich consider high end cars, especially sports cars, to be kind of showy and vulgar displays of wealth. The whole thing is to always hide your wealth. And then, in Manhattan, the rich almost never drive. They either get driven, or they take the subway/bus!

When I lived in CDM, a BMW or Mercedes was a low end car, a Bentley/Maserati was a more average car, and there wouldn't be a day when I wouldn't see a number of Ferraris and other exotic cars. LA/OC is like another planet.

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by svicious22

You must not have been in Chicago in a while-in Chicago PROPER in any neighborhood you'd actually want to live in 550-650K is condo territory or small, bling-free starter home, anything resembling a "mini-mansion" is going to be in the millions.

Median home price in Chicago is like 200k, so no. Chicago real estate is pretty cheap. You can buy something nice, in a great neighborhood, for 400k.

And the other poster was wrong about LA, too. Most people living in Van Nuys and the like are not paying 550k for a home. That's ridiculous. LA actually has a pretty low median income, and most people are renters, not homeowners. And most of the homeowners bought long ago, so current valuations are irreverent (either they bought cheap long ago, or the price increase are meaningless, because they already own, so can buy and sell with their equity).

The average person looking for a 550k home is not going to buy in some semi-slum; LA is expensive but not that expensive. High values in places like Van Nuys are because these homes are used by investors as rental properties for immigrants.