C4 or C5: My experience with a C4 (LONG)
Phil Ressler
C4 or C5 Corvette, buy either first-time buyers or people who have been out
of a Corvette for many years and are looking to re-enter the fold. Since I
processed the same dilemma in 1998 and have since lived with a 96 LT4
convertible for over 3 years, I thought I would post my assessment. This is
long so if you aren't interested, pass.
I intended to buy a C5 in 1998, but was deterred by the shortage of 6 speed
cars and the attendant dealer mark-ups that plagued the C5 buying experience
during the tech bubble, especially here in California. Seeing the waiting
lists for 6 speeds and the mark-ups, which I won't pay on principle, I began
thinking about a late-model C4 as a way of determining whether I would enjoy
a Corvette enough to eventually pay $50,000 for one, so I went shopping. I
looked at '92-'96 cars, really focusing on '94+ cars. Remembering that the
LT4 was '96 only, and knowing that the C4 build quality and design execution
improved throughout the model's life-span, I further narrowed my search to
an LT4 after driving a couple of '94 and '95 ZR-1s and LT-1s'
I decided against the ZR-1 because I like convertibles and I discovered that
the coupe C4 without the targa roof panel in place was in fact an even less
stiff chassis than the convertibles, owing to the absence of the X-brace in
the coupe. I also planned to put a lot of miles on the car, mostly freeway,
and wasn't sure I wanted the maintenance liability of the ZR-1 motor, but I
did want more usable power than an LT-1 if possible. So I narrowed my
search to a very specific car: 1996 LT4 convertible with red leather
interior. A Grand Sport or Collector's Editions would be fine with me. For
me a Corvette must have red leather, and doing some further research I found
that I LT4 convertibles with red leather interiors were not common. Only a
few hundred cars were made in that combination.
Meanwhile, I shopped for C5s, just in case I could find a car available
without a mark-up. Well, first problem was I couldn't get anyone to let me
drive a new car. I did find a dealer who had a '97 traded in and I got to
drive that, a coupe of course. There was no question the C5 was the better,
more modern car in every way possible. First and foremost, the C5 platform
structure is dramatically stiffer torsionally and in bending resistance. It
took Chevy 40 years to figure out how to manufacture a rigid chassis for a
glass/resin/composite bodied car, but they finally delivered. The cabin is
roomy, the plastics and leather communicate more quality than in past GM
efforts, ergonomics are modern, and entry/exit are civil and easy for men
and women alike. The sight lines are very good. Overall, the entire
experience of just sitting in -- and later driving -- the car made a
convincing case for biting the bullet on a C5. Had I done that, I am sure I
would not have regretted the purchase in any way.
But I could not find the car I wanted without a mark-up in coastal
California, plus would have had to wait interminably if I had been willing
to pay for the mark-up, so I intensified my search for an LT4. A week
before I would have had to pay my annual registration on a Lincoln Mark VIII
LSC that I wanted to sell, I found 4 cars on the Web: 2- 20,000 milers at
Pro-Team in Ohio (too far and too much money), 1 - 28,000 miler in Dallas
(right price, not easy to get to) and 1 - 40,000 miler in Scottsdale
Arizona, a 750 mile drive from where I was living in the Bay area at the
time. After some email wrangling, I reached a tentative deal on the Arizona
car -- an LT4 Collector convertible -- and drove down to see, drive and
decide.
With 40,000 miles, the car was at the upper limit of my idea of "used
Corvette". It was borderline. The previous owner seemed to not have ever
cleaned the interior, though there were no tears, carpet wear or conspicuous
abrasions. Just lots of grease and hell marks on the red carpet, dirty
seats, etc. It was a desert car that was driven and probably not garaged
much. The paint could have used a little work, but was fundamentally sound
and the clear-coat had plenty of gloss. I drive the car and it seemed
solid, with nothing untoward coming from the drive-train. I knew about the
intake gasket oil leak, which this car required a repair for. It would need
tires soon, and since I don't like black tops on anything but black cars, I
figured on changing the top. I accepted the need to detail and clean up the
interior, but figured I could do that. Nearly walking a way from the car,
something pulled me back to it and I bought it for $28,700 and drove it back
to San Jose.
First, let me say that "Armor-All All Purpose Auto Cleaner" is a miracle
compound for cleaning up a neglected interior. I saw it in a highway fuel
plaza off I-5 and grabbed a couple of bottles on impulse, never having used
it. My red interior was really dirty, but when I got home and vacuumed it
out, I then went to work on every surface, including the red seat belts,
which were gray with grime. AAAPAC took out every heel mark, every grease
spot, every oil stain, all evidence of air pollution grime and general
seediness that creeps into desert convertibles. In 90 minutes, I have a
gleaming, brilliant red interior with deep black accents that looked almost
brochure-new! Ah, I began having confidence in my decision. Next day, I
went to an upholstery shop and arranged to have a blue top put on the car,
and to have the intake manifold gasket replaced. Everything else checked
out fine. The car tracked straight, stopped straight, ran smoothly. A
month later, I put it right in its groove by replacing the stock Goodyear
GSCs with Firestone SZ-50s which I had been running on my SVT Cobra as well.
Here's what I observed about the C4 compared to the C5 (where appropriate):
1/ Design, space utilization & architecture: The C4 is one of the few car
designs from the 1980s that continues to wear well, especially with its
1990s refinements. It has a clean, lean shape that is low and spare,
without obvious subservience to aerodynamics. This is especially true of
the convertibles, which has lines I prefer to the C4 coupe. There are two
design features I LOVE about the C4 -- the clamshell hood and the top
center-mounted fuel point. In the 1970s and early 80s, I drove Triumph
Spitfires with the same arrangement and liked the superb access to the
motor, accessories, systems and front suspension that a clamshell affords,
and it is no less an asset on the C4. Ditto for the center-mounted fuel
point (though I wish the Vette had that cool chrome flip top that my
Spitfires had). As for packaging, I had been warned about the narrow
footwells caused by the big ZF 6 speed being shoved well into the cabin, the
small stowage space under the tonneau and the high sills impeding entry and
exit. Truth is, these have not been problems for me. I am 6'3" tall, but
thin at only 170 pounds. Size 13D shoes find enough space in the footwells
without getting tangled up. I like to have my eyes as high in the car as
possible, so the seat is not as low as it could go. A person with a longer
torso has enough seat adjustment latitude to fit fine, but legroom will be
compromised for anyone with a longer inseam than mine at 35". My wife is
only 5'4" and petite, so she has plenty of room to be comfortable. The
stowage space has been adequate for us. Neither of us golfs, so no clubs to
carry. But on regular weekend trips, we can take 2 carry-on-sized soft
bags, 2 notebook computers and one large tote bag, which all fits back there
with the top up. Top down, we would have to carry 60% of that, say 2 soft
bags and a small tote. I bought the car thinking I would have to add a
rear-deck rack, but that has not proven necessary. We travel light and
don't miss having a trunk, though I am sure we could fill it in a C5. The
C5 by contrast, has the wheels pushed out to the corners, a rear transaxle
to reduce intrusion of the mechanicals into the cabin, a real trunk and a
modern, aerodynamics-driven aesthetic. It looks liquid, marine, squashed
and stealthy, even sinister in black -- a real Sting Ray heritage in modern
melted form. The high rump offends some, but looks far less jarring today,
5 years after introduction. Both cars retain flip-up headlights and in this
respect, the C4 has the superior design. I think it is way past time to
move on and abandon this feature, but the Mid-Years and C4s had reasonably
elegant implementations of this design idea. The C5 headlight design is by
contrast ham-handed. The body contours of the front surfaces force the
deployed headlights to push an irregular line high in your line of sight,
standing tall like air brakes clawing for grip in the wind. They look dorky
flipped up at night and ruin the integrity of the C5 design at night. If I
buy a C5, first thing I will do is to install one of the aftermarket
fixed-beam kits that remove this ancient embarrassment to nocturnal driving.
However, the fit, finish and paint quality on C5s are uniformly superior by
an order of magnitude over even the best, last C4s. No question which is
the better car in manufacturing and design terms -- the C5, though you may,
like me, appreciate the leaner, cleaner proportions and lines of the C4.
2/ Motor/Drivetrain. The LS1 feels completely modern in an American way.
It is torquey but shows good top-end range. It thrums like a precision
instrument still capable of impressing you as a snarling beast when you want
it to, but unlikely to embarrass you in civilized circles. The LT4 is a
wonderful hybrid, under-rated by the factory and in practice basically the
equal of an LS1 in output. Some people say it dynos out to have a little
more. It's high-flow heads, roller-rockers and cam give it a modern
top-end, but it reaches peak torque almost 1000 rpms lower than the LS1. It
has more than a hint of the violence we used to enjoy in old muscle-cars yet
delivers lots of creamy power through the middle and into the top of its
power-band. It can pour on torque reasonably low, yet keep breathing freely
past 6000 rpm in stock form. The LT1 has the same feeling, just a little
less of it. This gives the late C4 a lot of personality that has been
somewhat refined out of the C5, in order to make the car more attractive to
an international audience buying international cars. Both cars can shed
their rear tires, no question. The LT4 just feels more violent doing it.
The late C4's ZF 6 speed transmission feels absolutely bulletproof. The C5
transaxle doesn't in any way feel fragile, but its operation does feel more
remote from the driver, in my opinion.
3/ Handling. I don't like the run-flat tires I've driven on, including the
C5's, so that reason alone is some reason for a Z06 or an LT4. Design work
on the C4 was done around 1980, before intensive use of CAD/CAM and when
horsepower was down worldwide. So the design objectives for the car were
primarily handling-related, particularly with respect to the desire to
out-corner a Ferrari. The C4 engineers succeeded in that design goal,
largely building the car around the tires and creating what even today is a
tenacious animal on a track or in the twisties. The C5 retains the
composite monospring rear, moves to coils in front and benefits from its far
stiffer chassis allowing the more supple suspension to work properly, and it
has the advantage of modern digital aids like auto-handling. But to me, the
C4 feels grippier, and I feel more directly connected to the tire/road
interface. I get more information through my heels, ass and palms about
what the car is doing, than in the C5. Maybe it's just me, but that's what
I sense. The C5 accommodates a much broader spectrum of drivers in every
way, and you need not be as competent to drive it aggressively as the C4.
But the traditional directness that comes with a sports car is more in
evidence in the C4 chassis, though I surmise that the insulating factors in
the C5 are not a property of the Z06, which all sources say feels almost
telepathically direct in its feedback. I know this: even with the
compromise of my convertible's elastic structure, my '96 has frightening
levels of grip that I might have more courage to exceed if it were a coupe,
but not in a ragtop. So, C5 is more controlled, refined and modern in its
handling, but the C4 feels more direct in its feedback and more tenacious
with the Firestone SZ50EP rubber I run now. Let's assume the Z06 blends
both personalities and emerges better than either, but it cannot be had as a
drop-top.
4/ Reliability/Maintenance. There is no high-performance sports car on this
planet that is as affordably maintainable as a Corvette. The C4 had a 13
year production run, so by '94 or so, pretty much all the bugs were worked
out, mitigated or documented so you could keep them at bay. I got my C4
with 40,000 miles on the odometer, and evidencing indifferent service
without outright neglect. The oil was clean, no blue smoke, no black smoke,
no coolant leaks, no Opti-Spark problems. Just a drip-drip-drip of oil from
the intake leak. In the past 3 years, I have put 55,000 miles on the car,
including fifty (50) 800-mile-round-trip high-speed night treks between San
Jose and LA or Orange County. I know every inch of I-5/405 from route 152
to Irvine, and Route 101 from San Jose to I-405. To those freeway drives,
add 15,000 miles or so of city, country and suburban traffic. I fixed the
intake oil leak at 40,000 miles and put new Firestones on at 42,000. I
changed the oil, always Mobil 1, every 5,000 miles, and changed coolant
every year. At 77,000 miles, my rear tires had to be replaced. The front
tires showed even wear with 70% of the tread-life left! Since the new EP
compound was introduced by Firestone, I put four new SZ50EP tires on the car
and put the Corvette's front tires on the rear of my SVT Cobra (same size),
At 82,000 miles, seeping coolant traced to a leaking water pump. So the
water pump was replaced, along with the Opti-Spark distributor as a
precaution, since coolant had been raining down on it for some time (no
problems to that point however). At the same time, it was discovered that
the intake oil leak was reappearing. I suspect a less-than perfect job the
first time, but I had it fixed again with no problems since. I expected the
brakes to crap out eons ago, but at 95,000 miles, the front pads are
original. 3 weeks ago a wear indicator on the rear right pads began
chirping, so new pads go in all around within days. I replaced the Bilstein
shocks on all four corners at 85,000 miles and at that time some front end
shimmy was traced to cracked bushings in the front upper control arms. Some
of my driving had been on some pretty rough sections of I-5. A
suspicious-looking flaw-possible-crack in one of the aluminum control arms
led to a decision to replace the arms and bushings together. Now at 95,000
miles, I think I will need an A/C charge before summer hits. And maybe the
steering is beginning to feel a little less precise.
I went one 18 month period spending nothing on maintenance except for oil
changes, all of 1999 and into the summer of 2000. At 95,000 miles, the car
passes California smog checks with a string of zeros. The motor uses NO oil
between changes. I have the stock thermostat so it runs as hot as late LTs
do but has never overheated. It has never failed to start. It has never
left me stranded. I have driven this car rain or shine, all seasons,
including having been caught in a few snowstorms going over the Grapevine
(for those of you that know about that stretch of I-5 over the Tehachapis).
It is garaged only half the time. No, California climate doesn't beat up on
a car like the Northeast or upper Mid-West does, but intense sun and a short
intense rainy season take some toll. All told, I am more than happy with
the minor repair costs associated with what is basically a 350 hp drivable
chassis that can punch through the air at 170 mph, set my hair on fire in a
sweeping turn, and smoke my tires into atmosphere just driving with my toes.
5/ Interior. There is a world of difference in the interiors of the C4 and
C5. The C5 is a modern paradigm of driver ergonomics and passenger comfort
in a sports car. The plastics are more than acceptable compared to other GM
cars and not substantially deficient compared to the car's competition.
Leather is fine. Not up to Jag standards, but 911 and Boxster S leather
ain't all that impressive these days either. The dash is too
monochromatically black, but is business-like and controls and gauges are
contemporary in feel and function. It's looks and feels like a serious car
from the inside vantage point, even if it is still identifiable as The
General's favored son. I like the early 1990s redesign of the C4 interior,
but materially and in execution, it screams GM. Mind you, even after 95,000
miles, everything in my car still works fine. No buttons or controls are
missing, everything functions. I don't even mind the LCD digital speedo and
multi-function display. The gauges are counter-intuitive in their
readings-at-a-glance, but you quickly get used to it. I love the meaty
steering wheel. But the stalks feel like I am snapping the stem off a wine
glass when I use them. The plastics are satin-finish but hard. The
expansive dash pad has a little too much gloss. And given the flex in the
car, all those little pieces screwed together squeak and groan when the
temperature suddenly changes. However, the shifter feels solid, even if the
throws are a little long. Ok for me, though since I have big hands and long
arms. I put a MOMO leather knob on it with finger detents, which totally
changed and improved the sensory experience of shifting gears. The C5 has
inviting chairs that look German and are pretty comfortable. By contrast,
the C4 sport seats look thin and cheap -- but surprise, they are for me very
comfortable. The thin seat back molds around my back and shoulders and the
thin seat cushion sits on strong elastic webbing. The cheap and nasty
leather has a fairly hard finish that seems to wear quite well, and the
grain is coarse, almost pebbly, so you don't slide in a turn. I can drive
my Corvette for hours, not having to get out until the 20 gallon tank is
drained. I can see that the late C4 sport seats are thin and light to save
weight while offering good support. At least that's true for a stringbean
like me. As for wear, my leather shows no signs of distress at the seams or
on any surfaces. There is a little abrasion discoloration on a small patch
of the driver's side bolster, but it is not material to the integrity of the
seat cover. Except for that little quarter-sized patch, the seats remain
brilliant red and easy to clean, even though they will never have the
showroom appeal of the C5 seats. As for room, the C5 wins hands down.
Deeper, wider footwells. Low door sills like a regular car.
Easy-to-read-and-reach buttons and controls. Better interior storage. But
something is lost in civilizing the C5. I have come to like the
closer-fitting, intimate cockpit of my C4. I feel more connected to the car
and enveloped by it. More a part of the mechanics and closer (even though I
am not) to my passenger (my wife) when that matters to me. Also, I like the
way the side windows slant back at the top, just where my eye can rotate for
a few more degrees of rearward view. The blind spot is made smaller with
that touch, even though it makes the car look dorkier with the top down and
windows up than the C5 (so I don't do it).
6/ Structure. The C5 is a paragon of modern structural rigidity in an
automobile, with even the convertible having a higher resonant frequency
than many sedans. The C4, on the other hand barely reasonably rigid as a
coupe and is positively alarmingly old-school as a convertible. Fact is,
the C4 was designed at a time when a convertible option was not foreseen, so
the car's structure was never intended to be produced sans top. The
convertible C4 is deeply compromised as a sheer performance car compared to
modern counterparts. If you've never owned a Corvette before, your first
drive in a C4 convertible can be quite disconcerting. On smooth roads, the
car feels a little flexy, but not in any way frightful. It feels like an
old-time convertible, with cowl-shake, rear quivers and tell-tale squeaks
and shivers that indicate the structure's parts are not all moving as a
unit. Then you hit a rough patch, some potholes say, or some sloppy
patchwork over older patches on a turn, or a nasty railroad crossing.
Suddenly, the car is clanking and squeaking all around you, crashing over
the lumps and basically feeling like the whole shebang is tied together with
surgical tubing instead of welds. On an energetic turn with some uneven
pavement under the wheels, the rear dances and skitters sideways. The big
clamshell hood quivers and dances on its hinges and rubber rests ahead of
you. The wheel vibrates in your hands. You are at first alarmed, until
memories of what convertibles felt like in 1965 seep into the forefront of
your mind and you begin to accept the looseness of the car and go with it.
Lack of torsional rigidity is the great liability of the C4 in any topless
form and if you are going to own one, you must resign yourself to its
quaking. On the other hand, at higher speeds, the car tends to skim over
the peaks of road flaws, rendering the shaking brief and the undulations
smaller.
There are 3 ways to mitigate this glaring deficiency in the C4. I have
tried none of them so far but am considering all. 1/ Install a coil-over
suspension. Several people testify to a properly calibrated coil-over
suspension sending less energy into the floppy structure than the stock
suspension, plus any crosstalk through the monospring is eliminated. This
seems reasonable, though I have not yet driven a coil-over modified C4. 2/
Doug Rippie sells a C4 convertible tubular brace that gets welded at 4
points into the frame, behind the seats and under the tonneau cover. Paying
careful attention to the car's behavior under flex, I can see this is a good
place to brace as a lot of shake emanates from the unreinforced area between
the shock mounts aft of the passenger/driver. 3/ It seems to me that some
clever and accomplished welder/fabricator could make a sitffer X-brace out
of round or box tubing, welded at the join. I don't know whether there is a
problem with a stiffer brace putting too much stress on the attachment
points in the perimeter frame, but I am going to investigate a solution.
Even boxing the corrugated factory brace would seem an improvement. All of
these are fairly affordable modifications. However, a C5 gives you a
properly rigid car from the get go, and that translates into sharp
improvements in handling, build quality, durability, aesthetic excellence,
NVH and the interior experience. If a German driving experience is vital to
you, stretch for a C5, used or new, no matter what your finances.
7/ SO, WHICH ONE? The LT4 C4 has more "personality" and character than a
non-Z06 C5, in my opinion, all its faults notwithstanding. Not everyone
likes "character" in their cars, because that usually is a product of it
being old and flawed. The C5 is a state-of-the-art device, the C4 is
advanced 1980 thinking and 1970 manufacturing pushed into the mid 1990s, one
improvement at a time. The C5 feels completely integrated, modern and
commanding. The late C4 feels intimate, powerful, nimble and American in a
throwback way. Modern enough to be taken seriously but raucous enough to
feel like a rough-and-ready time machine to a more carefree past. The C5 is
sleek and overtly sensual, whereas the C4 is lean and understated. The C5
is Euro-credible; the C4 is American techno-utilitarian. These are both
unmistakably Corvettes, but are two different experiences. If money
matters, a late C4 now gives you the full Corvette experience at amazingly
cheap prices in real money terms. The combination of the dramatic
improvements in the C5, the surfeit of lease-returns and the shaken economy
have plunged prices on C4s to used Mustang levels. And C5 purchases can be
liberally negotiated today. But I have grown to like and admire the special
characteristic of my LT4, to the point where I am seriously considering
throwing a few thousand dollars into renovations and leapfrogging the C5 to
buy a C6. The drive train feels bulletproof, making another 60K - 80K miles
feasible. Sure my LT4 won't project the same image of wealth and success,
but then there are far fewer of them than C5s. I am still on the fence
about this, but after 50,000 miles, I can say that there are days when miles
of rutted roads erode my affection for my C4; but there are more days when,
top-down in the Santa Monica mountains, on the Pacific coast or winding up
northward behind the coastal range, that my LT4 feels "loosely tight", flexy
but not rattly, and pouring on long pulls of creamy power while stuck to the
pavement like Wrigley's on a theater seat. Or rolling at speed at 2am down
a dark empty interstate, the ZF planted in 6th with the juggernaught drone
of inevitability resonating through my skeleton. It's then that it seems
wrong to orphan the car and I feel sure there's plenty of life left in it
for just a little more money expended.
Phil
Bruno
I have a question. You said, " First, let me say that "Armor-All All
Purpose Auto Cleaner" is a miracle compound for cleaning up a neglected
interior. " Is this product a silicon based product?
Please advise.
bk...@yahoo.com
"Phil Ressler" <phi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:onLa8.1364$YU2.122...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
Craig J.
Convertible/LT1. The cargo space is indeed limited but we are used to this
after having owned and flown a small 2+2 seating single engine Piper
airplane for a while. Taught us to travel light.
"Phil Ressler" <phi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:onLa8.1364$YU2.122...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
Phil Ressler
formulated like their "preservative" products. It is a cold-water-activated
detergent of some sort. You spray it on the surface to be cleaned and rub
the stain out with a damp-to-wet towel. It takes a little work, but this
cleaner removes dirt, oil and stains that nothing else I have tried could
handle. Works especially well on carpet of any kind. 409 now has a similar
carpet cleaner that seems to be nearly as good for multiple surfaces.
Phil
"Bruno" <Som...@MicroSoft.Com> wrote in message
news:VONa8.534$xs1.1...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Dad
--
Dad
98 C5 Black/Black/Auto
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd
"Craig J." <pilo...@sigecom.net> wrote in message
news:YxTa8.58$MF6....@newsfeed.slurp.net...
Craig J.
"Dad" <knoc...@bright.net> wrote in message
news:aaXa8.6433$w67.8...@cletus.bright.net...
BigBud6
2002 Magnetic Red Conv. with a tan top. The car must have been kept out
side because the top is dirty. Got any magic on what to use to make it look
like new again?
Pete
"Phil Ressler" <phi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:onLa8.1364$YU2.122...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
Phil Ressler
if you haven't done a thorough washing first -- rub the whole thing down.
My Corvette has a dark blue top, so I haven't had any problem with dirt.
But my SVT Cobra has a tan top and I have tried several top-specific
cleaners, but haven't found any of them to be exceptional. I use a
soft-bristle brush with plenty of car wash suds to clean the whole top and
go after lingering marks with the armor-all cleaner. After 6 years with 40%
garage time, it's in great shape and has only a couple of persistent
shadings that don't quite look like dirt.
The key with convertible tops is to clean them regularly fromt he time they
are new. They are a bitch to bring back from years of neglect. But try the
soft brush or nappy towels with car wash suds to start. Rinse liberally.
Phil
"BigBud6" <BigBud...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S1Ab8.25841$td.70...@news2.nash1.tn.home.com...
PawlRevere2
Several people recommend Bon Ami cleanser. I have some but have not used it
yet. Somewhat concerned if it will strip wax.
The top on my vert is a very clean white. After 3 years it still looks brand
new.
C4.Man 1994 Coupe
So if I have a very nice 94 C4 Coupe, I'm hearing that rather spend a
lot of money on it to customize it, soup up the engine and so forth,
It may be a better idea to wait till the C6 comes out then get a good
used C5. But what will that do to the selling price of my 94 C4. Right
now it Blue Books somewhere around $15K or $16K. Hell I still owe $17K
on it and three more years of payments. Yes I know I'm slightly upside
down on my payments, but a year ago when I first bought the car, I was
not, according to blue book values during the time. The value has
really come down in the past year. Almost $5K in one year. I guess it
may be a while before I can do any swapping. I guess be happy with my
C4 and enjoy it. Make my mods and have fun with it. Any input
people... What would you do???