Motor7 wrote:
Jall, I agree with what you are saying on overall condition. But be honest, would you expect a $4K difference in NADA value from identical A's that are 18 and 20 year old? That is a huge spread and it has a impact on loan value. Most banks go off this number(Low Retail) when loaning money on a RV...at least my credit union does. I can't help but think the NADA is skewed some on those numbers.
So, for me, yes, the condition would have to be exceptional(which I'm hoping for) for me to pay more for the '94 over the 96.
If you believe the value difference between a 94 and a 96 is really based on something printed in a book rather than purely based on condition, I suggest you spend a lot more time learning about the hobby before you buy anything.
The NADA guide is printed by dealers for dealer purposes. It is based on formula rather than sales reality. It is designed to give structure to lenders to give them a guideine to lend on a product they have not a clue about.
In the time period you are looking at, less than 40,000 Class A's were produced yearly industry wide and spread among dozens of manufacturers and models. Attempting to track value 20 years later is an insurmountable task. There can be entire years pass without a sale of one particular model and even then trying to make a value judgement with out ever seeing the vehicle makes it impossible.
Any experienced RV owner would advise you to buy the best condition unit available when spending sub-twenty-thousand dollars. In the best case scenario, experience tells you that spending several thousand dollars chasing problems will certainly happen in the first year of ownership.
At that price point, throw the book away and invest heavily in expert opinions as to condition of specific units!
