That’s what the ad said for this 1995 Hyundai Accent (craigslist posting). I’m just thinking maybe they shouldn’t have included a picture. I just thought it was funny.
Thanks for the chuckle, cig.
Without seeing the ad, I can’t tell if it is or isn’t in great shape. All I can see from the picture is a CF hood, or a CF wannabe hood.
Now, that slice of rice tells me it was owned by a F’n’F type…which would make me wary, thinking it was beat on, but doesn’t necessarily mean anything by itself. Did you perhaps think the hood was there due to body damage? (Maybe a higher res picture would make that clear…looks like a “performance mod” from here though.)
The F & F type is kind of what I was thinking and maybe that black is a dozen rattle cans worth due to the blotchy appearance. Wreck or rattle can, “great shape” might be debateable.
I zoomed in on the photo. It ain’t CF. My wild guess is that the owner sprayed the hood and roof to try to mimic CF. He wasn’t successful. You can clearly see the striations along where the edges of the spray patterns overlap. Rattlecans have that tendency. Without knowing how to minimize it, and without further finishing processes, well, the care in the photo is the result.
I don’t see anything else glaringly wrong. My guess is that it was parked outside and the paint on the hood and roof was looking pretty bad. So he got out the can of barbecue paint and had at it. If all that was wrong was dull, worn paint I don’t think this is an improvement, but if the paint was bad enough for metal to start showing, this may have some use. Cuts down on glare off the hood.
The first thought that comes to my mind is…I wonder what that guy’s other car–which isn’t in great shape–looks like…
The car might be in “great shape” - mechanically speaking. I’m not really looking for one, and certainly wouldn’t be looking at a '95 Hyundai. I just scan craigslist once in a while to keep up with the “beat” of the local used-by-owner market. That pic with ad text just cracked me up, and I thought they should have chosen better. I could, of course, spend all say posting the odd and bizarre from the list - including the person who wants $4000 for a 1989 Camry.
These days the meaning of great shape or mint condition no longer have any connection with objective reality. While I still prefer dealing with a private sale I don’t care how nice it looks, if there aren’t verifiable service records I’m not interested.
“Cherry One Owner” “Real Cream Puff”
I see this all the time on craigslist. Cars described as “runs and drives great, everything works, just needs transmission.” or “Come and get this great deal today, cash only, I lost the keys and the title but other than that it’s a bargain.”
Or the '50s car I saw on Craigslist - “100% original”. Seller didn’t deduct for the 50% of the body that had rusted away!
Agree; car descriptions are meaningless. When I advertised our 1994 Nissna Sentra, I showed 3 photos and as accurate a descritption as possible. Like 137,000 miles, very good mechanical condition, and 4 winter tires with wheels. I had 10 phone calls the first day, but sold the car to the guy who was painting my house who’s son needed a reliable little car for college.
The 3 pictures did the real selling job.
I remember selling an 87 Buick LeSabre T-type in the mid nineties and I swear the first question asked by 90% of the callers was what colour was it? Followed by so, what can you tell me about it? Sheesh - no wonder so many people get taken…
When I was trying to sell my '81 Chevy Citation (dealerships refused to take it as a trade-in because the marque’s rep was already so bad after 5 years, and also because they apparently considered a manual trans car to be undesirable), my ad clearly stated the model year, the odometer mileage, the optional equipment, the color, and the fact that it had a 4-speed manual transmission.
Virtually every phone call went something like this:
Q: What year is the car?
A: It’s an '81
Q: What color is it?
A: It’s silver with a blue interior.
Q: Does the car have an automatic transmission?
A: No, it is a 4-speed manual.
Q: Oh, I really wanted an automatic.
A: No, sorry, it is a manual trans.
Q: How many miles on it?
Q: So, it doesn’t have an automatic transmission?
A: NO, it has a 4-speed manual transmission,
Q: I really need an automatic. Are you SURE that it doesn’t have an automatic transmission?
After a few months of this ongoing nonsense, I sold it to a co-worker who was glad to get it.
I recall that, back in the '60s/'70s, there was a mega-dealer in PA (Reedman Motors) that claimed every one of their cars to have leather upholstery. No, these were not Caddys, Lincolns, & Jags. These were garden-variety Fords, Chevys, Plymouths, Pontiacs, etc. on which leather was probably not even available as an option
So, while many folks probably couldn’t distinguish the then-common vinyl upholstery from leather anyway, this scamming dealership consciously misrepresented all of their cars as having leather interiors.
"great shape inside and out"
Those were the good old days when we were young.
There was a cute post…here…that someone spotlighted an ad for an old suburban or something like that. This ad was written in the manner of high-end restaraunts’ syrupy supurlative over dose descriptions of the mundane features of the vehicle.
it was indeed humerous…if I can find it I’ll link it.
You have more patience then I.
it was a Jeep cherokee, not a suburban
I had a coworker who was selling an older car, Great shape! What maintenance and things have you done, brakes and fluids etc., angry response “WE HAVEN"T HAD TO DO ANYTHING I TOLD YOU IT WAS IN GREAT SHAPE!”