I knew that it probably happened but it is sad to see it in print. The govenment released the trade in list for the cash for clunkers program.

Here is the link:

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/24/s...served-better/

(5,000+) Mercedes-Benz including (142) SL, (3) S600, a 1994 E500, a 1992 500E, 1995 C36 and 1999 C43

Its sad those people either A) Don't care or B) Don't understand what they actually have...

Ohh Emm Gee!!

I'd kill for a 36/43 forget about a 500 wtf!!

Yeh, frig. I could have used the engine/tranny, etc from the C36 to make a nice coupe. Damnit. DAMNIT.

Wow...Some people need to be slapped.

What if their mechanic had just told em "you need $8000 of work on your car in the near future."

Also sacrificed were E30 M3, 850CSi, M5

Even then... It's likely the car could have been sold for $4500. A running 500ein almost any condition would, and I'm sure an e30 M3 could have.

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false

This guy will probably get suckered into turning it in. Then again the dealership salesmen are the ones to blame. A-holes!

I told u. Hate that program. I tried to buy a 92 300te 4 matic but wouldnt let me cash for clunkers. Why is the 500e on the list its a sports car?

alot of the junkyards take the engines out if you guys look you might end up with a nice m119 for your 300E ,but its very very sad.

The engines have to be destroyed.

yup, sodium silicate

At our junk yard u can pull everything but u cant buy the car.

The white 300te? I was going to buy that too!

Look at the engines if you see one in a junkyard, they are painted blue and no major components can be sold.

mmm I did notice orange spray paint on engines. That sucks.You were at the junk yard in rocklin? it wasnt painted so y couldnt they sell it to me :-(

Prepare yourselves for a rant.

i hate this kind of stuff. That program was so ridiculous.

Sure, the "clunkers" pollute more that most new cars... But what about the pollution caused by consumption (i.e., manufacturing a new car) and pollution caused by disposing of the old car?

And while I'm still going, it really makes me mad when people like Oprah talk about being green. I don't care if you build a "green" house if that house is 30,000 sq ft. If you compare that to a luxury-made, non-green 1,500 sq ft house, I can promise you that the mansion has far worse of an environmental impact.

Or take the person who drives a Prius to and from work on a 150 mile round trip commute and compare that guy to somebody who drives a V12 5 miles round trip to work. People will look at the V12 owner like he's murdering the planet while they'll think the prius owner is a true humanitarian. What a load of crap.

People focus way to much on the cool new "green thing" and completely ignore consumption! The cash for clunkers is just another example!

/Rant.

It's definitely sad to see those 500's get wrecked. They were probably traded in for toyota camry's!!

well... the impact comes from getting the v12 guy who drives 150 miles round trip to switch to a prius. he has to drive that distance anyway, why not get him to use less gas and create less pollution? or the person building a 30,000 sq ft house. if it's green, it may still pollute more than a 1500 sq ft luxury house, but it will pollute a lot less than a 30,000 sq ft luxury house. someone who is building a house like that is not going to be happy with one a tenth of the size, so if they go green at least that's something, right?
I agree with the problem of 'consumption', but if people are too stupid to reduce it then they can consume the same amount of miles or square feet that they were going to anyway, but have a smaller impact.

and the clunkers program was for the economic impact first, not environmental, that was just a fortunate side effect and managed to kill two birds at once, sort of. the point was to rescue the us auto industry, and save hundreds of thousands of jobs in a supply chain that touches almost every state in the country. i think it did a good job of doing that, and i'm sure any us auto worker will agree. the people that benefited directly were the tax payers, since the savings went into their pockets, and the us workers who contribute to building and selling these cars. i know a lot of foreign cars were sold too, but the overall impact to the economy and the industry was extremely positive. this same program has been in place in europe, and in fact the uk just extended their program again.
just my $0.02

All fair points.

If people aren't going to lower their consumption, then sure. It's better to go with the more green alternative. But that doesn't really solve the problem: people consume too many resources, green or not.

The cash for clunkers definitely helped the economy temporarily... no doubt about that. Yeah, a lot of foreign cars were sold, but that doesn't bother me a ton. Maybe a lot of the profits generated went to Japanese corporations, but many of those manufacturers do have facilities in the US. So it still benefited the workforce. It also benefited the US dealerships- those profits stay here.

my coworker's brother works for an OEM parts supplier in TN. He got furloghed and was close to having his house foreclosed on. after the cash for clunkers, they brought his job back because of the increased demand, and he's still working... who knows if it will last forever, but the program definitely helped a lot of companies survive through the low point. people can debate about its effectiveness all day long, but i know one family that knows first hand what impact it had!

and again, i agree on over consumption. i don't care if you use CFL bulbs... turn the frikkin light off when you leave the room!