- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

> I’ve been looking at the Dodge Stealth and was considering
> an ES or an RT.  I was considering and RT till I called
> the insurance company looking for the price difference in
> insurance:

> Here it is:

> 92 Stealth RT(NON-TURBO): $2500/yr
> 92 Stealth ES           : $1500/yr

> Called a few places and theses are about the mean prices.

> I’m wondering what are the differences in the ES and RT ???

> I assume that the RT is faster/nicer as it’s about 4K more,
> but what makes it $1000/yr more in insurance ????
> =================================================================
> Joe Pasko

> Systems Development / Unix Systems Administration  
> Supercomputer Computations Research Institute      pa…@scri.fsu.edu
> Phone (904) 644-0193                               FAX   (904) 644-0098

If the non-turbo is $2500/yr, then how much is the twin-turbo version?
Are you certain that they aren’t giving you the turbo price?  If given the
choice based on $4K purchasing price, I’d go with the RT just because it
looks so much cooler than the ES.  Same engine, wider tires, cooler
plastic.
Does anyone know whether the suspension or handling is any different?
————————————————————————-
 Luke Lin        | I didn’t do it      | Internet:lu…@ecs.comm.mot.com  
 ITT Tools, LMPS | Nobody saw me do it | Right Thing,Right Way
 Motorola        | You can’t prove     |                     G. Kawasaki
 Schaumburg, IL  | anything B. Simpson | Right Tool,Right Process L. Lin
————————————————————————-

: I’ve been looking at the Dodge Stealth and was considering
: an ES or an RT.  I was considering and RT till I called
: the insurance company looking for the price difference in
: insurance:

: Here it is:

: 92 Stealth RT(NON-TURBO): $2500/yr
: 92 Stealth ES           : $1500/yr

: Called a few places and theses are about the mean prices.

: I’m wondering what are the differences in the ES and RT ???

: I assume that the RT is faster/nicer as it’s about 4K more,
: but what makes it $1000/yr more in insurance ????

: Comments/suggestions welcome:

That’s amazing!  Both the ES and the R/T have the 222-hp DOHC engine.  
The R/T has perhaps wider tires, but that’s it!  I could understand the
base Stealth being lower, since it has the 164-hp SOHC engine.  Maybe the
insurance company made a mistake, and the lower rate is for the base model.

Actually, the Turbo is "limited production" AND my insurance specifically
notes turbo…

Craig

–
Craig Huffnagle
To fly is human, to hover is divine!        ’91 Dodge Stealth R/T Twin Turbo

chuff…@dmso.dtic.dla.mil               I don’t think it up, I just type it.

: I’ve been looking at the Dodge Stealth and was considering
: an ES or an RT.  I was considering and RT till I called
: the insurance company looking for the price difference in
: insurance:

: Here it is:

: 92 Stealth RT(NON-TURBO): $2500/yr
: 92 Stealth ES           : $1500/yr

: Called a few places and theses are about the mean prices.

: I’m wondering what are the differences in the ES and RT ???

: I assume that the RT is faster/nicer as it’s about 4K more,
: but what makes it $1000/yr more in insurance ????

: Comments/suggestions welcome:

: —
: =================================================================
: Joe Pasko

: Systems Development / Unix Systems Administration  
: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute      pa…@scri.fsu.edu
: Phone (904) 644-0193                               FAX   (904) 644-0098

Many of the RT’s are twin turbo charged so it being the same model means
not much to the insurance companies. Now you can see that now the only
monopoly left after the Phone company is gone is THE INSURANCE COMPANIES!
(excuse me for yelling.)

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

In article <328jto$…@mailer.fsu.edu> pa…@cac.psu.edu (Joe Pasko) writes:
>From: pa…@cac.psu.edu (Joe Pasko)
>Subject: *******Stealth ES vs RT************
>Date: 9 Aug 1994 19:03:20 GMT
>Keywords: stealth,es-rt
>I’ve been looking at the Dodge Stealth and was considering
>an ES or an RT.  I was considering and RT till I called
>the insurance company looking for the price difference in
>insurance:
>Here it is:
>92 Stealth RT(NON-TURBO): $2500/yr
>92 Stealth ES           : $1500/yr
>Called a few places and theses are about the mean prices.
>I’m wondering what are the differences in the ES and RT ???
>I assume that the RT is faster/nicer as it’s about 4K more,
>but what makes it $1000/yr more in insurance ????

It’s basically an excuse used by insurance companies to extort more money from
their mostly captive audience.  For example, our 1986 Mazda 626 hatchback has
a turbocharger which gives it a little more power at WOT; as if you briefly
had a six cylinder engine.  This mild turbo has cost us hundreds of rediculous
turbo "surcharges."  Yet, if it had a 3.0 liter six banger instead of a 2.2
liter turbocharged engine, I doubt there would have been as much extortion.

There are power/weight ratio tables that show that those vehicles with high
values are involved in more accidents.  The point of contention I have is
where the insurance companies draw the line.  I believe it one of the criteria
is how to make up for revenue lost the previous year on fixing grandma’s
Cadillac

Regards,
Eric Webb

>I’ve been looking at the Dodge Stealth and was considering
>an ES or an RT.  I was considering and RT till I called
>the insurance company looking for the price difference in
>insurance:
>Here it is:
>92 Stealth RT(NON-TURBO): $2500/yr
>92 Stealth ES           : $1500/yr
>Called a few places and theses are about the mean prices.
>I’m wondering what are the differences in the ES and RT ???
>I assume that the RT is faster/nicer as it’s about 4K more,
>but what makes it $1000/yr more in insurance ????

Actually, the RT may not be faster, but it’s probably nicer.  Both the
ES and RT have the same engine and tires, so acceleration should be
similar.  The RT comes with a spoiler in the back, which may actually
hurt acceleration.  It also comes with side-vents, a sportier
suspension, and it’s a little lower to the ground.

Other than that, the RT comes with a lot of things standard (like power
everything, ABS, etc) that are optional on the ES.  If you like the
features on the RT, and the insurance company is just going by whether
the sticker says ES or RT on it, then you should probably look for an
ES with an option package that adds almost all the RT features.  The
only thing you’ll miss out on are the RT’s cosmetic features (spoiler,
vents, etc).

–
Sam Horrocks
ICS Department, UC Irvine
Email: s…@ics.uci.edu

>I am intending to purchase a Honda Passport or Isuzu Rodeo Sports Utility Vehicle
>(SUV) in the near future. The Honda dealership let me take a Passport for the evening

Lemme guess, your other car is an Acura Vigor

Spiros

–
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos                    Kokomo, IN 46904   (317) 451-0815
Software Development Tools, AD/SI            c2…@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com
Delco Electronics/GM Hughes Electronics      "Reading, ‘Rithmetic, and Readnews"

It’s a nice truck/car.  My wife and I drove all the competitors
vehicles and this was the right size and feel for us (well her
actually) since some of the others were a bit more "trucklike".
Me – I drive a RX7 turbo and a BMW 325…and the Rodeo is too
slow, too soft and too much for the kind of spirited driving
I like.  However, that goes for any SUV.

We got a 93 – last year with vent windows, but no power mirrors.
Whatever.  The "rig" has had NO problems, although there’s a very
slight "squeek" in the steering column, which I suppose we’ll
have the dealer look at when they do the next service (which is
a recall for a camshaft seal).  Power is pretty good, it blows
along just fine, although I still dislike auto tranny’s which we
have in that vehicle.  Fuel economy is poor – 15-18mpg is all we
get, but then that’s the same as my RX7, so for the weight and lack
of aerodynamics it’s OK.  Off road we have barely done, like most
SUV’s, and we were very impressed by the traction and ability.  Far
more capability than we want to explore.

Nits – The clock is mounted below the radio.  Dumb!  The outside
mounted tire save interior room, but the hassle of opening the
rear window, swinging away the tire, and then lowering the tailgate
is a bit much – in my opinion.  I like the tire mounted under the
back area better.  

Final note – my wife LOVES this rig.  That’s really all that counts.

–
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
a…@qiclab.scn.rain.com                           Tigard, Oregon 97224
As I get older the days seem longer and the years seem shorter!

shel…@iastate.edu (Steve Sheldon) writes:

 I was just looking at Consumer Reports reliability charts…

 And the Isuzu Rodeo is 95% worse than average.

 I don’t know what that means, but it’s so low on the chart they had to
split the bar in two, and specifically say it was 95%…

 The only one that is worse is the Jeep Wrangler at 107% below average.

> According to this chart, relatively good SUV’s are:
> Toyota 4Runner, Nissan Pathfinder, Olds Bravada, Geo Tracker, Suzuki
>Sidekick(same as Geo).
> The Isuzu Trooper, Jeep Cherokee 4, Mazda Navajo, and Ford Explorer are
>not too far below average either 5-10%.
> Personally, I like the Nissan or the Olds, at least the ones I have

seen.

> You might want to look around before setting your sights on a Rodeo.

I understand that the Rodeo recieved a complete overhaul…New engine etc
in 92.
I believe that the older ones BEFORE 92 were trouble prone and may have
sqewed the chart.

Sean Alexander