Jump to content
  • When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

1976 BMW 2002 Tii in Pasadena, CA


Mark92131

Recommended Posts

Year:: 1976


Make:: BMW


Model:: 2002


Price:: 26500.00


Location: : Pasadena, CA

I saw this ad and thought I would pass it along.  A 1976 BMW 2002 in Inka over Black.  I feel like I have seen this car before, out of State plates, but may be having trouble getting those dual Webers through CA Smog.  Pricey, but nice.

 

NM/NA,

 

 

Mark92131

 

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5440822355.html

 

 

 

post-33686-0-77922600-1455129393_thumb.j

Edited by Mark92131

1970 BMW 1600 (Nevada)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seller told me the following. "The plates are old Its been in California for years and has passed smog and is current."    

 

There is no way that this car will pass CA smog in its present form. Once the smog tech pops the hood open for a visual inspection, test would be over as soon as the tech sees the dual Webers.  Seller should market this car out of state. This is by far the most expensive 76 2002 I've ever seen FS in CA.  I could see this asking price if it was a 75, then it would be smog exempt.  By law, the seller is responsible for the smog test before transfer of title if the car is sold in CA. I agree it's a very nice 02 but if you live in CA, you don't want to own a 76 2002 unless you enjoy pain every smog test.

 

G-Man

74 tii (many mods)
91 318i M42

07 4Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Interesting that I've never seen this car around town, since I live in Pasadena.........But smog is no worry, usually a smog tech is not familiar with a 76 2002, so passing is more about the jetting. Or maybe an alternative solution, or so I’ve been told.

 

Regardless $26.5K is a little steep

 

post-46690-0-38057400-1456463889_thumb.j

Edited by chargin

I don't take myself or opinions Seriously

My 4th 2002 and the first set of Square Tail-Lights

See the 4 versions of my 2002 project here: SoCal S2002 | Facebook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seller told me the following. "The plates are old Its been in California for years and has passed smog and is current."

Hmmmm, wonder why the tag is CT if it's been in CA for years. When it was on Ebay 2014 is was noted as being in CT.

post-32042-0-69567700-1456464640_thumb.j

Les

'74 '02 - Jade Touring (RHD)

'76 '02 - Delk's "Da Beater"

FAQ Member #17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm, wonder why the tag is CT if it's been in CA for years. When it was on Ebay 2014 is was noted as being in CT.attachicon.gifct1.jpg

Aaargh!

Your facts, Les, are getting in the way of potential buyers' dreams, so they seem to be ignoring the facts!

Thanks and best regards,

Steve

1976 2002 Polaris, 2742541 (original owner)

1973 2002tii Inka, 2762757 (not-the-original owner)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm, wonder why the tag is CT if it's been in CA for years. When it was on Ebay 2014 is was noted as being in CT.

attachicon.gifct1.jpg

 

Because:

 

"The pics in this Craigslist ad are the same ones used when it was on Ebay Sep 2014 and the car was (I think) in CT. "

 

Just reusing the pics from a few years ago would explain why you don't see CA plates, it could have passed smog.

 

Of course, the issue of using pictures from a few years ago leaves some open questions apart from licensing or smog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because:

 

"The pics in this Craigslist ad are the same ones used when it was on Ebay Sep 2014 and the car was (I think) in CT. "

 

Just reusing the pics from a few years ago would explain why you don't see CA plates, it could have passed smog.

 

Of course, the issue of using pictures from a few years ago leaves some open questions apart from licensing or smog.

Set aside the "passing smog" issue. Assume, for example, that the car will be purchased by someone outside California. What's important? Well, is this a California car, a Connecticut car, or a little bit of both? I generally assign a premium to California cars. Having spent 50 years in the Northeast, including 7 years in Connecticut, I will just say that I would NOT assign a premium to a Connecticut car!

Regards,

Steve

1976 2002 Polaris, 2742541 (original owner)

1973 2002tii Inka, 2762757 (not-the-original owner)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This is not a CA car - it is a CT car.  I saw it at a car show in Boston in 2014.  It may have been sold (for too much) and moved to the west coast.  It's a decent car with some interesting mods but the price is way too steep.  I told the owner two years ago that $15-18k was probably fair.  He gave it to a local dealer in CT / NY who is known for inflated prices in an area which has lots of $$$.  Someone may have overspent on this and is now looking to recoup some money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Upcoming Events

  • Supporting Vendors

×
×
  • Create New...