http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...000&cardist=40

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...000&cardist=73

So yea...I dont want to go travel far for a 2004.5 Z and those are not that far. I cant seem to tell if they are 2004.5 shapes though...I cant get a good look at the knee pads. Also, the first one has high miles for a 2004. That wont be a problem though because I will only put around 6k-7k miles a year, so when Im ready to sell the car in a few years, it will have low miles for a 2004. Does the 2nd one seem too good to be true?

 

I can understand the price for the 1st one...it has high miles

 

Neither one seems like there overpriced, but both of them for 2004 models sure do have a lot of miles. they have only been out for about 16 months.

 

you need to check your math again.

If they were bought in late 2003 (when the 2004 were released) they would be about 27-28 months old.

 

they are both 04's and not 04.5's. I cannot see the pads in the pics and they would be there if it was an 04.5.

 

Not much diff. in price so I'd go touring model, base does not have LSD. Better resale in the long run.

 

carfax both... especially the second one...

 

don't get base... you can find a touring for a bit more...

 

thanks guys