|
mik posted:Cool thanks for the link - they seem pretty smitten with it. The claim in all the auto mags is that the ST out GTIs the GTI for the most part. The GTI interior is in my opinion a little nicer and according to reviews the GTI rides a little softer, but the ST is probably the class leader at this point at least til the A7 GTI comes out in '14.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:17 |
|
|
(My original post) I ended up getting a new Mazda 5 instead of the Sienna. I rented the Sienna again and it was a huge pain to get it in and out of the garage. It's 10" wider than the Mazda, so I had to drive it really close to one side of my garage so that I could clear the fireplace. While I would have enjoyed the extra storage space, we're planning to be a family of four max, so the Mazda should fit our needs fine with the third row folded down. I saw some Mazda 5s that were used, but only a grand or two less than a new one, and most of them had over 35k on the ODO; not really worth it. I did see some used rentals from Hertz going for $13.5k, but on top of the high miles (>40k), rental companies are self-insured, so if they got into an accident it wouldn't show up on the carfax. We ended up getting a Touring model (MSRP $21.6k) for $18.6k + TTL. I was grinding away at multiple dealers to save a couple hundred here and there, but the last dealer I called beat everyone else by almost a grand. No-one else could touch the price so I walked in and did all the paperwork in less than two hours. It helped that it was the last couple of hours of the month, and the guy needed my sale to hit his quota.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
96cobraguy posted:Proposed Budget: $15-25k You're best off with something that has 3 rows or something bigger ("midsize"). Out of the list you posted, the Venza, Edge and Equinox are "midsize" while the Escape, CRV and Forester are "Compact". The Outback is somewhere in between. I posted this earlier: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3213538&userid=143660&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post403887477 Not saying you should neccesarily follow their recommendation but use it as a basis for further research. The Venza and Edge I would drop due to relatively poor crash safety ratings. My choice would be a slightly used Equinox/Terrain or Dodge Journey. You could also look into a Ford Explorer/Flex or a GM Lambda (Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave) but those are larger vehicles and you'll pay more in both price and fuel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:If you're only doing 50 miles a week, that's 2600 miles a year. Don't give as much of a poo poo about fuel economy - a 1 mpg gain is worth all of sixteen bucks a year to you. Boten Anna posted:You can get a pretty decent car for $20k and if you're paying in cash, don't fart away money leasing. Buy it so you have equity and a car worth something. KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:This is pretty silly! Don't listen to it. Leperflesh posted:Haha yeah, if you want to preserve your money the last thing you should do is buy a brand new car outright and ride the steepest part of the depreciation curve down before selling it in four years. Maybe I should tell you the whole story: the price of the car is being split with my brother, who may or may not sell it within 4 years. But I will probably not be sticking around after 4 years. If he sells it when I move, we also split the sale price; if not, then we work something else out that's fair. Let's say that the car is sold in 4 years. Even if it depreciates by 50%, which I'm assuming is pretty significant and unlikely, a 20k car can then be sold for 10k. Loss = 10k. If the car is leased at $250/month, that's a total cost of 12k, not counting any hidden fees that may result from leasing. Loss = 12k. Am I missing something? Would it depreciate by more than 50% in this time? What other leasing fees can I expect beyond a car maker's website claiming that 'x' car costs 'y' to lease per month? What's a better option for us if we simply want a lower overall cost 4 years later? Any other suggestions for cars? I'm now looking at the Dodge Dart and Kia Soul. Again, most important: Safety, MPG, Reliability. The MPG issue is not a cost-related one, but more of an environmental one. I just got my license a few days ago and I'd like to purchase this month. Since I would not use a car so often, but would sometimes take longer trips outside of NYC, I considered a Zipcar until I saw that the closest one required a half-hour train ride or few-minute car ride. It defeats much of the purpose for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
I'm quickly approaching the point where I will need a new daily driver. Here's my DD history: '91 MR2 -> '97 Avenger -> '00 Eclipse -> '07 Eclipse -> '99 Taurus. For comparison's sake, let's consider my wife's DD history: '99 Taurus -> '07 Eclipse. Hmm. I've had extremely good luck with the Avenger/Eclipse/Stratus R/T vehicles I've owned, and I'm pretty comfortable by now with most maintenance tasks that come up. I like how they look, as well. My caveats: 1. I want to pay cash for the car. 2. I have $7000 I can allocate, if needed. 3. The car needs to last roughly 5 years, at 15k miles per year. I found an '04 Stratus R/T, 109,000 miles, 2 door, 3.0L V6, leather interior, fog lights, 1 owner, purchased from and serviced by the dealership now selling the car. They want $5000 for it, I figured I could talk them down to $4500, and after fees and bullshit, get it for $5000 out the door. The car is in practically flawless condition, inside and out. But, I also found an '06 Eclipse GT with 76,000 miles going for $7000. It has cloth interior, fog lights, traction control, and a bit more pep from the 3.8L V6. The problem is, the previous owner put vinyl tribal decals on it, and when they took them off, the surrounding paint had faded slightly. This left a permanent "ghost" tribal symbol on the hood of the car, and ever so slightly on the driver's door. It has also been in a small accident in 2006, but shows no signs of it either aesthetically, or in how it drives. My gut tells me to get the Eclipse, but it often has poo poo for brains. What would you do? PainBreak fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Dec 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 10:19
|
|
|
I just called Geico for a quote for a new 2013 Kia Soul and they told me ~$1600 a month?! What is a decent price for insurance in NYC for a new driver? How does anyone start driving around here when they have to pay such insane prices? I'm 25, just got my license, but never had a criminal history, graduated summa cum laude from college, going to graduate school...
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 02:12
|
|
|
booseek posted:Maybe I should tell you the whole story: the price of the car is being split with my brother, who may or may not sell it within 4 years. But I will probably not be sticking around after 4 years. If he sells it when I move, we also split the sale price; if not, then we work something else out that's fair. You are comparing buying a brand new car to leasing a brand new car. I won't speak for everyone else, but my amusement was at the idea that it's financially wise to buy (or lease) a brand new car you intend to sell in four years, as opposed to getting a used car instead. See, the thing is, cars do not depreciate at a constant rate over their lifetime. Rather, they typically experience an initial period of rapid depreciation, and then a later much longer period of much slower depreciation. Strictly from a financial perspective, then, the best way to preserve your money is to buy a car that has already gone down the steep part of that depreciation curve. E.g., buy a used car for (say) $12k, and then in four years sell it for (say) $9k. (I think this is reasonable for a reasonably popular car, which you keep in good shape, and which you do not put a ton of miles on). But: to go to the question you actually asked: whether or not a given lease beats buying instead over x period of time is dependent on the actual terms of the lease, which vary from one car to the next and from one dealer to the next. I believe based on prior discussions here that it's possible sometimes to "win" with a lease, and at other times, buying would have been better. I want to preface the following by saying I'm not intimately familiar with lease structures, so I welcome corrections by anyone better informed. Consider this. The dealer has a brand new car. He wants to make a profit. He can sell it to you or lease it to you. All else being equal, he is no more or less likely to demand an unreasonable profit out of a lease than he is to demand an unreasonable profit out of a sale. When you lease a car, you undertake the risk because if you wreck it, your insurance pays for it; and if you ruin it before the lease is up, you'll be charged for the cost of repairing it (and/or if you drive it more miles than expected, you'll have to cough up for the mileage overage fees). That's similar to undertaking the risk when you buy the car (you still insure it, and if you drive it more or abuse it or whatever, you impact its resale value). Basically, you'll be paying for the depreciation of the car one way or another. But with a lease, you are buying something in addition to the car that you get when you buy it outright: you are purchasing the option to not purchase the car at the end of the lease (you retain the option to purchase it of course: the buyout price is quoted as part of the lease contract). Whereas when you buy outright, you don't have that option. The option-of-return costs you something. As it ought. From the dealer's perspective, your complicated financing vehicle is of value and he can attempt to make a profit on it. For example, you might choose to exercise the option to not buy the car if it unexpectedly depreciates more than anticipated by the contract (it proves to be wildly unpopular on the used market, for whatever intangible reason). When you buy, you're fully exposed to the vagaries of the used market, whereas with a lease, you're purchasing a hedge against that volatility. Therefore, one should expect leases to generally cost a little more than buying outright... all else being equal. A hedge on a car's future value should cost something, just as a hedge on a stock's future value (by purchasing a stock option, for example) costs something (typically a tiny fraction of the current market price of the underlying equity). But all else is not always equal. There can be all sorts of incentives available for a lease or for a purchase or both. Sometimes you can get a killer deal on a lease, sometimes you can get a killer deal on a purchase. So as a shopper, you have to do your due diligence and do all the math and understand all the terms, and then decide if you're getting a worthwhile deal by leasing over buying. It seems to me that your best option financially is to buy a used car. The risk you seem to want to hedge against is lower, not only because you spend less money, but because demonstratively a used car has already undergone the worst part of the depreciation curve, but also because the prospective resale market for that particular make and model is better exposed. Which is to say, if you buy a 2008 Ford Focus, you can already see how well the '08 Focus has retained value compared to what it was expected to cost back when it was new; this helps to inform you of how rapidly it's depreciating compared to expectations and therefore how rapidly it's likely to depreciate in the next 4 years. But if you just really want to drive a new car, because it'll smell nice and be all pristine inside, go for it. It's a luxury, but if you can afford it, luxuries are awesome. Just don't rationalize it by thinking that you're financially better off leasing a new car instead of buying a used car outright.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 07:14
|
|
|
Proposed Budget: $15000-20000, could probably flex up to $25000 if I needed to but would rather not obviously New or Used: CPO/recently used, although I'm not opposed to new if it's in my price range (which I kind of doubt) Body Style: Mid-sized SUV, maybe a midsized pickup Location: Las Vegas, NV How will you be using the car?: Driving myself to/from work (~65 miles daily round trip, mostly highway) and I do a considerable amount of bouncing around the sticks getting to outdoors stuff (shooting, hiking, camping, climbing, etc) so 4WD/AWD and some ground clearance is a requirement, along with at least some cargo space. What aspects are most important to you?: Reliability/longevity, the 4WD/AWD, ground clearance, and cargo space I mentioned above, MPG is in the back of my mind only because of the 65 mile daily commute, and affordability is semi-important...it's not like I want a bare bones/no frills vehicle, but saving a few bucks in exchange for not having "luxury" items like power seats, nav system/GPS, etc is fine with me. Currently comparing: Toyota FJ Cruiser, 4Runner, Tacoma, also semi-considering a Subaru Forester, Outback, XV Crosstek, or a similar Subaru SUV/crossover wagon type vehicle (mostly because of the non-negotiable ~65 mile daily commute) Was in the process of driving through Canada while moving from Anchorage to Vegas when I hit a deer, totaling my completely reliable no major issues 2000 4Runner with 232000+ miles on it.  I'm going to have to buy a vehicle relatively quickly after arriving in Vegas so I'm trying to get it narrowed down before I finish the drive down there once my insurance is taken care of here.I (and my parents) have driven Toyotas pretty much my entire life, so I'm familiar with them and that's what I'm first inclined to look at, but I'm by no means wedded to the brand. However, I do plan on driving this vehicle for while after I buy it, so I'd prefer something like a Toyota that you would likely be able to drive for, say, 12 years and 232000 miles without any major maintenance/component replacement/etc (  ). To that end I'm willing to pay the additional money that vehicles like that are going to cost on the used market. In addition to 4WD/AWD for running around the backcountry, I'm in the military so I'll be moving within 3-4 years and there's a distinct possibility that I'll be going somewhere colder with snow next, so that's a consideration as well since I plan to still be driving this vehicle then. I've driven trucks/SUVs for most of my life, so being "fun to drive" isn't really a concern, although something at least halfway comfortable would be nice seeing as how I'm going to spending at least a good hour in it five days a week at a minimum with the commute. I can drive a manual but it isn't a requirement or anything, so either manual or automatic is fine. e: Time for the obligatory comedy option...found a 2000 4Runner for sale down there with only 93,500 on it.
iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 08:55
|
|
|
That's not a comedy option.   Seriously I think you're pretty much right on with another 4Runner. There's not much else on the market that can match it for capability and reliability and it even gets pretty good fuel economy. The problem is that people know this and price their used vehicles correspondingly so for $20k you're not looking at a very good selection. Here's some that I can think of: - The FJ Cruiser I would stay away from as these had a well documented frame cracking issue (google "FJ cruiser fender crack"). It's essentially just a more stupid looking 4Runner with less practical doors anyway so I don't know why you wouldn't just get a 4Runner. Same thing with the Nissan Pathfinder, these aren't much cheaper and certainly aren't better than the 4Runner and the even the V6 engine gets astonishingly bad fuel economy, they are rated for like 16mpg combined. - 2010+ Jeep Grand Cherokee V6. These only got really good in the current generation and were not cheap new, so you're kind of looking at relatively high mileage examples if you want all the 4WD poo poo. As long as you don't get the air suspension or sunroof the reliability should be all right. I wouldn't go for the previous generation, it's old, not very safe, interior is terrible and reliability is dodgy. - If you're OK with a truck you could get a 2010+ Ford F150 V6. They get the same mileage as a Tacoma and are bigger, and it is like the most common vehicle on the roads in America so they're cheap and parts won't ever be an issue I suppose. Ford was early to the market with a competetive OHC V6 engine that got pretty decent fuel economy, compared to GM and Dodge. These aren't really all that capable off-road right out of the box though, the factory ground clearance is about the same as the Subaru Outback. Most people go to the aftermarket for that. - Jeep Patriot. It's a small car based Jeep with available low range gearing that makes it quite capable off road. They didn't sell for much more than $25k new so a used one should be quite cheap. Reliability is actually pretty decent, except for a known issue with suspension bushings on the older models that can be dealt with fairly easily if you know about it. The downside is that for what's essentially a small FWD car with an anemic 4 cyl engine, fuel economy is really bad if you do get the one with all the offroad stuff, not much better than a 4Runner or Grand Cherokee. It's otherwise just not a very good car, the interior is cheap and being fairly old the safety ratins aren't great. Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 14:13
|
|
|
Proposed Budget: $5-8k New or Used: Used Body Style: 4 door car(or SUV with decent gas mileage) How will you be using the car?: Hour commute several days a week. Looking for a comfortable car with decent gas mileage(My current vehicles drink gas) and reliability. I want the vehicle to still stand out visually if possible. Finding a $5-8k car with decent gas mileage and comfort isn't really that hard, but I'm looking for ideas for cars that fit into this that also have a unique or sporty visual appeal. My other car is 2004 Mazda RX8 that I bought for less than $10k and most people don't know enough about them to realize it's an 8 year old car. It looks like it's almost brand new to most people, and it looks like a very expensive car. I absolutely love it, for the bang for the buck in terms of curb appeal.....but it drinks gas, and it uses high octane gas, and the maintenance is high. I also drive a beater 98' dodge ram with really bad mileage. I'm looking for ideas for more economical cars that still have a bit of a visual wow factor. Edit - I could push the budget up for the right car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
cosmicjim posted:Proposed Budget: $5-8k Probably at the top end of your budget, but the last gen Mercedes SLK was actually one of the most reliable MBs you could get, for some odd reason. It wasn't much more than a basic C-class drivtrain underneath and the rest of the car including the trick folding roof is quite well built. I think 2004 was the last year they had the base model SLK230 with the 4 cylinder engine. I think it still looks pretty decent today. Another option is a last gen Cadillac CTS from around 2006 or so. The exterior styling is still striking and IMO it looks great, as long as you don't let anyone actually ride in it since the interior is kind of weird and didn't age well at all. The base models (not the V) are pretty reliable AFAIK. I wouldn't really call either of them "fuel efficient" for the amount of utility they have, but they should get you ~25mpg at least on the highway which is quite a bit better than the RX-8. Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 16:15
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Probably at the top end of your budget, but the last gen Mercedes SLK was actually one of the most reliable MBs you could get, for some odd reason. It wasn't much more than a basic C-class drivtrain underneath and the rest of the car including the trick folding roof is quite well built. I think 2004 was the last year they had the base model SLK230 with the 4 cylinder engine. I think it still looks pretty decent today. Am I missing out on certain models or is the slk just a 2 seater?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 16:29
|
|
|
cosmicjim posted:Am I missing out on certain models or is the slk just a 2 seater? Oh poo poo, forgot about the 4 seater part. Eh, you're not looking at too many options then under that criteria. Maybe last gen Lincoln MKZ? I always thought it was a pretty nice looking car, although I don't know about "looks more expensive than it is". Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 16:30
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Oh poo poo, forgot about the 4 seater part. Eh, you're not looking at too many options then under that criteria. I do like these Cadillacs. My wife will probably like it too. I figure there are still more options I haven't thought of. The RX8 for example wasn't on my radar just before I bought it because I thought it would be too small, but the suicide doors are amazing. I have 2 children, and we all get in out just fine. I'm not in hurry, since I actually have running transportation, I'm just looking on making a list and monitoring what comes up locally so I can pounce on a great deal on the low end of market value when it comes up, instead of having to just pick from what's available that very moment when I HAVE to buy a car. This cadillac is on the list, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
Along those lines, there's a web site that will crunch the numbers for you and tell you whether or not your lease is a decent deal: http://www.leaseguide.com/leasevalue-calc.cfm When I was looking at various lease options, it seemed like if it wasn't a nationally advertised lease deal from the manufacturer it wasn't worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 17:17
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:e: Time for the obligatory comedy option...found a 2000 4Runner for sale down there with only 93,500 on it. I also don't think the 2000 4Runner is a comedy option. If you already like them, know they'll work for you, and you can get it for a good price, why not? I just bought an XV Crosstrek so I can give you my thoughts on the Subarus. They will definitely save you on gas, and are relatively inexpensive for new cars. Whether an XV or a Forester would work for you depends a lot on just how rough the outdoor stuff you're looking to do is. They're never going to be rock crawlers, but do have something like 9" of ground clearance and a good AWD system. The number one complaint about the Crosstrek is that it's severely underpowered. It actually seems fine to me and I'm coming off a G35 and turbocharged miata before that, so YMMV. The Forester is bigger on the inside than the XV, has more cargo space, and has a slightly more powerful (but still weak) motor. It's getting a redesign for the next model year that'd be worth checking out since it adds some off-road tweaks to the AWD system. The current Forester is slightly cheaper than the XV in its base-est form, but the XV's base model is equivalent to the Premium trim level on the Forester. I think either only make sense if you're getting the lower trim levels as they get pricy fast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
powderific posted:I also don't think the 2000 4Runner is a comedy option. If you already like them, know they'll work for you, and you can get it for a good price, why not? I think that particular generation/year was the one with the weak head gaskets that go around 100k miles. It's not too bad of a repair if you catch it early though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
Ah, that makes sense. Still seems like another 4Runner might be the way to go if he can either deal with such issues ahead of time or avoid them entirely by getting a different year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
booseek posted:I just called Geico for a quote for a new 2013 Kia Soul and they told me ~$1600 a month?! At best you'll wrap that brand new car around a telephone pole in a month, at worst you're planning personal injury scam. NYC is a nightmare for anything car-related, that's why drivers don't do much driving and insurance companies don't do much insuring. Good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 20:49
|
|
|
booseek posted:I just called Geico for a quote for a new 2013 Kia Soul and they told me ~$1600 a month?! That's called a 'gently caress You' quote as in gently caress You we don't want your business. GEICO prefers low risk drivers with high credit scores. Your best bet is to contact an independent insurance agent who can get quotes from the 30 or 40 companies they deal with and find you the best price. I'm not familiar with NYC but a first time driver insuring a brand new car in NYC I would assume the rates will be insane. 300 to 400 a month I would guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I think that particular generation/year was the one with the weak head gaskets that go around 100k miles. It's not too bad of a repair if you catch it early though. Yes it is, yes they do, and no it isn't. In any case although I like the third gen better than the fourth gen, I don't think I want to go quite that far back for this vehicle so I'll probably be looking at a fourth gen (which I'm not a huge fan of) or the fifth gen (which I like better but which are going to be more expensive since I'd be talking an '09 or newer.) Although what the hell, I'll probably give that 2000 a look just for grins too. Either way I think I'm set on another 4Runner, but I'll keep the Subarus in mind as well. Thanks for the responses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:At best you'll wrap that brand new car around a telephone pole in a month, at worst you're planning personal injury scam. NYC is a nightmare for anything car-related, that's why drivers don't do much driving and insurance companies don't do much insuring. Good luck with that. Khorne fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Also known as insurance fraud.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:Also known as insurance fraud. I get that it is fraud if he intentionally registered his car somewhere he didn't live to get lower rates, but that didn't sound like what his situation would be at all. Rate evasion only seems to take place if you do not legally reside somewhere. If he has permanent residence in another state or elsewhere in new york his rates are going to be cheaper. Establishing permanent residence in NYC in his situation is a dumb idea. It's kind of moot if he already established residence there, but he could just be naively shopping for insurance. Khorne fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
Khorne posted:Is it actually insurance fraud if you are a student going to school somewhere but pay for insurance somewhere you legally reside? It's pretty common to have your car registered and paid for where you actually live, not where you are for half of the year for school. I actually don't know anyone who obtained car insurance where they are going to school, unless they are living really far from home and don't drive back there for breaks. It's not for financial reasons either, because some of them would pay lower rates where their school is. If he tells the insurance company that it is garaged where it is garaged it isn't. If they think it is parked in upstate when it is parked on the street in the Bronx every night, you might have an issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
The legal definition of where you reside has nothing to do with where your mom is storing your boxes of star wars figures. I'm pretty sure it has everything to do with how many days per year you spend the night, although I don't know what the exact figures are (and it may vary from state to state). Many students do go home for summer and holidays, but that still leaves them living in the state their school is for something like 2/3s up to maybe 4/5s of the year. It's probably extremely common for students to leave their cars registered and insured in their parents' state, but that doesn't at all mean it's legal. When the insurance agent asks you where you reside, you can probably ask questions about this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 07:06
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The legal definition of where you reside has nothing to do with where your mom is storing your boxes of star wars figures. I'm pretty sure it has everything to do with how many days per year you spend the night, although I don't know what the exact figures are (and it may vary from state to state). Generally it is legal to leave them registered there. Residency isn't based on that. The address you tell them it is garaged at, which is different than your residence in this case, is what matters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 07:22
|
|
|
Yeah, there's two issues I conflated: residency for the purpose of vehicle registration (e.g., must you register your car in the state where you're attending school: a legal issue), and where you tell your insurer you park the car (which is based on whatever their own definitions are and not some legal definition). For the latter, I imagine most insurance companies have fairly similar definitions but might have small differences? For the former, though, I'm curious. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the law. I'm here in California, and here's what I believe is the relevant section of the California vehicle code: quote:
If I understand this correctly, if you live in the state for at least 6 months of the year, the presumption is that you are a resident for the purposes of vehicle registration. Paying tuition as a resident also implies you have established residency, but it doesn't explicitly say that paying tuition as a non-resident refutes the presumption of residency. It also says that renting a home for use as a residence implies residency; I'm not sure if on-campus housing counts as "renting a home" but I suspect off-campus housing certainly does. All of these are described as "evidence" rather than "proof", though, so my impression is that one still has the right to rebut a determination of residency. I wish it gave examples or description of what would constitute adequate rebuttal, but I don't see that. e. On further investigation, I did find this: quote:Nonresident Student A student who is under 24 years of age, is a dependent, pays nonresident tuition, and is unemployed. So I guess you can be a non-resident (for the purposes of auto registration) if you're a student, paying non-resident tuition, and the only job you work is is part of your "educational field" and all the money goes towards education rather than "taken as an income". The example given shows this is basically internships, not typical student jobs such as waiting tables or whatever. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 07:44 on Dec 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 07:40
|
|
|
State law can vary a lot on vehicle registration stuff. In Nebraska there's a student exemption and they don't care what kind of tuition you pay or whether you work as long as it's considered a full time program. While checking this, I also discovered that Nebraska has vehicle registration reciprocity with Wyoming and North Carolina, so plates from there are accepted till they expire. I'd never heard of anything like that. (and why North Carolina, of all places?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 16:53
|
|
|
I dont know if this is the right place to ask, but what should I expect to actually pay for a lotus elise? Next year or so I will be purchasing either a used elise or new brz or something along those lines. Whats years should I look for in the elise, whats a good deal? Should I go for one with under 10k on it or look for some that have been driven a little more?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 19:02
|
|
|
I am actually going to school in Brooklyn College, which is less than 5 miles away from my house. I have permanent residence in Brooklyn, NY, and yes, I am very naively shopping for car insurance. Another company quoted me around $450 a month. They said that just having a license for several months will bring the cost down somewhat, but it is not until I have insurance (and no accidents) that the price will start coming down. My brother's girlfriend, who has a used Kia Soul, pays $125/month in Queens, NY. She is my age, but also had (until a week ago) a steady job as a high school music teacher, which she said that Geico said helped her get a lower rate. She also has a credit history, and I just started building one in August. She was under her parents' insurance for a little while, and had a license since she was a teenager, but has only really been driving for a year, she says. Would it be legal for me to actually go under her insurance for some time before getting my own car and insurance? If so, would it be fishy that her residence is in a different borough from my own? By how much would her rate go up? (I would obviously pay the difference.) Leperflesh posted:You are comparing buying a brand new car to leasing a brand new car. I won't speak for everyone else, but my amusement was at the idea that it's financially wise to buy (or lease) a brand new car you intend to sell in four years, as opposed to getting a used car instead. That's what I wanted to know. I think that after this next semester, so at the end of May or early June, I will get a used 2006/2007 Toyota Prius. The Prius would have been my first choice due to the safety and MPG ratings, but the cost was a bit too much. I see these 2006/2007 models for under $14k, some for around $12k, which is great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 20:49
|
|
|
booseek posted:I am actually going to school in Brooklyn College, which is less than 5 miles away from my house. I have permanent residence in Brooklyn, NY, and yes, I am very naively shopping for car insurance. The insurance company will want to know who is the driver of the vehicle (by percentages of time driven) and where the vehicle is parked. Making misrepresentations to your insurance company about those facts could greatly jeopardize your coverage in case of an accident/claim and are likely to be illegal at the same time. Do not do this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
Proposed Budget: $10-20k New or Used: New Body Style: Car 2 or 4-Door How will I be using the car: DD mostly, I only go about 5 miles a day to work but having a more reliable car will let me transfer to other towns for higher pay. What aspects are most important to you?: MPG, Nice Interior, "Fun" I am looking for a new car, preferably something at least slightly sporty. I was all sold on a corolla until I went for a test drive and hated how mashing the gas produced almost no response. From a strictly looks standpoint I prefer the Mazda 3 to the other cars in this price range, but interior is more important overall. I am coming from an 04 GTP so I realize that nothing in my price range will be as quick, but i am looking for some advice. Driven so far: Corolla: Meh. very reliable which I like, also good resale value. Chevy Sonic LTZ: Better, I really liked the radio and remote start on the LTZ over the base model Still need to test drive: Mazda 3 Dodge dart Ford Focus?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 07:37
|
|
|
You can probably take the Focus off the list. I don't think one in your price range will qualify as sporty to you. Best bet is probably the Dart or Mazda 3. I want to like Mazdas but I just don't for some irrational reason. They feel really cheaply built to me. My buddy has a Mazda 2 and every time I get in or out of that thing I feel like the door is going to fall off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 08:00
|
|
|
Hyundai Veloster? 2 doors, 200 HP, 37 MPG, ~$18k.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 10:22
|
|
|
I've never driven it so I guess you'll have to find out yourself, but every review of the Veloster turbo I''ve ever read emphatically state that it is in no way a "fun" car to drive, and the exterior styling really over-promise the performance, similar to the Genesis coupe. Also the automatic version of the turbo is a standard torque converter instead of the DSG that the regular version gets, so you gain 60 hp over the NA model but then lose 30hp in the drivetrain by the time it gets to the wheels. I think at that price range, the Sonic turbo is about the best you can do, and those are really expensive too for a B segment car. Maybe a FIAT 500 turbo? Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Dec 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 14:42
|
|
|
theOctagon posted:I am coming from an 04 GTP so I realize that nothing in my price range will be as quick The Dodge Avenger V6 comes with 283hp for an MSRP of just around $21k, and Chrylser always has some kind of deal going on especially on older models like the Sebring/Avenger, so you can probably get it for much less than that. For example right now you get $1000 off if you own a VW, you don't have to trade it in or anything, just prove you own one. Because Sergio Marchionne has some kind of personal feud with Ferdinand Piech. http://www.dodge.com/en/incentives/bonus_incentives/#vw_conquest_bonus  I doubt they will actually have to pay out because people who buy VWs are already beyond all reason. Also like half of VW buyers are only buying the diesels because they enjoy repairing fuel injection and emissions systems and hate driving/life.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 14:59
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Making misrepresentations to your insurance company about those facts could greatly jeopardize your coverage in case of an accident/claim and are likely to be illegal at the same time. Do not do this. The two most likely scenarios: they'll do some digging and refuse to pay because of "whatever reason" and you're up poo poo creek. Or, they'll just pay out because the time/money spent fighting you and future dollars lost when they lose your business isn't worth it. Its pretty much impossible to predict which way it will go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Proposed Budget: 6k is the upper end. New or Used: Used, obviously. Body Style: 4 door car, would consider 2 door. How will you be using the car?: Driving to work and back, occasional other tripes. Average probably about 100 miles tops a week. What aspects are most important to you? Reliability, gas mileage. I don't care about options - as long as this thing has A/C and a radio I'm happy. Standard transmission is actually preferred. Don't care about color or looking any particular way. I just want a reliable vehicle that I don't have to fill up that often that'll last me a few years until I can get something better. Additional info: I need to trade in my truck, and it blue books at roughly $4000. I'd like to try to cut it as close to even as I can. I would put this off until I had more savings, but this vehicle is devouring my paycheck alive, and the AC/heating unit just died completely and they estimated at least a grand to fix it and it's getting loving cold.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:17 |
|
|
96cobraguy posted:Proposed Budget: $15-25k I know you posted this a good few days ago, I hope you haven't made any decisions yet! I've had the pleasure of driving some of the cars/soft-offroaders on your list! Toyota Venza/Honda CRV - Stay away from these cars like the plague, they're designed for 40 year old mothers who have fulfilled their biological purpose and have no reason to drive a car that has any style, speed, quality, good looks, comfort, sex appeal etc. Seriously. If you purchased one of these, you'll just want to commit suicide after five minutes behind the wheel. Chevrolet Equinox - Now, we don't get this specific car over in Australia, but we do get one that shares the exact same GM platform. Its not a bad car, its reasonably priced, reasonably well built and (in black at least) reasonably good looking. It does have an eight-year-old chassis platform, so its certainly NOT at the cutting edge of technology. It usually comes in 2.4L, four cylinder flavour. This is the downfall as, although you might be attracted to the lower engine-size for fuel economy, I'm more than happy to bet that a big, almost 4000lb off roader will use a ton of fuel as you'll have to rev the nuts off of the engine just to move the thing, equating to sub 20 mpg (US). So, buy it if you must. But please buy it in diesel. Ford Edge - A similar situation to the Chevy. Its going to be a fairly good car, but thirsty. Once again, its based off of an ageing chassis platform so I bet its not the most dynamic drive. It does have an excellent 2.0L Ecoboost engine. I know I've just told you that 2.4L is too small, but I can argue my case for the 2.0L because of the gigantic turbo Ford gives you. 240hp and a good helping of torque from the turbo should do nicely, but don't expect the economy of a Prius! Ford Escape - My father owned one of these, It was hideously unreliable and almost got him killed when the engine decided to keep the throttle wide-open while he was driving on the freeway. This was 2002, so I'm sure most of the issues have been worked out, but the new models still share the same platform and therefore many of the components of the older cars... And you've got to question something when it's been recalled 10 times. *Stay Away* Subaru Forester - A fantastic drive. Its based on the Impreza platform, and Ken Block used to do his thing in an Impreza so it should have the potential for a lot of fun! Well, maybe not. It is a solid car, strong, reliable engines and good fuel efficiency. It is an ageing platform, and with it being Japanese built, servicing and parts are going to have a small premium. It is probably the smallest car here, but I urge you to get a test drive. The turbo-petrol engines are the way to go, smaller displacement but bags of power and efficiency. Subaru Liberty/Legacy/Outback - Now this is by far and away the best car on the list. It has charisma, and you'll feel rewarded driving it. It has a spacious, Euro-premium interior but still has the capacity and the 4wd off-road ability to 'Drive every mountain & ford every stream.' It has fantastic, powerful, reliable and efficient engines that deliver good fuel consumption. It holds its value well and is a safe place to be. If you only test drive one of the cars on this list, let it be the Subaru Outback. I also wouldn't overlook a Mercedes-Benz C-Class wagon, BMW 3-Series wagon or a BMW X3. They come at a bit of a premium, but there is always a good deal to be had on the used market. If you do as many miles as it sounds like you do, a quality, German executive-express might produce a more gratifying experience on long hauls. Nice interiors too! Good luck!
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 05:21
|
|