|
quote:Do you need a Truck? If No - disqualify the RAM. Need a bigger vehicle that fits the family. Currently driving a 99 mustang that's leaking transmission fluid so  Friar Zucchini posted:Those are so different that it's basically impossible to say which is better unless we can get a better idea of what you like from each one. Well we moved a thousand miles from anyone we know who has a truck a year ago and haven't met anyone that has one yet, and they are just super handy to have around. Coming from Texas where I took it for granted I guess and every other person had a truck. I've also driven all 3 and honestly the only one that gets me excited is the truck. The other two are just because we don't really need the truck and an SUV would work just fine and they were basically my top SUV picks. I'd pick the truck instantly as it was a blast to drive... ... but the gas mileage is awful so I'm being flaky about committing to it. The other problem is I can't find an SUV with the options I want anywhere near the budget I want. I just want a V6, trailer package and cold weather package on the Jeep but nobody has just those three at all and the only other ones with all three have like 80 other packages and are 45k or higher. Also because of the above reasons of not falling in love with the car I don't feel like building my own and paying invoice price would be worthwhile either.
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
If you're excited about the truck just buy it. The difference between a V6 Ram 2WD and a V6 Cherokee 2WD is just 2 or 3 mpg, it adds up to a couple hundred bucks per year if you drive 15k miles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
I recently bought a 2005 dodge ram V6 manual transmission for $9000. It is in fantastic condition with only 40k miles on it. Thing is, after driving this for a month I really wish I had bought a car instead. I was looking into possibilities of trading it straight across for a cheap used car and was wondering your guys' opinion on if this is a smart move. For the record, I paid off the loan already with my never used student loan from med school as it had a much lower interest rate and I won't have to make payments until after residency. I've seen a 2002 dodge strata 2door manual with 90k miles for $3,800, and a 2006 Chevrolet cobalt 4door manual with 146k miles for $4,200. I think I could easily get $6,000 for this truck and this would make trading across for those cars cost me nothing. However, I'm kinda worried that both of those cars are pieces of crap. I've heard mixed things about the strata and it's had. 4 previous owners, and the cobalt seems like it would be at the end of its lifespan at 140k miles. I really can't seem to find anything better around me that isn't just a trash heap. Should I just tough up and keep the truck? I imagine there's be a substantial maintenance/repair difference if I kept it. Or would one of those cars actually be a good option? Just not a day goes by I don't wish I was driving a car. What are other good options for used cars that would be around $4k-$6k in price, manual transmission, commuter and good gas mileage, and could last at least another 3 years? Blind Rasputin fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Jan 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Put it up for what you paid for it and also offer to trade outright for a car of similar value. You're not in a hurry so you can afford to wait for the right deal to come along.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
neogeo0823 posted:Since then, I've narrowed down my choices to either a 2010 Toyota Corolla, or a 2010 Honda Civic. I love the way the Civic looks, and it has better gas mileage, but I feel like the Corolla has better handling and acceleration, despite its somewhat dated appearance. Between the two, which car is generally more reliable/has a lower cost of ownership? Is there anything that either car is known for breaking on a regular basis? Which car would you pick, if given the option? melon cat fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jan 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:I didn't see anyone respond to this so I'll take a stab at it. I think if one can afford it, a down payment should be sized to avoid paying gap insurance. That is, get enough equity in the car that, should it be totaled, your insurance payout will fully cover what you still owe on the note, without having to add the extra "gap coverage" to your insurance policy. Exactly how much money that is, is dependent on how much your car depreciates as you drive it off the lot. Of course, gap insurance might be very expensive or very cheap, too, so whether or not it's worth putting an extra few thousand down to make sure you don't have to pay gap insurance is another difficult figure to estimate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 07:45
|
|
|
Man, I just wanted to thank you guys and this whole AI forum for every little bit of advice you give. I read just about everything here about buying used, and which make/model/years are the best bang for the buck. I went today to trade my 2005 Dodge ram 1500 with 40k miles for the only 2008 Ford Focus 5speed manual 4 door in silver (basically the exact car I wanted) I could find in Dallas at a reasonable price with only 112k miles on it. I went in there completely prepared. I got their carfax, it had one owner and a really good maintenance history. I wanted to trade my truck straight across so it would cover the out of door cost and the taxes. They wanted $8,000 for the focus. I showed them comparable internet deals at $6,000 at that mileage. Then I looked ALL OVER the car (even peaked my head under it) didn't see a speck of rust or anything suspicious. I even revved it, smelled it, test drove it, smelled it again, did just about everything you guys said to do. I did all this in front of the salesman and whoa did it make him cook. Everything checked out except on the test drive there was quite a bit of vibration within the cab. I had read about motor mount problems on these models causing exactly that. The salesman stepped away and I called a ford dealer and asked them how much it would cost to replace it and they said $320. So then the salesman comes back and says they will take my truck and do the deal except they want $500 from me. He was in the car with me during the test drive, knew of the vibration, saw me be all concerned about it while driving. I told him it was very definitely the motor mount and it is going to cost me at least $320 to replace it and there's no way I'm going to pay that $500... I walked out of there with that Ford focus not paying a cent. I made sure the title work was done and contract was signed. They tried to get me to sign a "borrower's agreement"? They kept trying to get me to sign it and I could just feel that it was bad news and refused. I looked it up later and apparently is this their way of being able to call you later, say the deal fell through, and they need more money? I took it to my local mechanic and the computer (not a single thing on it), fluids, transmission, clutch, belts, everything is in great order and he replaced the motor mount in an hour for $260. Car runs like a dream and I couldn't be happier and it was basically all thanks to you guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Why is there such a stigma against buying used? Everyone I've talked to about buying a used car have told me I'd be better off buying a new car after I graduate from college because apparently every used car is a POS or I'm gonna get ripped off. They say things like I'll be paying a poo poo ton for insurance and maintaining the car yet somehow buying new works out much cheaper. Doesn't insurance cost more for a brand new car, though? The way I see it is if I buy a new car after graduation for like $25k then I'd be left with <= $5k in the bank. However, if I buy a used one next year for ~$3k and assume I pay $2k/year for insurance and assume $1k per year for maintenance and another $1k for gas per year for 3 years then that comes to a total of $3k + ($2k x 3) + ($1k x 3) + ($1k x 3) = $15k spent by graduation with another $15k in the bank. What are your thoughts on this? Sorry if it's really off topic, I just want some input. Faded Sloth fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Jan 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 09:47
|
|
|
Faded Sloth posted:Why is there such a stigma against buying used? Everyone I've talked to about buying a used car have told me I'd be better off buying a new car after I graduate from college because apparently every used car is a POS or I'm gonna get ripped off. They say things like I'll be paying a poo poo ton for insurance and maintaining the car yet somehow buying new works out much cheaper. Doesn't insurance cost more for a brand new car, though? Cars and housing are 2 subjects that everyone has an opinion on because everyone needs to live somewhere and go places. Protip: Most people are morons and don't know gently caress all about gently caress all. People talk about it during casual conversations because that's what casual conversations are - unsourced, unresearched bullshit to pass the time because it's better than sitting around in uncomfortable silence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
Faded Sloth posted:Why is there such a stigma against buying used? Everyone I've talked to about buying a used car have told me I'd be better off buying a new car after I graduate from college because apparently every used car is a POS or I'm gonna get ripped off. They say things like I'll be paying a poo poo ton for insurance and maintaining the car yet somehow buying new works out much cheaper. Doesn't insurance cost more for a brand new car, though? As noted above, most people know poo poo all about buying cars. That being said there is a big difference buying lightly used vs buying very used, which is what a $3k car would be. I personally am I big proponent in the buying lightly used. You can snag cars after they hit their depreciation for a sizeable amount off what it would be new for not that much time off of its useable lifespan. The trouble with buying a $3k car is that you're likely getting something toward the end of its lifepan and the probability for something expensive to go wrong goes way up. Some people get lucky and buy a cheap car and have it last several years with little work and some people have the transmission blow after a couple months. It's a gamble. Personally, I'd look at something reasonable that is lightly used. You can get a lot of car for around $15k nowadays if you shop around. As for insurance, insurance is way more relative to your driving record and the car itself than it is used vs new. Things like safety features and engine size play a much bigger role.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Faded Sloth posted:Why is there such a stigma against buying used? Everyone I've talked to about buying a used car have told me I'd be better off buying a new car after I graduate from college because apparently every used car is a POS or I'm gonna get ripped off. They say things like I'll be paying a poo poo ton for insurance and maintaining the car yet somehow buying new works out much cheaper. Doesn't insurance cost more for a brand new car, though? You have to insure, maintain and fuel the new car too, remember. People's stigma about used cars usually are a justification to buy new cars more than anything else. Just look around you; there are million of cars, and the average car on U.S. roads is over 10 years old. So is everyone breaking down everywhere? Nope. Most people get where they're going just fine. You have to be a bit smarter when buying used and avoid troublesome models, but you can snag an exceptionally reliable and very pleasing car. I echo the recommendation to spend a bit more, however. You'll often need 5K to get an older car in good condition, and 10k will buy you a 5 year old economy car that's lots of trouble-free miles left in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
rockcity posted:I personally am I big proponent in the buying lightly used. You can snag cars after they hit their depreciation for a sizeable amount off what it would be new for not that much time off of its useable lifespan. I too generally make this recommendation, but the last few years have seen the lightly used car market go insane really. Some models still follow a fairly standard depreciation curve, but many times it's almost the same buying new vs. lightly used due to the current market conditions. Take for example when I was shopping for a Ford Explorer 2 years ago. A lightly used CPO 2011 was listed for 31,995 on the lot. Original MSRP was 35.5K and the car had about 22,000 miles on it and was a former rental vehicle. A brand new 2012, same trim and everything with an MSRP of 35.5K we purchased for 32.2 or so after dealer discount and Ford rebates. We didn't see the 'value' in buying slightly used over new in this case. I negotiated the 2011 CPO down to around 30,500 but for 1700 dollars the extra 22,000 miles were not worth it. I know many fuel efficient cars are in the same scenario these days. Lightly used Prius'(Prii?), Honda Fit's, Corolla's, all are in a similar situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Yeah, I didn't see any benefit to the "lightly used" option when I bought my CR-V either. I could've had a used 2012 with 20k miles for about $800 less (and a higher interest loan) than I got my new 2013 for. A far cry from the depreciation hit on my '07 MS3; I bought it in 2009 with 24k on it and it was somewhere around $7k off of MSRP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
I have to agree with the lightly used experiences as well. I tried negotiating a year old sti with 10k on it and the guy wouldn't go under $1000 from msrp. The whole thing about the car losing a ton of value when it comes off the lot isn't really true anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
It is entirely car specific.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Thanks guys, now I see where everyone is coming from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:It is entirely car specific. Yeah, it's highly model specific and most performance models are ones that break that trend like STi's, MS3's, etc. For some reason some of the cheaper economy cars are also falling into the trend as well. More generic sedans are still experiencing healthy drops though. It also depends on how lightly used it is. Because cars are lasting longer, cars under 10k miles might not have the drops they used to but a 30k mile car might be 30% less than a new one. I paid $24.5k for an EX35 with 35k on the clock a couple years ago and the sticker for it new was $38k.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
I was looking around on Craigslist and saw a couple 2009 Ford Flex's listed for under 17K, that's about half of MSRP. Seems like a drat good deal if you ask me. edit: Here's a 2010 with 51K miles for $18000. poo poo's cheap. Friar Zucchini fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Jan 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Yeah, it's highly model specific and most performance models are ones that break that trend like STi's, MS3's, etc. For some reason some of the cheaper economy cars are also falling into the trend as well. I think it's just the low base price to begin with takes away a lot of the possible price difference. Versas, for instance could be had so cheap new when I was looking that the used market was really unfriendly for the buyer. On that you might as well have bought new. I really didn't like them though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Friar Zucchini posted:I was looking around on Craigslist and saw a couple 2009 Ford Flex's listed for under 17K, that's about half of MSRP. Seems like a drat good deal if you ask me. 2009 was 5 years ago. 50% over 5 years is about right for a normal car of that price range. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Rebates and selling price can affect resale value (as a percentage of MSRP) down the line as well. My love of the Taurus SHO is no secret around here, but brand new Taurus SHO's sell at a massive discount. No one wants to buy a 48,000 dollar Ford Taurus believe it or not. An aggressive negotiator can get almost 10K off sticker on a new SHO between FoMoCo rebates and dealer discount. I see lightly used 2013's with under 10,000 miles going for 35K or less all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:2009 was 5 years ago. 50% over 5 years is about right for a normal car of that price range. I will admit that's basically the first time I've bothered to look at cars that aren't either new or under $4000.  edit: 2009 was five years ago? God I'm old 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Yep, a MY 2009 would probably have sold in calendar year 2008, so the car has been putting around for 5 years.Friar Zucchini posted:I will admit that's basically the first time I've bothered to look at cars that aren't either new or under $4000. Remember back before the Financial Crisis when the Nissan GTR was the hot new poo poo that we had hundred page threads in AI about? 
Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Jan 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Faded Sloth posted:Proposed Budget: as of right now ~$3,000 If I were you I'd get the nicest 4 cylinder Camry you can find. I say this for a few reasons, the first being that Toyota has the most reliable automatic transmissions, second the 4 cylinder is nearly indestructible, and third the third and fourth gen Camrys which are in your price range have very good build quality. DO NOT buy from a dealer however, be patient and find one from a private owner that was taken care of and it will run forever with little maintenance. I'm going to be picking up a '93 4cyl Camry here soon in exchange for me doing some work to the owner's home. It's a one owner car and has almost 200k miles on it, however I'm not worried in the slightest because the car has all the timely maintenance records from the local Toyota dealership and it can go another 200k easy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
How have 2010+ Mazda 3's been for rust? I heard pre-2008 were really bad and 2008-2009 seemed to have improved some but I can't find very much info on 2010 and up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
They're still made in the same plant with the same paint shop, I can't imagine the rustproofing has improved any.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
Yeah I did some more digging and I'm seeing stories about 2010 and 2011 models with corrosion problems already. I like driving the Mazda3 I get from AutoShare but I had minor body panel rust problems with my last car and I'd like a not-ugly car this go around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
I was going to say it's another reason to step up to the 6, but then I realized that they've moved production of the 6 back to the same plant in Japan that makes the 3 too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
I have no rust on my '09 3 that I know of, for what it's worth. Mid-atlantic region too, so we get a fair amount of road salt and humidity both. Just had it serviced by a shop I trust too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Proposed Budget: $30,000 New or Used: New Body Style: Any How will you be using the car?: Commuting to work 5 days a week in salt heavy winter conditions and normal summer weather. Leisure driving and track days possible. No family, no kids so carrying 4 passengers would be nice but not required. What aspects are most important to you?: Fun to drive. Reliability. Willing to compromise on mileage if other costs are lower. I want a good sound system and the ability to handle cold winter weather. I want the car to be able to stand the test of time as I plan to own it long term. My problem is I'm comparing apples to oranges since I'm evaluating my purchase across a spectrum that looks like this Sport|-------------| Entry-Level Luxury. I'm willing to compromise between either of these elements as long as my reliability and winter capability requirements are met. Both extremes would make me happy. Currently my shortlist boils down to this: 1. 2014 Mazda 3 2.5L Sedan - This car sounds like it meets most of my requirements, especially with the Bose sound system and driving dynamics. Currently negotiating with dealer for a possible March delivery. Need a sober second thought. (Cons: Could rust away and look like crap in 4 years, hidden exhaust pipes scream cheap Hyundai style econobox despite paying a significant premium for this trim level.) Seems like a good compromise between sport and entry level luxury putting it in ILX and Verano territory. 2. Mark 7 Golf: Seems very promising. I'd probably get the 1.8T model since my 14km commute is full of stop & go traffic which means I'll be freezing my rear end off in the TDI model without a proper warmup. The GTI is far too expensive here and probably will cost me 40k+ on the road and won't have the same comforts as the Mazda despite. (Cons: Will spend far too much money on maintenance and repairs due to reliability problems. Risky to own past warranty.) 3. Ford Mustang: I'd sacrifice a lot of comforts but still have a great audio system. The car has been around forever and probably shares a lot of parts with high volume Fords like the F-150. Should be pretty reliable and the sheet metal seems rust resistant. In a world of Camrys and Civics I would still stand out despite the car being common in rental fleets.(Cons: Possible winter difficulties, might not be as reliable as I think it is, floaty ride?, not worth it unless a V8?, Insurance might risk cost of ownership) 4. Hyundai Genesis Coupe: Could be a good compromise on reliability and cost of ownership while still getting mustang like features. (Cons: Looks like a cheap plastic car, Don't like the interior, reliability questionable, crappy ride, winter capable?) 5. Subaru Impreza: Meets my reliability, long term ownership and winter ready requirements. (Cons: Slow, cheap interior, don't like how it looks, higher trim levels are too expensive for what you get) 6. Buick Verano: Has most of what the Mazda has with a stronger engine for a roughly similar price. (Cons: I don't trust GM, this thing probably won't last me a long time.) 7. Acura ILX: Mazda has most of what this car has for less money. The Mazda has a better engine unless I choose to get the model with the 200hp engine. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:5. Subaru Impreza: Meets my reliability, long term ownership and winter ready requirements. (Cons: Slow, cheap interior, don't like how it looks, higher trim levels are too expensive for what you get) Have you looked at the WRX? It is well within your budget. Or is that what you meant by higher trim levels?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
The Made in Japan Imprezas have similar probles as the Mazda with rust. Here's an example of an almost brand new car in Calgary where they don't really use salt. http://www.westernsubaruclub.com/smf/index.php?topic=22315.0 If you're just looking at the base NA version the made in USA Legacy might be a better bet. VW/Audi/Porsche all have like 13 year anti-perforation warranties and have fully galvanized bodies from the factory. I would trust the Verano on reliability before the Mustang. You can also get into a Camaro for about the same price. A Fiesta ST or Focus ST is what you are really looking for though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Proposed Budget: $30,000 I feel like the Mustang might be the best considering your priorities, but you will need snow tires. The Hyundai is similar, but it's not received very good reliability rankings from Consumer Reports, and I've heard of some bad experiences from people trying to use the 7year/10,000 mile warranty. That's just anecdotal, though. Thing is, there's no reason to buy a new Mustang, they depreciate like crazy. You can get a 2-3 year old V6 for half your budget, or a 1 year old 5.0 with $5k to spare. So consider that. Golf would also be good for rust resistance, but I'm not sure how I'd feel buying the first of a new model year from VW.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
The Focus and Fiesta ST really caught my attention. My only concern with those is that I have never driven a manual before. Always wanted to, but never had the opportunity since my friends know better than to let me learn on their cars. Still, the Focus ST rockets to 2nd place. I'll probably stall it until I figure out how to drive stick. After year 1 I hear it depreciates by about 10k but this isn't an issue for me since I will own it long term. I'll have to sit in one to make sure the Recaro seats aren't a problem. My employer also has a program where I can get a discount if I buy a Ford vehicle. I suppose once I stack whatever factory incentives they have and the usual dealer negotiation I could get a Focus ST for FAR less than the Mazda. I'd sacrifice a few tech gizmos, but meh I can live without them considering the rest of the car will be almost identically equipped. I suppose my only concern with the ST is how much it will cost to service and whether I can trust it to be reliable. I'm going to assume American cars are solid with regards to rust/paint issues. I have coworkers who had horrifying experiences with their Ford cars dying on them but this was on older models just before the Mulaly days really kicked in. I like the luxury/handling balance the Golf strikes but the new one might prove to be risky until Mexico gets their QA affairs in order. I can't afford to wait another model year because of my job. They had it out in Europe for a while so perhaps Puebla will be able to get a head start on quality. I'm not sure. I think the Golf will be fine as far as the power-train is concerned but I suspect I'll have a lot of problems with the electrical system. A friend of mine drives a Beetle and I couldn't help but notice how hollow and flimsy his doors are. When I shut the door there's no weight to it and there's a loud rattle as the door panel vibrates against the metal. I suspect the Golf will do the same thing. As for the Mustang, I'll have a look and see how much lightly used ones go for. Lastly could you guys tell me more about the Camaro and Legacy? I have zero knowledge of GM cars beyond the usual hearsay (Government motors, unreliable crap, cheap plastic American poo poo). I have an open mind. If the Camaro isn't too expensive to maintain and can offer up decent reliability figures it's a contender for sure. EDIT: A quick google search produced this: http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=326133. STs seem to wind up in the shop a lot for turbo issues. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 03:12 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Now if your primary goal is the status of driving an Audi or Benz, go ahead and buy one. If you're looking for a good value while meeting certain wants/needs, consider the following: I have to agree with this. I just bought a Ford Flex with the Limited trim, after coming from driving mainly luxury vehicles. For the price and what you get, you really can't compete (I really love Infinitis, but paying so much for a car that I was going to spend half my day fishing cheerios out of the seats didn't sit well with me.) I also like the Sync operating system. The car right before it was the STi, and the Subaru/Pioneer operating system pissed me off in a new way every day. The last time I used BMW's it irritated me a bit as well. Uncle Jam posted:I have to agree with the lightly used experiences as well. I tried negotiating a year old sti with 10k on it and the guy wouldn't go under $1000 from msrp. The whole thing about the car losing a ton of value when it comes off the lot isn't really true anymore. Because of the sales tax advantages in my province and having a 3 week old baby, I went the lazy route and traded in my year-old sti and got a really decent price (low kms also helped.) They're so easy to sell that dealers will always make money on that trade-in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:The Focus and Fiesta ST really caught my attention. My only concern with those is that I have never driven a manual before. Always wanted to, but never had the opportunity since my friends know better than to let me learn on their cars. Take into consideration that 1) a lot of Ford's problems stem from the MyFordTouch system, which are annoying but won't kill you, and 2) Focus ST drivers are probably dumb assholes beating the poo poo out of their cars (see: "Overboost" function). That being said I really haven't heard anything has imrpoved with Ford WRT reliability since Mullaly, most Ford apologists are crediting him with things like greater emphasis on exterior design, embracing and marketing the poo poo out of new engine technology, and unifying European and American product lines. Good for selling more new cars but that's it. By most measures Ford's reliability is actually much worse than it was before because of all the new technologies. Mustangs haven't exactly been trouble free either. VWs are unreliable because they are badly designed and use shoddy parts. ALl of their problems stem from parts and design decisions from Germany. The whole "Mexican cars are unreliable" thing is just thinly veiled racism from VW apologists. Somehow every other car maker except for VW is able to make reliable cars in Mexico except for VW, just like every other car maker except for VW is able to make reliable cars everywhere. GM has been suffering from some rather questionable product planning recently but their quality has generally been quite good, better than Ford or Chrysler I would say. The Camaro is a bad car in many ways, it has a terrible interior and unless you buy the convertible you can't see anything out of it, but I've never heard of any reliability issues and they are quite fast esp. considering the price. The Legacy is pretty good but the problem is that they got rid of all the performance trims so the only choices are the NA engine with CVT (slow)， NA engine with 6MT (slow, guzzles gas like a V6)， or H6 (not that fast, auto only, guzzles gas like a V8).
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The Legacy is pretty good but the problem is that they got rid of all the performance trims so the only choices are the NA engine with CVT (slow)， NA engine with 6MT (slow, guzzles gas like a V6)， or H6 (not that fast, auto only, guzzles gas like a V8). Yeah, but the turbo was fast, but guzzled gas like a v10. Having driven both in anger, I'd much rather the fiesta ST than the focus ST. Unless you need the space, I'd strongly recommend the small one. "Depreciates 10k is bullshit" because Focus STs are leaving the lot for way under MSRP. Like 22k on package 3 cheap for 2013s. People who mod them may have problems, but thems the breaks for modded cars. Even "just a re-flash" can be huge if poorly done. I suspect that they don't have a well known reliable tuner like for Subarus or VWs because small turbo engines are new for USDM fords. This only matters if you want to mod. I wouldn't be to worried about reliability, but I'd strongly prefer one without myford touch (don't know if that is an option). GM QC is just fine. The camaro is like driving a tank with the gunslit windows. It is my least favorite muscle car.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:After year 1 I hear it depreciates by about 10k but this isn't an issue for me since I will own it long term. This is not great thinking to get into, not least of all because if it depreciates that much in one year, why aren't you just buying one that's one year old? Depreciation is something you have to think about no matter how long you plan on keeping the car. Now actually, I don't think the Focus ST depreciates that much except maybe a loaded model, which can hit 30k. Options don't do well on the used market. I've driven the Focus ST recently and I'd have hard time recommending it. There's a lot of issues with the clutch, and some issues with the turbo. The car is fun and fast but also has torque steer (the steering wheel moves when you're hard on the gas) and the interior doesn't strike me as particularly comfortable. The real problem, though, is the Mustang - it is better looking, more reliable, faster, more fun to drive, and it's not even much less economical with the V6. As for the Fiesta ST, it can be hoot, but it's also based of a sub-compact economy car and has some baggage that goes with that. It's very small, a bit loud inside, and material quality in the interior isn't the best. You're also likely to have difficulty finding one on a lot, and people were saying their orders are taking 6 weeks last time I'd visited the Fiesta forum, which was a few weeks ago. Camaro? I don't like it. Visibility is bad, interior is bad, engine is just okay with the V6. I'd pick the Mustang instead. Still, it might be worth a drive if you fancy its looks, because it can be a comfortable cruiser. I've not pay much attention to the latest legacy so I'll not comment, but it's probably not much fun to drive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:Camaro? I don't like it. Visibility is bad, interior is bad, engine is just okay with the V6. I'd pick the Mustang instead. Still, it might be worth a drive if you fancy its looks, because it can be a comfortable cruiser. I've read the past few posts about camaro/mustang, but I'm looking at the Challenger R/T. I was considering the golf mk7, but after the transmission on my wife's Mexican jetta exploded at 40,000mi, I won't be buying another Mexican produced VW, especially one in the first model year. Any word on Dodge reliability? I think I'm going to wait for the 2015 m/y for what is reported to be an upgraded interior.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
I like the Fiesta ST from what I've seen. Comes with all the nice things like nav, good sound system and some leather for far less than competing brands. I haven't heard about any serious reliability issues with it. Only trouble is I'm a tall guy so I will have to go find a Fiesta and sit in one just to make sure I can fit into it. While we're on the subject of hopped up ecoboxes what about the Civic Si HFP?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 17:09
|
|