Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Smart Shopper Please help me decide between...
562 messages, Last post on Sep 17, 2009 at 6:31 AM
You are in the Smart Shopper Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester
|
Replying to: koftheworld (Mar 13, 2009 10:50 am) At lunch time I went home and we started moseying to the hospital. This was kid #3 so we knew the drill. Vans aren't bad. They're practical as all get out. The idea that a decent sized SUV is somehow less dorky is foreign to us. OTOH I'll readily admit that their gas mileage isn't much better than a lot of SUVs either. The Ody is actually our best snow vehicle. That said, the best advice is always buy what you like. well, maybe not the best advice but certainly the most likely to be followed... |
|
|
Honda is “repurchasing” our 07 Odyssey, long story. Wife doesn’t want another van, and she is looking for small to midsized crossover. Here is the catch, it has to have factory installed rear entertainment system similar to Honda’s where kids could listen to XM through the headphones and can control the stations, while she is listening to FM or CD through the speakers. It can be five passenger, must be reliable, and costs under $30K. Toyota Venza doesn’t come with rear DVD systems, at least in our region. Cheapest Highlander with DVD is $37K+. Pilot is out, too big, too ugly. Any other suggestions? Does anybody have experience with Mazda CX-9? |
|
|
Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 12:44 pm) Yeah, get each kid a $120 8" DVD player + headphones and call it good. You'd be amazed how quickly little kids learn this stuff if they know they're in charge of their own entertainment. The factory ones are way overpriced. -Mathias
|
|
|
Replying to: steine13 (Mar 13, 2009 3:38 pm) Just like factory nav systems (although the integration is pretty slick, but that's probably less of an issue with a kids' entertainment system). Don't get me started on Onstar's turn-by-turn navigation, which is just pathetic. |
|
|
Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 12:44 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: qbrozen (Mar 13, 2009 5:55 pm) I swear I am about to strangle my wife. We just spent four ours on Edmunds researching SUVs. She doesn’t want midsized ones because they are too big. Small ones don’t have enough leg room. CRV is great, but it won’t work because it is a 4cyl. RAV4 has 6cyl but the spare tire on the rear door is ugly. RAV4 without the rear tire has run flat tires, she doesn’t like that either. I should unleash her on some salesmen; I bet she would generate some stories from the sales frontiers.
|
|
|
Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 8:05 pm) I'm driving a 22 year old 4Runner for precisely that reason. It runs, it works, and it's paid for. If I had to make payments and have full coverage on a vehicle right now, it would cripple me. If the Honda is paid off, drive it and laugh at the people who are paying for new cars. That's exactly WHY you used to buy a Honda or Toyota, in fact - because you could drive it another decade once it was paid off and really come out ahead. |
|
|
Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 8:05 pm) Why is that? My mechanic has been telling me for years that if I want uncomplicated long life, a Japanese four-cylinder is the way to go. The sixes aren't bad but are more complicated. I'd have loved a strong four (and manual transmission) in our Sienna, which of course wasn't available. So six new spark plugs are two-three hours of labor. Oh well. Honda arguably builds the best four-cylinder engines in the world. They were years behind Toyota when they stuffed a six into the Accord, and C&D wrote about it, saying it was basically a waste of money, the four being so good and the car more balanced. I subscribe to the theory that we drive much more powerful engines than we need because American drivers, especially women, are conditioned to never floor or flog an engine. IOW, the car needs to accelerate great with 1/2 throttle or less, and not sound like it's working hard. The few times you really need close to 200 hp, just open up the CRV and it'll get the job done. Maybe you can get the missus to try it out on a test drive; just warm up the engine well beforehand. With your parameters, the CRV should be about perfect. Good luck, -Mathias
|
|
|
Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 8:05 pm) |
|
|
|
|
I'm in Los Angeles and currently looking to purchase my first car (I'm 25, female, and have had my mom's hand-me-down Cavalier since high school). Right now I am trying to get the best deal on a car, not just go with the newest, most flashy vehicle. I don't want to throw money away -- albeit steep depreciation, APR, etc. I have done quite a bit of research but it helps to get perspectives from people who have been in my situation and have experience with the cars I'm interested in. My top cars are Lexus IS250 (number 1 choice), BMW 328i and MB C300. I absolutely love the Lexus, but the APR on a purchase is about 7.7% (729 Auto Fico, but first-time buyer) and all that money is a total loss, and not worth it in my opinion. BMW and MB are higher priced, but both have potential APR of 0.9% (both say I would qualify but I don't know until I run credit.. I have already run at Lexus) for 60 and 66 months respectively. On the Lexus I'm interested in the premium and navi packages (POSSIBLY not navi, depending on the deal) with auto tranny, on the BMW just the premium package with auto tranny and on the MB just automatic tranny (possibly prem 1 package). What is the best car to hold value? Obviously the 3 series and C-class were both completely redone in in the past 2 years, Lexus had a last major redo in 2005 so it will likely have another one in the next 2 to 3 model years which concerns me on resale (no, I don't want to lease). BMW also pays first 2 months payments and has 4 year/50000 mile maintenance which is a plus, though Lexus already threw in 2 years maintenance and I'm sure MB would do the same. On the CPO side there is '06 or '07 IS250 (though I much prefer the '08 and '09 because of the grey wood trim), the '06 325i (0.9% APR) and the C230 (unknown APR?). I'm looking for opinions on whether the depreciation factor is high enough on the new models that I should look at going with the CPO instead or if a new vehicle is worth the extra ~$12K more. Also, is the CPO program on these vehicles any good (include maintenance, thorough inspection, etc?) because I've seen some posts that make me wary on other threads. Basically, I'm looking for your thoughts on NEW vs. USED (purchase) and then from there what vehicle out of the 3 as far as reliability, cost of ownership, etc. Thanks so much all! I've learned so much from you all already and am looking forward to your informative responses! 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Smart Shopper Please help me decide between...
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
