Ask the Car People.SM


Please help me decide between...

562 messages,  Last post on Sep 17, 2009 at 7:31 AM

You are in the Smart Shopper Forum.

What is this discussion about? Car Buying

Messages Page 53 of 57

#513 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [steine13] by exb0

Mar 14, 2009 (7:38 am)

Replying to: steine13 (Mar 14, 2009 5:27 am)
I have no problems with the CR-V, my wife does. She read Edmunds review and it says:
 
"The CR-V's Achilles' heel continues to be its four-cylinder engine, which simply can't compete with the V6s available in rival models. With a full load of passengers and cargo, highway merging can be harrowing, and the automatic transmission hunts more than Teddy Roosevelt on an African safari."
 
It is my fault, I introduced her to Edmunds. I usually shop for vehicles for her, give her two options and she picks one. However, I always get blamed for anything that goes wrong with her vehicle. This time she is doing her own research.
 
I think I will steer her toward the CR-V LX. My kids are going to get their licenses in two years. If she doesn't like the CR-V, she can give it to the kids.
 
Do you think CR-V is safe for teenager drivers? I know that SUV are not recommended for teenagers for the risk of roll over, but how likely is that?
 
Another question is AWD vs. FWD. We live in Northern VA and we don't really need AWD, however, I am worried about the resale value. In my area, for some dumb reason, majority of SUVs are sold as AWD, even sedans with that option are more popular. If I get the FWD, how bad do you think I will get hit at trade-in time?

#514 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [exb0] by fezo

Mar 14, 2009 (7:41 am)

Replying to: exb0 (Mar 13, 2009 9:05 pm)
Ouch! Best of luck. I can see a really pleasant weekend at your place....
 
Fortunately my wife has a much shorter "I hate that" list. I think it came from here dad being in car sales. She never got used to one car for any length of time.

#515 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [exb0] by steine13

Mar 14, 2009 (8:05 am)

Replying to: exb0 (Mar 14, 2009 7:38 am)
Do you think CR-V is safe for teenager drivers? I know that SUV are not recommended for teenagers for the risk of roll over, but how likely is that?
 
Depends on how inclined your boys are to be idiots... I don't even know anyone who's rolled a car; it seems to be pretty avoidable for most sane people.
 
Disconnect the radio and make them keep their cell phones off, and you're 90% of the way there...
 
-Mathias

#516 of 562 Re: Between Lexus IS250, BMW 3-series, MB C-class -- also, New or CPO? [greeneyespsu] by tlong

Mar 14, 2009 (9:11 pm)

Replying to: greeneyespsu (Mar 14, 2009 7:36 am)
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.
 
Your post if confusing. If you want to save money the cars you listed are not cheap. Buying new is also not cheap. It sounds like you brain is competing with your heart. Buy what you love and understand it will be expensive, or buy what is economical.
 
If you want the Lexus and are willing to drive it a long time then Lexi have good resale values and are very reliable. You're going to pay more for maintenance on the German cars, also read Edmund's recent experiences with the MB C series reliability. If you are only going to keep the car a few years and under 80k miles then all three are going to be very expensive because you will eat the depreciation and they are all expensive, even though they hold their values pretty well they start with a high price so the depreciation (in absolute terms) is a lot.
 
If you want a nicer car and want to save some money then buy a car that is a few years old and somebody else can eat that depreciation. CPO may buy some peace of mind but you will get a much better deal if you go private party. I'd personally buy a few year old car and have a trusted private mechanic look the car over. With the money you save you can pay for your own repairs or buy a maintenance contract.
 
The other option is to buy new but buy a cheaper car. Since it appears you like sportier small cars, look at fully loaded Honda Civic or Mazda 3, or Acura TSX or VW Jetta. But of course the Jetta has the high German repair costs and low reliability.
 
Best of luck and tell us how you do!

#517 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [steine13] by suydam

Mar 15, 2009 (7:21 am)

Replying to: steine13 (Mar 14, 2009 8:05 am)
See the following Edmunds article:
http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/121373/article.html
 
Rollovers are a common problem with teen drivers and account for about 25% of fatal accidents. Teens do this more than experienced drivers because they swerve to miss something, then oversteer and overcorrect. They also have the lowest rate of seatbelt use and thus are more likely to be ejected from the vehicle if they do roll it. For this reason the typical SUV is not as safe for a teen driver as it would be for more mature drivers.
 
I have had 3 kids through the teen years and from my experience with them and their friends, I say big, safe, and slow. Buick or Toyota Camry or something like that.

#518 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [suydam] by steine13

Mar 15, 2009 (7:29 am)

Replying to: suydam (Mar 15, 2009 7:21 am)
. They also have the lowest rate of seatbelt use [..]
 
Well, that issue has an easy engineering solution...
 
My point is that the fix to rollover issues is not a lower center of gravity but a higher level of responsibility.
 
There are a very few vehicles that are prone to rolling over, and they were duly noted by Consumer's Union. The Tracker/Samurai twins, a couple others... I forget, it's been a while. But any car-based SUV is going to be just fine.
 
My point of view is that of a bicycle commuter. I'm scared *of* them, not *for* them.
 
-Mathias

#519 of 562 Re: Midsized crossover [steine13] by fezo

Mar 15, 2009 (8:52 am)

Replying to: steine13 (Mar 15, 2009 7:29 am)
Mathias makes good points but I don't think I would put my kid in most SUVs. Things like the CRV or RAV4 are different. They don't have the rollover tendencies of, say, early Explorers.
 
You can have rollover woes with cars, too, when they are badly engineered. VW Beetles were like that. Early Corvairs. The sad thing with the Corvairs is they were nice cars and once the problem was corrected they were as safe as most things on the road - but the damage had been done.

#520 of 562 Re: Between Lexus IS250, BMW 3-series, MB C-class -- also, New or CPO? [greeneyespsu] by cccompson

Mar 15, 2009 (11:58 am)

Replying to: greeneyespsu (Mar 14, 2009 7:36 am)
If you truly don't want to throw money away, stay away from high-end vehicles, especially those of German manufacture - period.

#521 of 562 Re: Between Lexus IS250, BMW 3-series, MB C-class -- also, New or CPO? [gre by plekto

Mar 15, 2009 (2:41 pm)

Replying to: greeneyespsu (Mar 14, 2009 7:36 am)
I'm replying to two posts here to save space, so bear with me...
 
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.
 
Unfortunately, this leads to poor ring seating, carbon build-up, and other ills. Engines need to be regularly run at 2/3 - 3/4 of their maximum RPM to remain healthy. Every time I hear someone lugging a 4 cylinder engine I cringe. Americans need to un-learn these habits as they lead to premature wear, poor mileage, and buying a much more expensive vehicle than you need. A manual 4 cylinder Accord will go quicker in actual driving as the 6 with automatic just because of the driving style and one using the engine versus the other lugging it all the time.
 
*****
As for the poster who is looking for a small luxury sport sedan, I have a couple of recommendations, since my best friend recently was in the same scenario.
 
1: You want a car with RWD and proper handling. Front wheel drive is not any safer than RWD except in very tiny cars with poor weight distribution. Since a tiny Yaris, for instance, is about 60% front-heavy, it makes sense to make it FWD. But a sporty European type car with almost 50/50 weight distribution that weighs over 3000lbs is far better off as RWD. Case in point - my 2 ton SUV with RWD and rock-crawling tires is easier to steer than a rental FWD Cobalt I got recently.
 
2: You want a couple of year old certified car. Let the other person eat the initial tax and depreciation. You can, for instance, get a 4 year old C class for nearly 15K. That's a TAD better than a Corolla, in my book.
 
3:You want manual. Every car that's sold in Europe to people outside of maybe luxo-barges like the S-Class and taxis is manual. If you want a reliable car, therefore, manual is an absolute must. Mercedes, for instance, has terrible quality on its automatic transmissions because they're basically Chrysler units that they toss in for rental fleets in Europe(or technology borrowed from Chrysler) - and bring over pretty much as-is to the unwashed masses of yuppies in the U.S.(they really do look down on us when it comes to vehicles, and quite often, it's deserved)
 
The Lexus suffer from the miserable 5 and 6 speed automatics that are really expensive to fix and not very reliable as they are pretty new technology that Toyota is working the bugs out of. In Asia, the vast majority of vehicles are also sold with manuals, and a Japanese manual transmission is fantastic. Because it's what they sell at home. Again, they tend to toss any old automatic in it, call it a day, and ship it over to the U.S.
 
The best automatic transmissions, btw, are made by... GM. Because it's all GM does and has done for 95% of its fleet for nearly 40 years. GM also makes good manuals in their upper-end vehicles when you can find them.
 
The typical manual transmission repair is $600-$900. The typical automatic is now $4000. As a young driver, learning manual is not only a good skill to have, but it's the most frugal long-term option. Oh - and the cars have much higher resale value when you do decide to sell it in a few years.
 
My recommendations would be to look at the IS300, the C230K, and a first generation Cadillac CTS. The IS300 is by far a better vehicle than the IS250. Better handling, engine, and power. It's not an IS350, but the IS250 honestly drives like a GM or Ford car because it has far too little power for the weight.
 
The C230K - the sedan model with the 4 cylinder supercharged engine is capable of getting 35mpg highway, is agile, and extremely fun. The C class with manual was and still is the most popular model sold in Europe to real consumers that's made by Mercedes. Hardly anyone over there buys the E or S class except for fleets. The normal C230 is about the same in terms of performance, but it gets about 5mpg worse highway mileage and weighs a couple of hundred pounds more.
 
The CTS is a notable exception to the typical GM car. It's quick, has a great transmission that you could learn on it 15 minutes, and most of all, sells for really low prices used. The 3.6 is the one to get, because it's as advanced as anything Toyota or Honda make - and really transforms the car. The first generation ones are a bit smaller and more attractive to me as well. While I like the manual the most, I would buy a CTS with automatic, because it's a good and inexpensive unit to replace.(half the cost of the transmission in the Lexus)
 
People went on and on about how the interior on the CTS was bad, but honestly, it's better than a Civic. Was it price-competitive when it was new? Hardly. But as a used deal, I'd spend $12-$15K on a CTS a few years old over a new economy car without thinking twice about it. My parents did this same thing as well - bought a used higher end car instead of a new budget model. In every case their better built, better equipped and larger vehicle was better to drive and lasted longer than the ones their friends bought.
 
Lastly, new VS used - used has lots less sales tax, is less money per month, has less initial registration, and you can usually drive cars like this for about a 2K a year depreciation since the initial 3-4 years took out 40-50%. Buying a car for $12-15K and selling it 5 years later for $6K is a lot better than Buying new and eating $6K in the first year.

#522 of 562 Re: Between Lexus IS250, BMW 3-series, MB C-class -- also, New or CPO? [gre [plekto] by fezo

Mar 15, 2009 (2:46 pm)

Replying to: plekto (Mar 15, 2009 2:41 pm)
I'm absolutely with you on that last point. Let someone else take the depreciation hit on a new car. A two year old low mileage car has a ton of depreciation wrung out of it and is likely fine for a good decade.

Messages Page 53 of 57

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement