Last post on Mar 16, 2013 at 9:24 AM
You are in the Smart Shopper
What is this discussion about?
#1355 of 1392 Re: Need to spend less on gas. What to buy? [sebring95]
Oct 20, 2011 (4:13 pm)
If you're talking a mid-2000's midsize sedan, not just Accord and Camry, but pretty much all of the offerings are decent. Fusion/Milan, Sonata/Optima, Malibu, and so on can all be good options in 4 cylinder guise.
Oct 21, 2011 (10:25 am)
I am all over the place with cars. Initially, was thinking SUV but lately I am thinking AWD sedan. Want to go used and pretty new 2009-2010. Since, I am going used Subies are out. So, what is left? The way I look at it a new Legacy can be had for about 22,000 so I want to spend less than that. The only car that I can think of is a Fusion/MKZ and I don't know if an MKZ can be had for that price. Am I missing something? Most AWD cars are more expensive brands BMW, Audi, Infiniti, etc. The only other options are a Taurus but man are those things (the new body style) pricey, or the Chrysler 300 but that is pricey too. What else is there?
Now, I know that snow tires on a FWD car are better than a AWD with all season tire but my wife wants AWD which means that I need AWD.
#1357 of 1392 Re: AWD Car [robbieg]
Oct 22, 2011 (3:19 am)
I've been all over this one too as I could get by with a car a lot more often than I do if I went AWD. My biggest problem with the AWD cars is the horrendous gas mileage. I mean for what you give up they're not much better than SUV/Crossovers. But if you want the performance increase the car obviously wins out. I won't buy a Subaru new or used and they've pretty much got the market locked up. I think they're good cars and the awd is far better than most of the run-o-the-mill AWD's...but I just don't like anything they have to offer.
I think the Fusion/Milan is about the only choice in that age/price range. I would want to hold out for the 2010 on that model. The MKZ is still a little pricier and I can't see paying extra for the same car with a Lincoln name on it unless there's a specific feature you want. Gas mileage is a stinky 17/24 (for a mid-size V6 it's stinky).
If I do it I'm really leaning towards the Charger RT. It's expensive but I get the performance I'm looking for and mpg is 15/23. V8 under the hood of a bigger better performing vehicle and I'm ok with a 1-2mpg penalty. In the end...I'll probably just keep pumping gas into my Pathfinder. Performance isn't bad and I don't have to dump $30k+. I'm getting cheap in my old age.
#1358 of 1392 Re: AWD Car [sebring95]
Oct 22, 2011 (1:18 pm)
Not cheap, just a bit more practical. Everybody has a different point where it pays to swap out a vehicle over keeping the curent ride. We're in a similar situation...the wife's '05 Mazda 3s is almost at 97.4k miles and we had to decide to keep the car and buy new shoes for it or to trade it in on a new car. She needed new tires like "now" so we had a decision to make...keep it & buy tires or plunk down about $20k or so on new. Problem is that the supply of cars she'd like isn't there and she has a pretty good short list to test drive. And we hate to rush into this big of a decision and to spend that kind of $ on when she hasn't tried everything and have a chance to discuss it with me.
So we decided to buy the new shoes and keep the car for another year at least. Hopefully nothing big will happen where the car needs some major $ thrown at it. We'll do the 100k mile stuff...new plugs and radiator service and possibly a tranny service. But nothing else and hope we can get her a 2013 model. By that time supply will be back up and we'll have test driven everything on the short list. Time to think while accumulating more $ in the bank to purchase it outright, unless they bring back the 0% financing.
This is the practical, financially smart thing to do to achieve the ultimate result of purchasing her a great new car. And then, by 2015 or so, it'll be my turn. With the way I'm putting on mileage now, my Civic should have under 50k miles and there will still be pretty good value left for the next owner...they will be getting a very sweet, well careed for ride. A win/win for everyone concerned!
#1359 of 1392 Re: AWD Car [sebring95]
Oct 22, 2011 (3:08 pm)
I had an '07 Fusion AWD until about 6 months ago.
It was one of those 80/20 cars.
I liked that it did not feel front driveish and was very smooth on the highway.
The engine sound was bad, especially when started cold.
After that it was pretty quiet, although nailing the gas didn't sound that great either.
The interior showed some obvious cost cutting, but the back seat had plenty on legroom and headroom for a 6ft+ adult, even with sunroof.
Mine was rated 18/27 under the old rating system and on a long trip I could hit the highway rating. Overall, I averaged 22.25 mpg.
The MKZ has a larger 3.5 engine.
Dec 03, 2011 (10:44 am)
I'm looking to purchase an inexpensive, older convertible (ideally a 2 seater) that I can keep for years to come as a second car. I'd like it to be reliable, fun to drive, won't plummet in value, and a car that, if something breaks, there's information out there to teach me how to fix it. I'm pretty young, and I don't know a whole lot about cars (although I am pretty handy), but if I learn on the way that's great. I don't want it to start out as a project car, but if over the years it gives me some projects, I'm okay with that. I'm thinking about an older BMW Z3. According to edmunds prices a 96 would should come in at about 4-5k. I'd also consider the Honda S2000, although the entry price seems to be about double what I could get a Z3 for (although it would be a newer car). I thought about the MR2 Spyder but heard that it has an unpleasant exhaust note, the Audi TT, but given Audi's reliability that thought concerns me, and the Miata really doesn't do anything for me visually. Are there any other cars I should seriously consider? Would appreciate thoughts from some that have gone before me. Thanks all!
#1361 of 1392 Re: What to buy? [hambonecampana]
Dec 03, 2011 (11:54 am)
Well, since you shot down the miata, the z3 is your car. Unless you want to spend the dough on the Honda, the bimmer is the only other reliable and easy to work on model. Stick with the 6 cylinder, IMHO.
#1362 of 1392 Re: What to buy? [qbrozen]
Dec 06, 2011 (6:19 am)
Totally agreed-- the early year 4 cylinder Z3s were terrible. Compare the inline six to the S2000s and see what you find out. I doubt the gap is as wide as you think, and the S2000 is a much faster, more sporty car than any except the M Z3 which I doubt is on the table.
#1363 of 1392 Re: What to buy? [colin_l]
Dec 11, 2011 (2:21 pm)
You absolutely want the S2000. The resale value on BMWs is poor because they are pretty sad things used, especially the original Z3s. The Boxster also has similar engine and repair cost issues. Both drive great, but they aren't simple or basic cars. ie - they are a 2-seater convertibles and not really a light and agile roadster.
Plus, the reason S2000s don't depreciate is because they really were instant classics.
#1364 of 1392 Re: What to buy? [plekto]
Dec 11, 2011 (6:15 pm)
Well, if we are comparing old ones, it doesn't amount to a whole hell of a lot. And s2ks certainly do depreciate.
2000 z3 2.5. Original msrp 31,300. Current trade-in value with 100k miles is $4900. 15.66%
2000 s2000. Original msrp 32,000. Current trade-in value with 100k miles is $5800. 18.13%
That seems to hold pretty steady through the years. An '04 s2k, for instance, is worth a grand more than an '04 z4 2.5. Both were right around $33k new.