Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Midsize Sedans 2.0

1483484486488489742

Comments

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    We have bought 8 vehicles in 25 years. 3 of these were used. 2 of the used ones were bought for our kids to use. We also still have the last 3 of those that were bought new.

    I'm not too sure about the way acdii thinks about money, given this statement: haven't lost money, or rolled payments over on any of them, in fact my last two purchases have reduced my monthly payments.

    I don't really know what "rolled payments" even means. I think it is unlikely, to say the least, that he traded the cars in for more than he paid, so I am not sure what the claim of "not losing money" actually means. He seems to be one who thinks not in terms of how much something costs, but instead how much it costs per month...so not losing money probably just means the car did not depreciate faster than he paid off the loans.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    That still seems high to me. 18,500 per year would be 92,500 mi in 5 years. Would a 5 year old Sonata with that many miles on it really have a value of $8500?

    Edmunds is showing me more like $6000 for a 2005 with 92,500 miles...and that's for selling it yourself. Trade in is even lower, well under $5K.

    (BTW 18,500 miles per year is well above average, I think the average driver puts something like 12-13,000 miles on)
  • acdiiacdii Posts: 753
    By not losing money, I mean, I paid for the cars use, and when I traded it, I didn't owe more than what I got for it, hence no money lost.

    If you lease a car, at the end of the lease you turn it in. You pay for the car's depreciation through a lease. Basically this is what I did, just not by leasing the car. Needless to say I just got lucky that the cars all held high resale values so that when I traded in the cars they did not have any negative equity in them. When you trade in a car, any negative equity, that is money in which the car is worth less than what is held by the bank note, is what you either have to pay off upfront, or roll it into the next car loan. So lets say the car you finance is 28K, the trade is worth 22K, you owe 24K, that extra 2K you either need to pay off right then, or add it to the loan of the next car, so you finance a 28K car for 30K. This is where you wind up totally upside down on a car loan, somewhere you don't want to be, and in most cases is where you wind up on a used car loan due to the higher finance charges. In all my trades I was in the equal or positive category, no negative equity on any of them. This is basically where you wind up if you lease a car.

    In all the cases except the Prius, The money I paid out went towards depreciation of the car, since I put on a lot of miles, the cars depreciate fast, hence the short turnaround times between cars, if I still drove the Prius, it would be in negative equity territory, where I would owe more on it that its market value. I got rid of it when it still had decent market value, same with the Camry Hybrid and Hyundai Veracruz. The main difference between the way I have been doing it and a true lease, once I hit the mile limit on the leased car, it would have to be parked until the lease ends, or pay a large penalty for excess mileage. I have also been able to negotiate some really good deals on the cars, and I keep my cars in pristine shape, which helps tremendously when it comes time to trade them. The Prius and Veracruz were like new when I traded them, the Camry had some body damage from a storm, and a horse, so I got lucky that I got payoff on it in the trade, which took some heavy negotiations.
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    edited April 2010
    Yeah well the 2005 Sonata only cost about $16K to start so in your example I'd only be losing $11K in 5 years, not too bad at all. The 2011 I would expect to get $8500 pretty easily in 5 years/95000 miles, especially for the SE or Limited.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    I think it's a 23 hp difference (240 to 263)

    That's with the new 3.0L. The 06-09 3.0L was around 221.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,972
    the topic was 2010 models.
    i own 3 3.0 duratec v6's. the 04 escape part time 4wd (200 hp)/4 speed trans averages 19.2 mpg. the 07 fusion awd (221 hp)/6 speed trans averages 22 mpg. the 09 escape awd (240 hp)/6 speed trans averages 22 mpg.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    temj12 said he/she owned a 2008 V6. I was comparing it to that.
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    I measure differently.
    I bought a 2000 S-10 new for $9990 plus tax. I traded it in a year and 5300 miles later for 9700. It cost me 290 to own for a year.
    If I was making $24 a month in payments, and put nothing down, I would have come out even on the S-10 in your book?
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    $290 a year sounds like a good deal for just about any car - where do I sign up??
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 418
    Why arent you counting the tax you paid?

    In any case the people saying you're turning over your cars multiple times in the span of a few years I strongly doubt (a euphemism ;) ) that you're even close to breaking even. Nothing wrong with doing it if you want to, but you lose money that way. Taxes, document fees, depreciation and so on.

    I was considering getting a used for my next car but I'll probably go new myself hah :P I do plan on keeping it for at least 5 years though.
  • acdiiacdii Posts: 753
    Why arent you counting the tax you paid?

    Oh I do, I get to deduct it from my taxes! Here's the thing, The most I have put down was one months car payment on any of them, financed the rest. The key to this was getting very low financing. On the Fusion, it is 0%, the Flex is 3.9%, so I am not paying out a large portion on finance charges, instead the majority of the payments go towards the principal, keeping the payoff in line with the depreciation. As long as that can be maintained, flipping cars is easy, but when you get into a point where you owe more than the car is worth, then you are in a bad loan, and unless you can dump some cash into the loan, you are stuck with that car until it is paid off, and in my case, that would be a car with at least 175K miles in under 5 years. I average at least 38K a year or more, it adds up quickly. Where I live having a dependable car that handles snow well is a must, and it has to have room for two car seats and two adults. The Fusion has done this to a T!
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,972
    sorry. my bad.
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 418
    I'm still putting off buying. I think I just want to be sure I'm making the right choice since I want the car I get to last me another 10 years like my current car. Well that and I love not having a car payment ;)

    Anyway, let me know if I have this about right: By this fall, I should be able to see both a Sonata Turbo and the new 2011 Kia Optima, right? I'm assuming the Kia will have a Turbo as well but not by Fall. Anything else interesting in this segment that will be available by that time? Right now the cars that interest me in the midsize sedans are the 2011 Sonata, Altima and the upcoming Kia since it's basically a Sonata in a different body style from what I can gather.
  • syitalian25syitalian25 Posts: 303
    I want to love the Kia and say it is basically a Sonata with some minor differences, but in the past the reviews on similar Kia sedans have pointed out some big differences in terms of the way the car drives. I would definitely wait for the Optima to be out for a few months and see what reviewers/owners are saying about it before deciding it's a discount Sonata. Plus please God tell me they are not going to sell it with those wheels...
  • avucarguyavucarguy Posts: 56
    but I'll stick to my original assertion that frequent trades are bad for most people's financial health.
    I agree with you, but buying a car with a good resale value helps reduce your loss when it comes time to sell or trade it in for a new vehicle. I also stay with vehicles that will cost
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 418
    Hah yeah those rims look terrible but I do like the body style a lot. At least from what I've seen. Yes I'll certainly wait to see what the reviewers say, if they arent all as great as the Sonatas have been that will make a big impact on my decision.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    edited April 2010
    I don't know of anything else coming down the pike by the end of 2010 in the mid-sized family car class. The next-gen Passat is not due until 2011. The next Camry probably won't be here until 2011 at the earliest. You might want to take a look at the new Regal when it arrives later this year; I was impressed when I saw it up close at the auto show. Who knows, maybe someday soon the good folks at Edmunds.com may even decide to retire the Aura picture to the right and replace it with the Regal (hint hint HINT :) ).

    Another possibility for later this year is the next-gen Elantra, which will be like the Kizashi in the sense it will have mid-sized interior room but a compact exterior, and an I4 only (and a hybrid powertrain is rumored). It's been called a "2011" model, but I'd be surprised if it came out for the 2011 MY, i.e. late 2010, since the current Elantra debuted in late 2006 as a 2007 MY, and four years is very short for a generational changeover these days.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Based on your logic...I bought a new car for $20,000, sold it a week later for $15,000, but I did not lose any money on it because I paid cash.

    Also the 0% is usually not really 0%, as it is typically an alternative to a cash rebate. If I have a choice of a $2000 rebate or 0%, then taking the 0% really means effectively paying $2000 in interest.

    That said, with the amount of driving you do, I can certainly understand getting a new car every 3 years or so. I'd take about 15 years to get the miles you put on in 3.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    edited April 2010
    I think the new Focus is to be out later this year. If they are making it bigger, it may be approaching the size of smaller midsize cars (or should I say car, as the Kizashi seems to be the only smaller midsize).

    Oh, also isn't there a new and bigger 2011 Jetta coming this summer or fall? Maybe that'll be nearly midsize also.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    There's no information saying the Focus will be moving up to the mid-sized class, interior-wise. The Fusion is already in that class. Hyundai's problem (if you can call it that) is that the Sonata is in the large-car class interior-space-wise. So they need a car with a mid-sized interior, hence the Elantra.

    Also, we have seen a preview of what is in store for the 2011 Jetta in the guise of the 2010 Golf, and the interior of that is only 93 cubic feet--a couple more than the 2010 Jetta, but not enough to get into mid-sized territory. It's possible the Jetta will have a larger interior than the Golf, but it would take a considerable bump to put it into the mid-sized class.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Well, not that EPAs "cubic feet" is necessarily the arbiter of size classes to me, but they have the Golf (as well as the predecessor rabbit) at 94 cf for passenger "volume". So if you were to just add the Jetta's 16 cf trunk to that it'd be 110 cf which is the bottom of the midsize category. However, the Jetta loses a few cf...not sure why, but my guess would be that the roof line leads to less rear head room?

    The current Focus is only 3 "cubic feet" short of reaching the 110 that defines midsize class for EPA. Adding a couple inches of width (I understand it is to be wider) could be enough to push it to 110.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    As a matter of fact it looks like if the new Focus gets the interior width of the current european model, it'll be about as close to EPA's midsize as it can be, if it is not actually in that size class.

    EPA "volume" is based on multiplying head room by leg room by shoulder room in front and rear and adding and then adding trunk volume. The current euro Focus is has an inch or two more shoulder room than our version. That increase would be enough to move interior passenger volume to about 96 cf adding a 14 cf trunk would mean 110 cf and thus midsize, according to EPA.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    As a matter of fact it looks like if the new Focus gets the interior width of the current european model, it'll be about as close to EPA's midsize as it can be, if it is not actually in that size class.

    EPA "volume" is based on multiplying head room by leg room by shoulder room in front and rear and adding and then adding trunk volume. The current euro Focus is has an inch or two more shoulder room than our version. That increase would be enough to move interior passenger volume to about 96 cf adding a 14 cf trunk would mean 110 cf and thus midsize, according to EPA.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    edited April 2010
    We'll have to see how the numbers shake out. Maybe we'll have one or two more "compacts with mid-sized interiors" in the near future--which would be a good thing. Although the numbers don't tell the whole story as we know, e.g. the Accent has more interior volume than the Civic, but there's lots more usable leg room in back of the Civic than in the Accent.
  • dash5dash5 Posts: 418
    Oh the Regal I forgot about that one thank you. Hyundai, Kia and Buick. Would definitely not have thought that a year or two ago.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    I think there's many people today with that thought. ;)
  • Hyundai's problem (if you can call it that) is that the Sonata is in the large-car class interior-space-wise. So they need a car with a mid-sized interior, hence the Elantra.

    That's what I don't get...how does Hyundai fit all that space in the Sonata (and the trunk, which is huge) and still get the stellar MPG?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    edited April 2010
    A long wheelbase, and GDI. And weight savings by not having to support a V6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Seems like we heard about this for a good 6 months to a year, then it was dropped from conversation. It was supposed to be the next big engine technology jump for Honda. What happened? And no, I'm not looking for a snide remarks; just curious.
  • acdiiacdii Posts: 753
    It's Magic! Not having a V6 in it helps, but it is probably underpowered, so it may not get up to speed as fast as one may like, but get good FE. It probably has a low COD too.
Sign In or Register to comment.