the last time I had a car totaled was in 1998. I was driving an '86 Monte that my Mom had given me just three months before. She had bought it new, and taken good care of it, but it had high mileage, a broken power antenna, and faded paint. Something like 179K when she gave it to me, and it was around 192K just 3 short months later, when I got t-boned while delivering pizzas.
Now, to me, that was a nice car, but with that kind of mileage, it was almost worthless. Insurance company gave me something like $2100 for it (would've been more, but I held onto the car). Plus $500 for pain and suffering. I ended up selling the thing for parts for about $800.
Now I wouldn't have paid $2100 for an '86 Monte with that kind of mileage back then, even if it were pristine! Unless it had a newly rebuilt 350 dropped in, or something!
Maybe I just got lucky, though. Also, things were a lot different back then, and insurance companies weren't hurting as bad back then.
That big depreciation hit one takes with a new car can sure look big if it is totalled out in its first year of existence. However, if it is a couple of years old then things can be better. A guy hit the '99 Cherokee I bought for my college age son. We had only had it since August. It had just 36,000 miles on it. They totalled it out and paid me pretty much what I had paid for it. Gave me retail price. They paid for the trailer hitch I had had UHaul install, too. So I guess I was lucky. The insurance companies are often just happy that no one was hurt both for humanitarian reasons and for the fact that person injury and medical care are where the costs can really add up.
As far as stolen cars, in that story about the most frequent vehicles, one source complained that Chyrysler was lax in adding anti-theft deterrence to their cars. Is this true? I looked at it another way, that after an Escalade, a Stratus was the next most desirable car. Anybody believe that?
I could believe that Chrysler is lax in installing theft deterent devices as std equipment. For Example, Honda gives you computer coded keys as std on the 03 Accord. Supposedly, you need this key to start the car. I am sure there are ways around it but it just makes the car less desirable as far as a thief is concerned. Well, since I was never a thief, I hope this is the case. But in the Intrepid, you can only get computer coded keys if you buy the ES model with the M package. In other words, you are talking about a car that retails for at least 27K, where as a 03 Accord LX 4 door automatic lists for $20,460. It seems to me that every manufacturer can give you computer coded keys for just a few pennies more.
Seems to me that Chrysler is no more, or less, "lax" about adding theft deterrent features than any other auto manufacturer. Security alarms and features have ALWAYS been available as optional equipment, including the Sentry key system on my Intrepid. Singling out Chrysler as different than other auto manufacturers in this regard seems rather "back handed".. It's also reasonable to assume that--given the universality of drivetrains and parts across the Chrysler line, these parts are not ending up in our country exclusively---think Mexico, Canada, etc....
question: how do you get at one of the click on dome lights in the overhead console? One is burned out. I bought the correct bulb, took the screw out on the windshield side of the console and the cover still wouldn't budge. I was afraid to pull too hard given that there are electrical connections to it. Yes, the entire unit moved, not just the cover. Any knowledge out there would be appreciated.
If you know the Chrysler product line, I am sure you will agree it is below industry standard in much of its equipment. Chrysler is alot like the bird with one tune cheap cheap cheap cheap cheap cheap.
My awareness of the Chrysler line comes from owning several, having a family member that was a former service manager, and an interest in most things automotive. I assume you have some baseline data to define what the "industry standard" is... Is that among primarily American manufacturers? If so I'd enjoy seeing that baseline and how it's defined..
Sorry if I got your knickers in a knott, however if you check you will see that my comments were directed toward Mike 372. I have no problem with your loyalty toward Chrysler as you indicate you have owned several and have a relative who once upon a time was a service manager. As an auto buff you must realize Chrysler was one of the first to begin decontenting or in some cases not even providing standard equipment ie ABS, Traction control, Side air bags, Power windows, Power seats, Auto headlights, Drl's, Remote entry etc etc etc, If you are happy with yours fine, you are the driver/owner and that is all that counts, just a little less of the superior attitude would be appreciated.
Well...yes....I am German....but I haven't worn knickers in quite some time and I can't recall a single time that they were "knotted". I wouldn't say that I'm a "Chrysler loyalist", although I currently own one. I owned and rather enjoyed three Mitsubishi's prior to my Intrepid and my family member USED to be a service manager. Yet, ironically, I didn't buy any vehicles from his dealership... I certainly appreciate that you commented to Mike372--but you posted a visible message about an issue that I was also discussing. It seems to me that you were trying to present a factual statement about decontenting and Chrysler apparently leading the field. You are correct that I have a great interest in automotive issues. That's why I responded; as you apparently had discovered some information of which I wasn't aware. Of course you would agree that it's important that information have a basis in fact or it might be considered by some to be just so much bluster.. As far as the superior attitude accusations, I'm not quite sure I understand where that comes from.....but, perhaps, it comes from the same place as your "data" on Chrysler's decontenting.... Be well..
the forum is not meant to be a back stabbing contest. These contests are reserved for those seeking political office. Much of what is said is based on opinions and may or may not be supported by facts. People tend to become disinterested very FAST if these types of discussions are part of the forum. So, please, if you are going to say something that may bring a negative response, do it privately, ie. via email.
I recently checked what a 2003 equipped exactly the same as my '99 would cost. I added the options on. With the car optioned the same way, the MSRP was about $1000 more, but with the available rebates and discounts, was about $1500 less.
My point--maybe "decontenting" is good as long as one looks closely at the options list and chooses wisely. That way you get exactly what you want. With a website like Edmunds, it is so easy. I ordered my 'Trep just the way I wanted it and it was in in 4 weeks.
Anybody have any advice about my dome light question above? Just a simple question.
Well the day we thought would never arrive has . The last LH car to ever to be built rolled off the line today . The last car was a white Intrepid SE . Now comes our future , the LX. Production should start sometime in Jan 04. I will keep you posted !!
Otto... Must be an interesting experience when a long standing, and good, run comes to an end. Is there a major retooling effort going on because of the differences between the LH and LX? Next, was there excess production of Intrepids to build up supplys until the LX's come out next Spring? Thanks for any info you have..
will the new LX have the same 4.5" bolt pattern that the LH does? It's not a big thing, but I think it's kinda cool that, if I wanted to, I could actually swap wheels between my '57 DeSoto, '79 New Yorker, '89 Gran Fury, and '00 Intrepid, and they'd all fit (well, except maybe fore clearances in the wheel well and such)
Jason - yup its kinda sad to see something you have been building since 1992 go away . There is a major retooling job going on at the plant as I write this . Production will not get going again till Jan of next year . We built a supply for the dealers , but not sure you would call it excess . Just something to hold them over till Jan .
Andre , I have seen the wheels and without actually trying one LX wheel on the LH it does look like the same pattern . Thats just a guess
was there much of a retooling of the factory back when you guys switched from the first-gen LH to the 2nd-gen? I'm looking forward to seeing these new LX'es on the street. I got a chance to see the Magnum wagon at the Carlisle PA all-Mopar nationals back in July, and that's one sweet looking ride! I thought it was kinda funny though...at the end of the show, they were loading the Magnum and some other show vehicles onto the same tractor trailers, along with some old 55-56 DeSotos! Now that was an interesting mix...
That has a good ring to it... Maybe you should start a car column called "Hey Otto".. Always good to have career options..! Two questions--one for Otto, one for the group. Otto--have you gotten any word on when the new Durango will be at dealerships? Second--what has been the groups experience with strut life? My 2000 ES is approaching 69K--no service folks have said "your struts are on the way out".. But I'm curious....
I think that I will have to look at that as the new supplement for the "Trep. I need to replace a 13 year old Aerostar van in the not too distant future.
Thanks... I look forward to taking one for a spin. I'll be in touch about Detroit. Have you been following the posts here for the past few weeks? Notice any similarities to an old friend of ours....
I have a 2000 Intrepid with 53,500 mostly highway miles. It is a GREAT car; 25 mpg avg, and no repairs required so far. That includes brakes, as it is still on the original brakes. Is that common on highway used Intrepids? I am thinking it is time to have them looked at, and I understand that after that many miles, I may have to spring for rotors as well. However, I have no brake noise, good stopping power, and no pulsing. If only my wife's Chevy Malibu could have done as well....
your rotors are probably fine. I've got about 85,000 miles on my '00, and it'll probably need new rotors the next time I get front pads again. My original pads lasted 39K miles up front, and 51K in the back. And this was mainly around-town driving. Hell, a good deal of that was delivering pizzas, and trust me, I wasn't gentle on the brakes! The next set of pads only lasted about 30K, but I goofed up and boughht cheap pads, so I got what I paid for, I guess. At 69K I bought some $55 Bendix pads, and I figure when they wear out, I'll do the rotors at the same time.
Probably the best thing to do is to get it jacked up and pull a wheel off, and look at the brakes. If you're doing mostly highway miles, they should last a long time.
One of my supervisors has a '92 or '93 Honda Civic that went about 150-160K miles on its first set of brake pads! He does almost pure highway driving, and comes in early and leaves early enough to miss most of the rush hour traffic. He's still on his original drums. Now I'm sure there's a certain crowd that would just chant "oooohhhhm....Honda....Oooooohhhhhmmmmm....Honda" but I think just about any car should get some serious life out of the brake pads if it's mainly driven on the highway. Provided you don't ride the brakes or regularly nail them!
if you want pads that will outlast your rotors, stop quicker and leave no dust on your wheels. They will add about $50/axle to your brake job but well worth it.
My roommates Honda Civic's front pads lasted about 40,000 miles. I am told by the Honda dealer that the rear brake shoes will easily go 100K miles. I checked them at 68K and they looked OK. At least half of the driving is on small town roads. I am in the process of repairing the Celica GTS and if it drives OK I will keep my Trep in the garage to keep the miles down. It still looks showroom new at 7300 miles.
I just had my '99 ES front brakes done at 68,000 miles. Those were the original pads and were still not completely gone. The rotors were turned at the same time. The rears are fine, and look like they will last well over 100,000 miles. Mine is a mix of highway and city driving.
I had the same experience as smithed since my driving is also a mixture of city and highway (mostly highway) I had a 95 Intrepid ES that I changed the front pads at 66K. I had the rotors turned at ~30 K, then replaced them at 66K. The back pads were still going strong at 102K when I traded to a 2003 300M.
Current company issue 02 Intrepid, not my choice but someone has to drive them. Brake repairs (km's are approx) Front 15, 35, 55, 75. Rear 35, 75. Pads and rotors replaced each time , first replacement under warranty, front calipers also replaced at that time, Chrysler parts. All other replacements were done with aftermarket parts cheap rotors and ceramic pads. Tests were done on other fleet vehicles using better quality rotors w/ metallic pads (noisy) or lower quality pads (fast wear). Higher quality rotors were also tested but the best combination was found to be the good pads with import rotors and change as a set. The local Chrysler dealer suggested using aftermarket parts to obtain better results than original equipment. With a labor rate of 60. per hr it is not cost effective to have the rotors turned.
My 2000 ES has just shy of 70,000 miles. I had my front pads replaced at roughly 45,000 with Bendix lifetime warranted pads. Rears needed replacing at 50,000. So far no other brake repair needs..
The Intrepid does have a wear indicator for the brakes, but it's nothing hi-tech. Just a little metal clip that screeches when the brake pad gets too thin and lets the clip touch the rotor.
Unfortunately, brakes don't always wear evenly. When I changed my front pads (can't remember if it was the first time or the second) one of the pads had actually worn at an angle. There was almost no "meat" at one edge, but where the little metal clip was, it wasn't worn down enough yet to make contact.
Probably a good idea to do a visual check on the brakes every time you rotate the tires. Which reminds me, that time's coming up again soon for me...
...for my old 'Trep. My Dad was in the mood for a car, so we went car shopping today. I had no intention of buying a new car, but I found one that might be just enough to get me out of my 'Trep. And dangit, this wasn't supposed to happen! My 'Trep was the first new car I ever bought, and it's paid off by Thanksgiving '04. I was really hoping to drive it till it dropped, and try to go as long as possible without a car payment! I was kinda hoping that my next car would be a few years down the road, when the new LX cars start hitting the used car market. Oh why oh why is the Lord tempting me so?
And what, pray tell, and I being tempted by? This evil-looking, black '02 Intrepid R/T that we saw sitting on a used car lot! Thankfully, we spent enough time getting my Dad a car that it started getting late, so I have time to think about it, but come noon tomorrow, when that dealership opens, I have a feeling I'm going to be there as they open the gate!! I'm almost tempted to keep my '00 around, but I still owe 14 months on it, and don't want to keep two car payments going on it. Plus, they're willing to give me what I owe on my '00 (which is about $1300 more than it's worth, with the miles I have on it), so I can probably actually get into this thing for a lower monthly payment, and on a 4-year term.
For some reason, that old song by Squeeze, "Tempted by the fruit of another" is running through my mind right now...
Ah hell Andre.....Just spring for a 2004 SXT--you'll get the same motor, just no 17" tires and sports suspension... Plus you'll have a new Intrepid with a huge rebate, low or no interest financing, and that "new car smell"... Or not.... Happy hunting! For what it's worth I feel the same way come fall--every vehicle I ever purchased since 1990 was between Halloween and Christmas--tis the season!
Did you buy the 02 R/T. Its very tempting. It is similar to the '02 SXT with the 3.5 motor and 7752 miles that I passed up when I bought my new SE. At $14,500 it was a great deal but it didn't have ABS, and that is why I didnt buy it. But I still think about it. I finally fixed up my moms Celica GTS that was in the accident and it rides just like it did before the accident. The body is in real good condition, just the front fender is scraped on the bottom. I hope to keep the miles down on my Trep and use the GTS, especially in the winter. It has an outstanding sound system, top of the line when the car was bought. It has every option offered in the car in 1991, short of all wheel drive, including ABS brakes. It listed for a whopping $23,698 in 1991, which was alot of $$ for a Celica back then.
...after I had a chance to sleep on it that nite. I went to bed all excited and everything, almost like a little kid on Christmas Eve, but started having second thoughts the next morning. As I got ready to go pick up my Dad (he wanted to go with me), I felt kinda like the Christians being thrown to the gladiators, but then I guess that's usually how it is when you go to the car dealer! ;-)
Anyway, when I drove the car, I was underwhelmed. Not that it was a bad car, but I guess I was just expecting more. It was kinda like expecting a '68 Coronet R/T, maybe, but then getting handed a '78 Aspen R/T! I really thought this car would be faster, but honestly, it didn't seem all that much quicker than my tiny 2.7! I'm sure if I put a stopwatch to it, it would've been much more noticeable, but just going by the "seat of your pants" feeling, it just didn't come off as that impressive. At least not enough to make me sink all that money into it.
Then I started thinking about how my car is paid off by next November, but if I traded, that would bump it out to 4 years, and it just didn't seem worth it. Plus, I know how my car's been maintained, and as a result I trust it. I know what it's had done to it, and I know what it's going to need soon. I didn't want to make the jump from that, back to a used car whose reliability could be a crap shoot.
I also started missing my car, even though I hadn't gotten rid of it yet! I mean, this was the first car I ever bought brand-new, and suddenly, I started feeling like an overprotective father! So, I'll probably end up sticking with my original plan, to drive this thing until it drops.
Thanks for keeping us informed... So many things seem clearer after a good night's sleep. While it's true that the 2.7 engine is a great little mill--the 3.2 and 3.5 are considerably faster. I notice it much more at the extremes of the rev range. Stepping off--because of the aggressive throttle tip in--seems comparable but is stronger with the 3.2/3.5(with the stronger torque) and in the upper ranges the superior horsepower wins. I was lucky enough to "run" a friend's SE against my ES. Gave a good account of itself but couldn't hang. In a similar vein, I played "cat and mouse" with an R/T last year coming back from a trip late at night. When a hole broke he could always get away faster than my 3.2, but eventually I could reel him back in. That said, when the 2.7 is "on the cam" and taking advantage of the lighter weight of the SE, it's a great ride. I have the same trepidation (no pun intended) about buying used--one never knows. Keep us informed..... And a note to the group...anyone seen a 2004 Durango on a lot??
I drove an new ES a couple of years ago with the 3.2 liter engine and I really could not tell a difference compared with the 2.7. After driving the ES, I took a SE with the 2.7 liter on the same road, up and down a rather substantial hill, and the only difference I could detect was the 3.2 was quieter. But the 3.5 liter in the SXT was definitely more powerful than the 2.7 liter. The 2.7 liter is OK but there are times where I wish I had the 3.5 liter.
would the 3.5 engine get? This R/T was EPA rated at 18/26. My '00 2.7 is rated at 20/29, and I usually get around 22 around town, and have actually gotten over 30 on the highway, although the norm is usually more like 28.
There are times too when I wish I had a bigger motor, but then overall, I think my car's pretty well-balanced out. This R/T definitely was faster than my car, but I guess I just expected more. Like years ago when I totaled my '69 Dart 225 slant six, and a few days later found a '68 with a 318...that was like a difference of night and day! Or comparing my old 1980 Malibu 229 V-6 or my '82 Cutlass Supreme 231 to my Mom's '86 Monte 305 when she gave it to me. That thing would've utterly blown the doors off those other two cars, and it wasn't even an SS!
I'm sure I would've been happy with the R/T if I bought it. The main factor though, was going into that much debt again! It was still a nice car, but just not nice enough to make me forget about the price!
a great V-8. My first car was a '71 Chevelle with a 350 motor. It was a quick car, only problem was that it got 10 MPG. But then again, gas was only 35 cents a gallon back in '71. My 1976 Firebird also had a 350 V-8, but it was not a Chevy V-8. The Chevy V-8's just had a great reputation, as they were also popular engines for speed boats of the time. Actually, the '91 Celica GTS with a 24 valve 2.2 liter engine is a pretty quick car. Its small and light. Kind of fun to drive around, although I have to watch my speed more carefully than with the Intrepid. The best thing about the car in playing Freebird with the 10 speaker premium sound system. You might wonder how they got 10 speakers in such a small car, but I counted them and there is definitely 10 speakers.
I have a five year old 300M with the 3.5L and I can tell you it is one great engine. After 115,000 miles, I have not had the first hiccup with this motor. I get up to 30 MPG steady-state interstate cruising at 75-80 MPH. In the first two years of ownership, I averaged 22.5 MPG in all driving (50/50 hwy/city).
Within the next couple of weeks, I will become the user of an '04 Intrepid ES as a company car and I'm really looking forward to it.
Smart move on your part. Monthly payments sure are great when they are paid off and there are none. That is really something to strive for. I am always concerned about looking down the road at 36 to 60 months of car payments. Don't do it unless you have to. Nothing like driving a car that you are happy with that has no payments associated with it.
The big advantage of buying new as opposed to used is that you know the maintenance that has been done and can feel better about driving it for many years and miles after all the payments are made. That said, I have had good luck with a couple of used vehicles, but bought the 'Trep new in '99 and have records of all the maintenance and know exactly what needs to be done and when.
That's a nice car, but you should stop looking at the picture. It's like some of those magazines with the girls in them--gets you all excited and doing things you shouldn't.
Comments
Now, to me, that was a nice car, but with that kind of mileage, it was almost worthless. Insurance company gave me something like $2100 for it (would've been more, but I held onto the car). Plus $500 for pain and suffering. I ended up selling the thing for parts for about $800.
Now I wouldn't have paid $2100 for an '86 Monte with that kind of mileage back then, even if it were pristine! Unless it had a newly rebuilt 350 dropped in, or something!
Maybe I just got lucky, though. Also, things were a lot different back then, and insurance companies weren't hurting as bad back then.
As far as stolen cars, in that story about the most frequent vehicles, one source complained that Chyrysler was lax in adding anti-theft deterrence to their cars. Is this true? I looked at it another way, that after an Escalade, a Stratus was the next most desirable car. Anybody believe that?
ES
Thanks
ES '99
I certainly appreciate that you commented to Mike372--but you posted a visible message about an issue that I was also discussing. It seems to me that you were trying to present a factual statement about decontenting and Chrysler apparently leading the field. You are correct that I have a great interest in automotive issues. That's why I responded; as you apparently had discovered some information of which I wasn't aware. Of course you would agree that it's important that information have a basis in fact or it might be considered by some to be just so much bluster.. As far as the superior attitude accusations, I'm not quite sure I understand where that comes from.....but, perhaps, it comes from the same place as your "data" on Chrysler's decontenting.... Be well..
My point--maybe "decontenting" is good as long as one looks closely at the options list and chooses wisely. That way you get exactly what you want. With a website like Edmunds, it is so easy. I ordered my 'Trep just the way I wanted it and it was in in 4 weeks.
Anybody have any advice about my dome light question above? Just a simple question.
Thanks,
ES '99
Thanks.
Now comes our future , the LX. Production should start sometime in Jan 04. I will keep you posted !!
Andre , I have seen the wheels and without actually trying one LX wheel on the LH it does look like the same pattern . Thats just a guess
the new durango advertising starts around the end of october....so some should be on dealer lots by then...
yep!
Probably the best thing to do is to get it jacked up and pull a wheel off, and look at the brakes. If you're doing mostly highway miles, they should last a long time.
One of my supervisors has a '92 or '93 Honda Civic that went about 150-160K miles on its first set of brake pads! He does almost pure highway driving, and comes in early and leaves early enough to miss most of the rush hour traffic. He's still on his original drums. Now I'm sure there's a certain crowd that would just chant "oooohhhhm....Honda....Oooooohhhhhmmmmm....Honda" but I think just about any car should get some serious life out of the brake pads if it's mainly driven on the highway. Provided you don't ride the brakes or regularly nail them!
I have a 2002 Intrepid SE (only 4,100 miles) and have been thinking of adding a few mods. Has anyone added new features to their cars?
ES
Brake repairs (km's are approx)
Front 15, 35, 55, 75.
Rear 35, 75. Pads and rotors replaced each time , first replacement under warranty, front calipers also replaced at that time, Chrysler parts. All other replacements were done with aftermarket parts cheap rotors and ceramic pads. Tests were done on other fleet vehicles using better quality rotors w/ metallic pads (noisy) or lower quality pads (fast wear). Higher quality rotors were also tested but the best combination was found to be the good pads with import rotors and change as a set.
The local Chrysler dealer suggested using aftermarket parts to obtain better results than original equipment. With a labor rate of 60. per hr it is not cost effective to have the rotors turned.
Unfortunately, brakes don't always wear evenly. When I changed my front pads (can't remember if it was the first time or the second) one of the pads had actually worn at an angle. There was almost no "meat" at one edge, but where the little metal clip was, it wasn't worn down enough yet to make contact.
Probably a good idea to do a visual check on the brakes every time you rotate the tires. Which reminds me, that time's coming up again soon for me...
And what, pray tell, and I being tempted by? This evil-looking, black '02 Intrepid R/T that we saw sitting on a used car lot! Thankfully, we spent enough time getting my Dad a car that it started getting late, so I have time to think about it, but come noon tomorrow, when that dealership opens, I have a feeling I'm going to be there as they open the gate!! I'm almost tempted to keep my '00 around, but I still owe 14 months on it, and don't want to keep two car payments going on it. Plus, they're willing to give me what I owe on my '00 (which is about $1300 more than it's worth, with the miles I have on it), so I can probably actually get into this thing for a lower monthly payment, and on a 4-year term.
For some reason, that old song by Squeeze, "Tempted by the fruit of another" is running through my mind right now...
Anyway, when I drove the car, I was underwhelmed. Not that it was a bad car, but I guess I was just expecting more. It was kinda like expecting a '68 Coronet R/T, maybe, but then getting handed a '78 Aspen R/T! I really thought this car would be faster, but honestly, it didn't seem all that much quicker than my tiny 2.7! I'm sure if I put a stopwatch to it, it would've been much more noticeable, but just going by the "seat of your pants" feeling, it just didn't come off as that impressive. At least not enough to make me sink all that money into it.
Then I started thinking about how my car is paid off by next November, but if I traded, that would bump it out to 4 years, and it just didn't seem worth it. Plus, I know how my car's been maintained, and as a result I trust it. I know what it's had done to it, and I know what it's going to need soon. I didn't want to make the jump from that, back to a used car whose reliability could be a crap shoot.
I also started missing my car, even though I hadn't gotten rid of it yet! I mean, this was the first car I ever bought brand-new, and suddenly, I started feeling like an overprotective father! So, I'll probably end up sticking with my original plan, to drive this thing until it drops.
That said, when the 2.7 is "on the cam" and taking advantage of the lighter weight of the SE, it's a great ride. I have the same trepidation (no pun intended) about buying used--one never knows. Keep us informed..... And a note to the group...anyone seen a 2004 Durango on a lot??
There are times too when I wish I had a bigger motor, but then overall, I think my car's pretty well-balanced out. This R/T definitely was faster than my car, but I guess I just expected more. Like years ago when I totaled my '69 Dart 225 slant six, and a few days later found a '68 with a 318...that was like a difference of night and day! Or comparing my old 1980 Malibu 229 V-6 or my '82 Cutlass Supreme 231 to my Mom's '86 Monte 305 when she gave it to me. That thing would've utterly blown the doors off those other two cars, and it wasn't even an SS!
I'm sure I would've been happy with the R/T if I bought it. The main factor though, was going into that much debt again! It was still a nice car, but just not nice enough to make me forget about the price!
Within the next couple of weeks, I will become the user of an '04 Intrepid ES as a company car and I'm really looking forward to it.
Smart move on your part. Monthly payments sure are great when they are paid off and there are none. That is really something to strive for. I am always concerned about looking down the road at 36 to 60 months of car payments. Don't do it unless you have to. Nothing like driving a car that you are happy with that has no payments associated with it.
The big advantage of buying new as opposed to used is that you know the maintenance that has been done and can feel better about driving it for many years and miles after all the payments are made. That said, I have had good luck with a couple of used vehicles, but bought the 'Trep new in '99 and have records of all the maintenance and know exactly what needs to be done and when.
Have a good one,
ES
http://bz.homenetinc.com/sheehy/vehicles/A230576A.jpg
That's a nice car, but you should stop looking at the picture. It's like some of those magazines with the girls in them--gets you all excited and doing things you shouldn't.
ES