Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Acceleration is not a problem. It's the braking and cornering in a big vehicle (MV or SUV) that take getting used to.
"But so too is having the luxury of time and the capacity to test drive anything and everything as many times as is needed." Best buying advice possible.
There are so many new vehicles out each year a month is not enough time to evaluate test drive and find the best price. I give it 6 months to a year.
Mini-Vans vs. SUV's
Is there a difference anymore?
I have found when you reduce all the comparisons down to paper MV's define a very narrow group of the truck category.
Meaning a DC has more in common with a Mazda MPV than a Suburban does with a Rav4. The Rav4 may have more in common with the MPV than the burb.
Try looking at it from that perspective.
Applying your own criteria to MV's and SUV's put a single list together of best to worst vehicles. (If you include all SUV's Escape, Rav4, etc. you might want to add sedans to your list.)
What you will most likely find is that SUV's and MV's will be mixed throughout your list.
On safety- Prepare the same list based on the available safety criteria and you will find similar results.
So assuming that one says MV or SUV, I assume they already eliminate all small UTEs, then they need to say -- maybe -- import or domestic, 4wd or 2wd, room for 4 or 8 (or some other #), insurance rates/ratings, quality, value, etc -- then they may have 2 or 3 MVs and 3 or 4 SUVs, surely the list can be culled to that point in a weekend of research, followed by 2 wks to 2 mos of test driving and/or renting.
Granted many folks do not desire to take that much time or may not have that much time, but -- that's how I'd start.
We want vehicle to make around town and trips easier with a 1 yr. old. Wife's transmission dies, search is on.
1. Wife insists on Japanese only. Eliminates a hefty # of options.
2. Wife wants SUV initially. Concedes that this entails interior room sacrifice, since she does not want Sequoia-sized vehicle. Rides in a 4Runner, won't do.
3. MV now in play (I had to push), list is narrowed to Odyssey, Sienna, Highlander, Acura MDX.
4. Drove all 4 a la jaws' advice. Top choice was the MDX, but not worth several thousand extra to us, so got the Ody.
Agree completely.
For example: I narrowed my commuter car choices to the Camry or Accord. Gave it three months and monitored price financing etc. Ended up with the Accord dealer invoice and 3.9% financing.
Narrowed my family vehicle search to the HO (I did test drive all MV's takes about 2 days to do) and waited 4 months to get it. Avoiding the "I need a vehicle now situation" allowed me to get a better deal in one case and my choice of vehicle in the other.
Of course you can only plan, things can happen that cause you to need something sooner rather than later.
Basically, prepare the list and test drive the top 6.
tj_610-Similiar situation price nixed some vehicles and room nixed others HO was a nice balance for us.
Unfotunately from my research, it seems obvious that neither one of these models is going to receive high marks for reliability...any opinions on the best buy??
I think I'd stay away from both. I had a 97 Gr. Caravan, it was a lemon, I have lost all faith in Chrysler products based on it and the way we were treated when went to lemon arbitration.
That said, the questions should be:
1. Do you need space or versatility? The MV will have much more than the SUV
2. Do you plan a lot of driving? THe MV will have a lower fuel bill
3. What about maintenance? The MV theoretically will be less costly
4. Will you tow or haul HEAVY things, if so the SUV may be a better option.
On that issue, I find many complaints about MV transmissions and stuff like that, personally I think they are not meant to haul all the stuff folks put in them --- hence they begin to sag wear out faster than the heavier duty stuff in a SUV
MY buddy swore by his 95 (or 94?) Gr Cherokee, until baby number 3 came along, then he got (against my experience) a 01 Grand Caravan.
He wishes he still had the SUV.
Sorry but this in one you'll have to make yourself.
If it was me, and I needed either, I would seriously consider a new one, at least you'd have some coverage, the mileage seems high on them both, and they may have been through so much that can be hidden with a good cleaning.....
Good Luck.
Did you run the True Market Value numbers?
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
In our case, we only have 2 kids, and towing/hauling is not really important...we're looking for a little height (vs. standard sedan) and enough room to fit the 4 of us along with a few strollers, etc...whatever we end up with probably won't be driven more than 10-12K per year.
Thanks again!
I'd go along with what jaw said and add a few...it sounds like you don't need an SUV and you could use the extra cargo space that MVs have. Also, if your kids are small, take note of the ease of putting a child in and out of a kid seat...it can be difficult in the higher position of the SUV. It depends on the model, so I'd bring a car seat and try it.
Good luck in your decision...already you're ahead of the game in that you're looking carefully at your requirements!
Tom
I don't know what the financials are, but noticed the two vehicles you mentioned were in the 6-7 grand range. Although not scientific, I did a search w/in 200 miles of my location for MVs in 6-8 grand range and 8-10 grand range, i noticed in the latter category i saw a few more imports with less than 100k mi's and saw a lot of domestics in the '98 yr range give or take w/ 50-60k mi's, keeping in mind these are just asking prices, and varying degrees of condition etc., my only point was maybe if you go to a CarMax if you have one, or a very big used car center, poke around a little see what you might like, narrow down to a few to do some more in depth research on, then set out to find a clean one for the price you know you should pay. I don't know, that's what I would do. Good luck!!
Karz
Thanks for the info...I've been trying to do that as well. And actually, I'm in a pretty good position in that I'm not under the gun (time-wise) to have that second vehicle, so I'm being picky. We're also on the lookout for a decent wagon, which could really serve the same purpose (except for the height of an SUV/MV)...
Thanks again!
I liked the Toyota fine (certainly not in love but it had it's good points), but the architecture of the MV made the transition from people to cargo hauler a chore. I'm getting a very consistent 14+ mpg around town in the Tahoe. I got a wide range of city mpg in the Toyota between low 15's and high 17's that promised 19 (never came close). Since I'm buying regular fuel for the Tahoe and used the recommended premium in the Sienna my monthly fuel cost is maybe $5-$10 more a month.
I prefer the Tahoe for it's luxury feel and easy transition into a cargo vehicle. It all depends on how you use a car.
He also has a Silverado, and I have the Suburban.
He says (and he is a full time trucker, in the hills of PA), that while the AWD is great, the thing sags mightilly when he is towing or loads several people and gear in the van and that the ride is more truck like than some rigs.
He told me that if he had it to do over he'd a got a Suburban.
Hope this offers you something.
Made ya look.
Steve, Host
FOlks on another forum just don't get (or want to get that).
A MV has it's place as does a SUV. When I owned my MV, it was a VERY VERY poor handler in snow (at any depth), now that was the first reason that I moved to a SUV.
I soon discovered that my original SUV was just too small, after doing much research I narrowed it to either the Tahoe or Suburban.
The Sub met (and continues to meet) my current and projected needs in ways no MV ever could.
Simple. Unless folks want to argue.
So I got a MV (for now - my needs may change one of these days).
btw, I never had a SUV. I did have a CJ-5, but "Wranglers" don't count, LOL.
Steve, Host
Seems to me that one cannot really tow or haul much with a Wrangler, but they can off road. And off roading is not the norm for auto buying. Thus they are unique, and for reasons I don't fully understand dumped in with 4wd trucks/wagons aka SUVs.
What the heck are you talking about? Please give some example of someone 'over there' not "getting" value.
When I owned my MV, it was a VERY VERY poor handler in snow (at any depth), now that was the first reason that I moved to a SUV.
Yes...in significant snow, an SUV is better. This is pretty much a no-brainer. But, of course, this is only one consideration and for many folks, one of very little consequence.
Simple. Unless folks want to argue.
Who would do that??? What would be the point of arguing about JAW2000's requirements-setting???
This topic (like the other one) is not about you.
Actually, lately, it's not about much ;-)
If Wranglers do count...
Hmmmm...define count. Are legitimte SUVs? Except for the minimal cargo area, it cetainly has all the attributes.
Yes, it can't tow much, only 2000 lbs. Less than most mini-utes.
And off roading is not the norm for auto buying. Thus they are unique...
Huh? I have no clue how you got from one end of that sentence to the other. Yes, few folks have off roading as a requirement. But that doesn't make the Wrangler unique as an off-road capable vehicle. There are lots of those. Though few more capable.
Why do you follow me everywhere I go and change my words, I never anything about significant snow, I said any snow.
Are you just looking for a fight or an argument? If so I suggest you vist the I don't like SUVs.. forum, I think you'll find it much more to your liking, what part of your post was on the MV topic?
Folks on another forum? you take issue with that? my you really are looking for a fight.
I might be talking about any number of them, or is that not possible, because the roaming forum watcher says so?
LOL!
ANd why would I think this was about me?
Why don't you go back and read your own post? You said:
The Sub met (and continues to meet) my current and projected needs in ways no MV ever could.
Simple. Unless folks want to argue.
*****
And if my MV was a poor handler in any amount snow would not a 4wd auto be a better alternative...
I agreed with that. Didn't you read my post?
Besides...didn't I say there was no point in arguing about what your requirements were? So why would I?
Why do you follow me everywhere I go...
You really think everything is about you, don't you? Jaw, I subscribe to this topic, like many others. When someone posts here, I see it the next time I view my 'message center'. I ignored your post from yesterday, there was nothing to say. But you said some things I needed (!) to respond to. Just like I do with everyone else.
...and change my words...
I do not have edit access to your posts ;-) Really, ask Steve, he'll confirm this ;-)
...I never anything about significant snow, I said any snow.
I never said you did.
Are you just looking for a fight or an argument?
I'm looking for on-topic discussion. Is this tough to figure out?
...what part of your post was on the MV topic?
All of it.
Folks on another forum? you take issue with that? my you really are looking for a fight.
You seem to have great difficulty withthe art of discussion.
You made a statement about folks 'on another forum'. I think it was a ridiculous one, so I challenged you on it. If you're not up to being challenged, you're in the wrong place and/or you have no business making challengeable statements.
I might be talking about any number of them, or is that not possible, because the roaming forum watcher says so?
LOL!
It's possible, but it's not true. You can fool some people, but not all of them ;-) In this case, that means me :-)
Edmunds policy strictly forbids anyone from modifying postings - including the hosts! Only members may modify their own posting - but only within a 30 minute window!
tidester, host
What a hoot.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Thanks for the explanation, but no one was confused about that...I don't think ;-)
...that is what I have done.
You seem very confused. You were the one that questioned whether I was on-topic...not the other way around.
Why all the verbiage? You made a statement, I challenged it. Why is it that you spin and dance, make wild, silly accusations and talk about everything under the sun....except...simply...answer...the...question???
Are you incapable? If so, you could either say nothing or you could say "I'd rather not discuss what I meant". After all, I know you're big on alternatives ;-)
Is the question: "Simple. Unless folks want to argue.
Who would do that??? What would be the point of arguing about JAW2000's requirements-setting???"
Well the answer would be you , and as far as the second ? I have no idea.
Did I miss something?
You take offense at that?!?!?!?!?!
Maybe Tidester and I should go hang out with Revka on the Wagons board where people don't have to try to slot everything so tightly. It's all about image and marketing, right?
Steve, Host
For a moment I thought I was in that other forum! ;-)
tidester, host
Steve, Host
There were several questions. Try simply answering them. Just...simply...answering them. Try the straight ahead approach instead of the twisty one.
Also, try dropping the "snide comment" mode...
FOlks on another forum just don't get (or want to get that).
Really. That was low. Not to mention baseless.
You take offense at that?!?!?!?!?!
Other than that first puerile statement, I didn't take offense at anything you posted. I'm basically asking why you don't talk straight.
I'd prefer rational discussion, frankly.
You're not too perceptive, either ;-)
"Falling into my trap"...good one. If you have something to say, just say it...and back it up with something based on reality.
Thank you.
Bluedevils and I go back a long time now (to the Trajon Langdon days in fact) and I'm tempted to let him borrow our big bazooka.
Steve, Host
steve_HOST - speaking of Trajan, what's he up to these days?
The topic is NOT - repeat - NOT Jaw2000, Li_sailor, Bluedevils nor any other individual Town Hall member.
I don't like repeating myself myself. :-)
tidester, host
Ok, SUVs v MVs...one of my favorite comparisons....
Unless you tow/off road or heavy-haul, I'd go with the MV.
Thought I'd get radical for a minute ;-)
Li - the bazooka is pf_flyer's tool of choice in News & Views and Pickups. When the Daewoo topics get unwieldy, he brings out the Big Bazooka.
How about this definition - a SUV is a compact 2-door econobox built to government specifications.
Steve, Host
All the more reason not to like them! ;-) (JUST KIDDING, gang - inside joke!)
tidester, host
Yes, I know...I've seen you reference it many times. I was just noting the similarity of weapon use.
a SUV is a compact 2-door econobox built to government specifications.
Well, they're almost always 4 door, but more to the point, I would say built to manufacturer's specs...as in high profit, marketing-created demand-based vehicle. Of course, with the Bushies now firmly in control, we'll see even more convergence of those two ;-)
2. That comment was directed at Steve.
3. DO you take offense at everything that you think is directed at you, do you reply to everything that people say, and do you feel a NEED to defend everything that you feel to the hilt, even when it is not appropriate?
4. I was having a conversation with Steve, I mentioned my EXPERIENCES with both a MV and 2 SUVs. This is a board for comparisons no? I have had the luxury of owning both, have you? No? Then what is your business here again?
Oh yeah: a) disagree with anyone who prefers SUVs (unless they tow), b) bludgeon anyone who disagrees with your limited POV and reply to aside comments that really have little if anything to do with you.
Was trying to stay on topic and have a discussion, that did not happen, was not my fault. Bluedevils saw this. Did get suckered, and only one person realized it. Funnier every day.
Unless folks want to argue.
I guess they do. I certainly didn't.
MVs do NOT do all the things that some folks think they do.
MVs cost wise can end up costing quite a bit more than SUVs.
MVs can carry lots of people (some SUVs can as well).
MVs are generally better on gas, and ride more smoothly.
MVs generally do not handle well in any wet weather.
MVs do not generally have suspensions nor engines that would allow for the space available to be used often for the purposes of hauling much weight wise.
MVs and SUVs both block vision, both offer better views of the road for drivers, both get average (ow worse for some SUVs MPG), both are assumed safer for their occupants in collisions.
MVs 3rd rows and most SUV 3rd row seats are generally death traps in collisions.
In my area and in my experiences -- SUV owner/drivers are far less prone to dinging other cars in parking lots. I have actually had a person hit my first SUV with her door, leave an obvious mark, get flustered when confronted, and then trot off saying she did not have time for this 'non-sense.' MV swing doors are bigger and heavier than SUVs and their owners either don't get it or don't care about it.
.....Unless folks want to argue.......
Yeah. Sure you do.
FOlks on another forum just don't get (or want to get that).
A nonsense statement. Pure trolling.
Unless folks want to argue.
Unless? Everyone argues here. Pretending you don't know this...this is talking straight?
WHo are you
Pretending not to know who I am. Straight talk.
Why do you follow me everywhere I go
Self delusion and aggrandizment.
I suggest you vist the I don't like SUVs.. forum
Straight talk...an honest recommendation.
I might be talking about any number of them
Straight talk. An honest statement.
the roaming forum watcher
Straight talk. A reasonable characterization of my TH record.
No, jaw, you don't talk straight, most of the time.
That comment was directed at Steve.
So what? If you intended it to be exclusively for Steve, you should have sent him an email. Posts on Edmunds topics' are not private. In fact, the expressed intent of the existence of the topic is to foster inclusion, not exclusion.
DO you take offense at everything that you think is directed at you...
That's a silly question, jaw...all you have to do is read all the posts I respond to and see if I'm acting on being offended. Actually, I am almost never offended at anything that is posted. Even by you.
do you reply to everything that people say
Go check the IDLSWDY topic and answer your own question.
and do you feel a NEED to defend everything that you feel to the hilt, even when it is not appropriate?
I have no idea what you mean by inappropriate and I suspect that neither do you.
Then what is your business here again?
What do your activities have to do with mine, except for comments I make to yours? I'm here to discuss the topic. I have no idea what your question is.
Here's how it works here on this forum: you post, others read (or not) and reply (or not) and post their own comments (or not).
You seem not to be able to figure this out. Instead, you spend most of your time grinding axes and trying to keep that chip on your shoulder healthy. Why? Who knows, but it's not adding value to this forum. That's just my opinion, it's the hosts' opinion that counts, so I'll move on now.
How else could one reply to all the rubbish and fluff, and stay totally off topic, you are as guilty as anyone ever has been of this 'sin.'
P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C
Ok, now, after you reply to this (for last wordmanship) you can move on.
Thanks, li-s for ruining a perfectly a good discussion because YOU did not like one statement, that I must now try to end all posts with, just because I know what it does to you....
.....Unless folks want to argue.......
I'm just curious as to what those things would be.
MVs cost wise can end up costing quite a bit more than SUVs.
And vice versa.
MVs generally do not handle well in any wet weather.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but I don't think the SUV has any advantage here.
MVs do not generally have suspensions nor engines that would allow for the space available to be used often for the purposes of hauling much weight wise.
Right, SUVs are clearly superior for heavy hauling...i.e., over about 1200 lbs.
MVs and SUVs both block vision, both offer better views of the road for drivers...
True.
...both get average (ow worse for some SUVs MPG)...
No, they both get worse than average mpg for all passenger vehicles. SUVs are worse. MVs avg 21, mid SUVs 19, large SUVs under 15.
...both are assumed safer for their occupants in collisions.
No. MVs are safer in all collisions, SUVs are less safe in single vehicle collisions, esp collision with fixed or heavier objects.
MVs 3rd rows and most SUV 3rd row seats are generally death traps in collisions.
True, but the incidence of these types of fatalities is very small.
Generally speaking, the advantages of an SUV are evident when towing, off roading and heavy hauling. If you don't do one of these things, the SUV has only disadvantages. MVs have more cargo space, handle better, have better mpg and are less dangerous to other vehicles in a collision.
tidester, host
What Tides said....
Steve, Host