Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
You might want to try a used VW Phaeton. Tehy're selling horribly, so you can get a greeat discount on a used one, and from what I've read (mainly on Edmunds.com), they are great luxury cars.
How many miles per year/avg will you be driving?
What is the geography/climate where the car will be used?
Can you get low or no interest financing?
=======
You mentioned resale value in ~ 5 years. Is this because you have considered leasing and know that a car with a higher residual will have a lower payment?
If you are planning on a 5 year turnaround -- and have NOT considered leasing, "why not?"
If you are able to get zero % financing, forget the previous two questions since they become irrelevant.
You seem to be going about this by prepping well, gathering info, etc -- unless your miles are really high high high or 0% interest can be had, well, it seems leasing may have merit for your circumstances.
Just a thought. :shades:
History: I started this search since my current lease on my Mazda 6s was coming to an end. Great car, but lacked the memory seating and it had a tremendous amount of road noise. Hence having phone conversations while on the road was difficult. (My work revolves around the phone & email.). Plus we wanted to share the car so that we'll reduce the use of our gas guzzler - Ford Expedition.
So we started our search with this:
a) Memory Seating
b) Road noise should be low
c) Should be a Japanese car
d) Should have the *most* value for money
The rest of it relating to telescoping wheel, nav, etc ... were creature comforts that we are not set on. But at this price point, they 'all' come with some or all of it.
On evaluating several cars (ES, GS, TL, Accord, Maxima, TSX, G35), we found out that we needed to spend in the $30s. Used or not, there was a delta of about $3K from the $30K number. We were comfortable with that. Hence the search ....
Now to answer your Qs:
I live in Portland, OR. Anticipated annual mileage will be around 8K miles. Push comes to shove maybe 10K.
The car will be driven on alternate days by my wife & me. (I'm trying to wean her away from her favorite - Ford Expedition due to gas reasons.) Hence the telescoping feature will be as important as the memory seating if I'm going to pay the $30sK price tag.
We test drove the ES and it did not suit me at all. Too bland. Did not have the 'tiptronic' feature. Spouse liked the steering; as good as the GS300. (We may still end up getting the ES since there are good deals on some used ones here; but leaving it as the last of the last option.)
VW Phateon: None around here and it is still priced well above my price point across the country.
I'll be paying cash. If to sweeten the deal, the dealer wants me to get a loan, I will; and then in a month I'll turn around & pay it off completely. (I did this with my bike so that they dealer could reduce the price of the bike by $500/-. Cost of the loan: $50/-)
The car is going to be a 'lifer' (yeah right!!!) and I may consider selling it in 5 years. But not before that, for now. I don't want a lease, since my current Mazda 6s is one and spouse wants to know where the money went. :mad:
I would buy this car and keep it, but it does not have the memory seating - that is the key feature that I'm looking for. All the rest are creature comforts that I can live without, but have added into the equation due to the price tag.
So hopefully this gives u little more insight that u can base your inputs on.
Once again thx for ur inputs. I sincerely appreciate it.
M
Infiniti G35
- almost a tie here at under 9/10ths
Acura TL
From a power perspective:
Infiniti G35
Acura TL
From a sytling perspective:
Acura TL
Infiniti G35
From a sound system perspecitve:
Acura TL (DVD-Audio system is excellent)
Infinti G35
From a lux and build fit/finish perspective:
Acura TL
Infiniti G35 (almost a tie, IMO)
Perceived "back seat" advantage (size, comfort):
Acura TL
Infiniti G35
Nav System:
Acura TL
Infiniti G35
Under the circumstances you describe, in the location you describe, FWD or RWD (since I assume the G35X is not a consideration)-- FWD:
FWD - Acura TL
Leaving the G35 out since it is RWD.
Overall, the choice, I'll assume will be influenced a lot by style (not that that is a bad thing.)
To me, the looker is the TL. The Infiniti has more power and can put it to use (drag racing?) a bit better, but for practical purposes these differences are not show stoppers IMHO.
If it were my money, I'd get the TL with the Nav system and a stick shift and grin from ear to ear.
:shades:
Re: Shopping for a new car.
Date: Now
There is a saying that goes something like this:
ü Do not advise your boss, employees, friends, neighbors or relatives on virtually anything pertaining to “substantial” decisions (such as car buying, house buying, major purchases of almost any nature – even home appliances and TV's that are over several hundreds of dollars); for, if your advice is followed and that advice turns out to have any negative consequences, the person you advised may have “difficulties” with the relationship between you two in the future.
Having said this and pretty much believing that it is true, I will submit the following not as advice(since I don't want to make even my blogger friends have difficulties) but as data points and/or information for your to consider as you make your moves with respect to a new vehicle.
==========
ü In an ideal world, something that “costs” or is priced at “X” should “cost” very close to the same as something that is also priced at “X” – since the dollars are the great equalizer. A $30,000 Ford should "cost" [you] about the same as a $30,000 Chrysler, that is. It almost makes too much sense doesn't it?
In the "real world," however, this is true only sometimes. It is rarely true with Cars and Major Appliances, to name two, however.
What I mean by this is that a $30,000 car may be acquired, for instance, for $30,000 in cash, financed @ 0.00% interest for 60 months with a payment of $500 per month, leased for 39 months for $219 per month or financed with stated interest rates (above 0.00%) for a specified number of months.
Moreover, a $30,000 car when it is first brought to market (and/or if it is VERY popular) may command its full MSRP, or OVER its full MSRP or sometimes even under its MSRP. Yet 8 months or a year later, for example, it may be discounted (off of MSRP to effect a drastic price cut per month) to "$179 per month with $999 due at signing," when it has been upstaged by a newer “hot car.” Of course, it is the same car as it was 8+ months ago, but now it is "worth less" to the consumer even though it is the same car "now" as it was "then." The lesson learned?: the market is fickle. Doh! Do ya think?
Your willingness and ability to "time" (or plan) your purchase so that you can order the exact car you want may benefit you. On the other hand, your willingness to “take what is available” NOW may benefit you, too. Your "refusal" to take a black leather interior in favor of a gray fabric interior could actually cost you MORE money despite the fact that the MSRP of the car sporting leather seats is probably higher. Why? Well, it is because the price is, in large measure, based on "what is hot TODAY." The Acutal Cost of Manufacture seems almost irrelevant when it gets to the retail level under certain circumstances.
Other factors, you can control will affect your deal, too. Namely, your willingness to take either a Ford, Mercury, Saab, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, Dodge, VW, BMW or Hyundai product may get you substantially "more car" (your definition is the one that determines what is "more" not anyone else's) for the same or LESS money than if you are steadfast that ONLY a day-glow purple metallic Nissan Pathfinder WITHOUT a sunroof and with Premium Stereo but with fancy alloy wheels and without Homelink but equipped with XM Radio, and so on, is worth your consideration.
Personal Example
Although I have had over 2 dozen Audis since early 1977 (and by that I mean my cars, my wife’s cars and company cars during that period), the last time I looked at getting a new car, I shopped for about 10 cars and narrowed it to 3 and short listed it to 2.
At the time, the car with THE HIGHEST MSRP was almost $200 per month less than a car that was over $3,000 lower MSRP (on a lease of 36 months or 39 months with 15,000 miles per year allowance.) The car with the most "features and functions" was nearly $6,000 less than the one with the highest MSRP, but it – the one that was $6,000 less – took 120 days to get, and the monthly payment was almost the same as the $6,000 more expensive car and the term was only 3 months longer on the lower priced car to make it competitively priced with the most expensive car.
Whew! It was confusing and tiring just to wade through all the data points.
As noted, I looked at 10 cars that were roughly in the same "size and content area" in March of 2005 – this "area" included an Acura RL, Chrysler 300C AWD, a Cadillac CTS and STS AWD, an Infiniti M35X, a BMW 530i, an Audi A6 quattro, a Mercedes E class 4Matic and several others. The cars I initially considered ranged in MSRP from $40,000 to over $56,000.
I "wanted" the Audi (it was my sentimental favorite) – but only if it could be had at the right price. It was NOT the least expensive @MSRP, but it was the "middle child" between the initial final three: Audi A6 3.2, BMW 530i, and Infiniti M35X. At this point, the lowest monthly payment was associated with the BMW, which had the highest MSRP!
All-wheel-drive (AWD) was a deal breaker, however, as I would NOT, under any circumstances have a two wheel drive vehicle (especially NOT RWD) – FWIW, my own and my family’s safety and security are too important to compromise on that. Besides I actually am convinced that AWD cars perform better and are more fun, too boot. At that time, only the Audi and the Infiniti offered AWD.
But, I priced all three vehicles to use in my negotiations (and in an attempt to keep his car in the game, the BMW dealer assured me there would be a new AWD BMW “soon”) – and I shared the information with the dealers I spoke to. I kept them each fully in the loop of the prices that were being offered for cars that were “VERY similar” in content.
First the easy stuff (for me):
ü I determined 3 color choices were what I was looking for. Color Choice #1 Green, #2 Silver and #3 Red or Dark Blue – any of these three colors were workable (remember I was planning to order the car, so to clarify, please understand that my number 1 choice was dark green pearl and number two was silver pearl, number three was a dark red pearl or a dark blue pearl – tied, in that order.) I discovered Infiniti did not offer a green, but it did offer silver. I was now down to two color choices, then and both were acceptable to me.
ü Interior Color Choice and covering (fabric, leather, [alcantara] or plastic) – here, too, I had in my mind three colors or combinations that I would accept with the exterior color choice I wanted. My choices included – Camel Leather, Beige Leather or Platinum/gray Leather or Alacantara. These three colors would work with green or silver pearl paint so I ranked them in the order I specified above.
I then moved on to the "optional" or "available" content, the things most of us know as options and packages.
Go to Next Post
#1 must have
#2 must NOT have
#3 OK to have
Individual options (considerations):
#1 must have
#2 must NOT have
#3 OK to have
I also wanted to consider some other factors that would be important. Broadly I put them under the rubric Total Cost of Ownership (TCO.)
Cost structure (assuming 50,000 miles):
1. Insurance costs
2. Maintenance costs
3. Fuel costs
4. Repair costs (which implied warranty coverage considerations)
5. Tire replacement likelihood (will I need tires in the period of time I plan to have it?) and costs
And, of course "professional" input, was important to me, too. I read a lot of test reports and reviews.
Reviews from everywhere EXCLUDING Consumer’s Reports (for I do not buy their rankings), but including:
ü Automobile
ü Car & Driver
ü Motor Trend
ü Road & Track
ü New York Times
ü USA Today
ü On-line blogs, e.g., edmunds.com & the Internet generally
As noted, there would be linkage between the product features, style and "content," and the acquisition and on-going costs. I consdidered many other factors, that is.
Finance and/or Lease terms/payment options, other factors to consider, etc:
ü Seat of the pants driving feel (subjective)
ü Availability, convenience and requirements related to service and service intervals
ü Regrets from previous purchases – “I wish I would have gotten cruise control, etc.” kind of thing (I now LOVE satellite radio, for example)
The shopping research allows the subsequent efforts.
Shopping Pre-work:
ü Identical test drives: this is difficult and time consuming to accomplish, but it is very important.
o Take multiple test drives of car “A” – if possible make two visits to the dealership and test drive different examples of car “A” OVER THE SAME ROUTE.
ü Take notes. Figure out what impressions you have and write them down. Note questions that you want the cars under your scrutiny to addresses
o Take multiple test drives of car “B” – if possible make two visits to the dealership and test drive different examples of car “B” over the same route that you took car “A” – yes, this means if the dealerships are 10 miles apart, you must decide where the test drive loop/route is and be faithful to it with all the cars you test.
Remember, a car that seems silky smooth on the Interstate may seem uncertain and/or rough on a secondary road or urban street setting. Three hard stops in a row can reveal brakes that seem great on the first stop or two may “fade” on the third stop, etc.
Deal du jour considerations:
Somebody, somewhere has a "good-deal" going on at any one time. The deal you are offered on day 1 may be better or worse on day 31 or 61. You will drive yourself NUTS if you always believe “it will be better tomorrow.” It may indeed be better tomorrow – but what may be better may be on your #2 choice in your #3 choice of color and interior. You have to determine HOW much (in dollars) something is worth today and in the future.
For example, if you want a red car and one exactly like you want in every other way is offered to you in white (or some other color that is NOT red), you have to determine how much RED is really worth to you as a portion of the deal, as a percentage of the MSRP. If the white car is $1,000 less will you pay the $1,000 to get the red one? Your values count here, not the salesperson's and certainly not mine.
Of course if you are ordering a car, this will be a much more minor issue, but, remember, in my case, I wanted the color "pearl green" and Audi and BMW offered this color while Infiniti did not. On the BMW, in fact, pearl green was a $750 option. It was “no extra charge” on the Audi and silver was “free on either the Audi or the Infiniti” but silver was also $750 on the BMW.
What’s “that special something (option, color, etc.) worth to you?” Unless you ONLY have one color and/or combination in mind, you could save yourself money by having a choice #2. Somewhere I believe there is a study that links the car's color to the owners overall happiness with the ownership experience. The lesson there is if color is important to you, $750 less will be meaningless to you 6 months from now as you are driving the one you "settled for" while seeing the color you really want driving down the street.
==========
Enough about colors.
For me, my #1 “I wish it could come with” option was a stick shift. Only the BMW offered either manual or automatic shift. Manual shift was $1,275 LESS than automatic – plus the gas mileage was +2MPG better. But I was not unwilling to drive an automatic if I had to.
Other important (to me) accessories, options, features or content (whatever "name" they call it is by manufacturer) included keyless entry, push-button start and rear parking radar, for example.
Audi and BMW offered rear parking radar; Infiniti offered a rear camera which mostly was a substitute for the radar. Audi and Infiniti offered push-button start; it was standard on the Infiniti, it was $750 on the Audi, and not even offered on the BMW at that time.
The list of "must have" things, including anti-lock brakes, all-season tires and so on was quite extensive in my case. To keep things straights, I had to make them fit into categories:
ü Must have (e.g., All Wheel Drive)
ü Must NOT have (e.g., a solar sunroof)
ü Nice to have even if it costs a "little more" (another subjective term) (e.g., a power rear window shade)
ü OK to have (but not really worth much with respect to $ to me, or something that probably I would never order but that would not make me reject the car simply because it came with this feature) (e.g., cooled seats)
In my case, as a further example, tire pressure monitoring over a three year period has fallen from Must have to Nice to have to OK to have since I had owned a car with it for almost 3 years and found it novel (and not lacking in some potential) but not particularly useful, either. Likewise, I had evaluated On*Star for 3 years and decided it was not worth $16.95 per month for “the basic” system. The higher priced systems were outrageously priced, so there, too, I was not interested.
Now, Satellite Radio, on the other hand, has gone from Nice to have to Must have, as has voice command and sat nav.
Note: My examples are just that, MINE – but I submit you may want to consider setting up your own criteria and then living with them. You may change your mind over time, but you will drive yourself nuts and harbor post purchase doubts if you don’t understand your current Must’s, Must not’s, Nice’s and OK’s fully.
Go to Next Post.
"Switching gears" to make a point, i.e.
The SUV from Lincoln/Mercury called the Mercury Mariner is, by all accounts a good vehicle. It may be NOT what you want, however. Yet, is there a price at which you might consider the Mariner over another vehicle you are currently favoring? If the two vehicles can be similarly equipped, “how much” are they on identical termed deals? At what point can the Mariner "make you an offer you can't refuse?"
Currently, the Mariner for 39 months with $0.00 due on the day you pick it up (that is no down payment, no deposit and no first payment) is $279 per month and that allows 12,000 miles per year.
If you have not tested the Mariner, simply as an example, does the $279 per month with no up-front $’s sound in any way “interesting?” Mariner has been named a “best buy,” if you are impressed by such information, here's the URL:
Klik
Comparably equipped, what is the deal (even if you are NOT interested in leasing) on cars on your current short list and the Mariner? This may be very revealing about you or the intended buyers/drivers.
By the way, I want you to know I am NOT endorsing or suggesting that you stay away from or gravitate to any particular vehicle (other than all wheel drive from whoever you choose.) I am suggesting that you consider putting things into $ perspective. If you would take the Mariner for $100.00 per month but not for $600.00 per month, now you know what your "bookends" are. You need simply begin discounting the $600.00 down to the point that you WOULD be unable to refuse the Mariner and unless that is unrealistically, low, say $110.00 per month, you then would know better how to evaluate the market. If the Mariner is a complete mystery to you, for instance, perhaps a long test drive does have merit, before you move either closer or farther from making such a decision.
And, so you do not think this tangent is a hidden Mercury advert:
Have you considered a Hyundai product? The market buzz is very high on them and they are very well warranted and the newest ones can be decked out with “lots of content.” They are no longer "cheapies," i.e. What about Ford, Dodge, GMC? Do these nameplates interest you at all? How about Honda, Mazda, Isuzu, Mitsubishi or Subaru? Right now Subaru, e.g., is riding HIGH on a great reputation with very sound, and most consider, "attractive" products.
Perhaps you would never consider a Saab, or hadn’t thought about one previously – but, perhaps General Motors current woes can be your good fortune. The SAAB 97-X is, by all accounts, a pretty good SUV, sporty and very car-like; and, it is heavily “supported” (financially) by GM. The price is right as they say.
Here are 20 pictures of the SAAB 97-X:
Klik
Here’s a current deal for the SAAB:
Lease Offer
2006 9-7X 4.2i
Automatic transmission
Starting at $399 mo./24 mo.*
No security deposit required. Dealer financial participation may affect consumer cost. ‡Residency restrictions apply. Terms apply to a new 2006 Saab 9-7X 4.2i based on MSRP of $39,240.00. Lease payment for the Saab 9-7X 4.2i is $398.99 for 24 months, totaling $ 9,575.76. Payments may be higher in some states. Option to purchase at lease end for $27,468.00 (plus taxes, insurance, title and registration fees). Customer is liable for a mileage charge of $.20 per mile over 24,000 miles and for excess wear and tear. Not available with other program offers. Call 1 800 SAAB USA for important program details and limitations. SEE YOUR PARTICIPATING SAAB DEALER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS ON THESE AND OTHER LEASE AND FINANCE PROGRAMS. ©2006 SAAB AUTOMOBILE USA
*Effective: 3/1/2006 - 4/4/2006
========== yadda, yadda, yadda, etc.
Again, I am NOT endorsing the SAAB – I am attempting to "broaden your horizons" and perhaps make this process (acquiring a new vehicle) a little less daunting, possibly less expensive and maybe even a more fun process.
Remember too, the watchwords of my CPA firm:
ü "Buy" that which appreciates in value – e.g., real estate (generally speaking)
ü "Rent" or Lease that which depreciates in value – e.g., cars (generally speaking)
Hope this is taken as a series of “ideas” NOT as anything even approaching a suggestion of what kind of car to go for.
Good luck. :shades:
Mark
Only thing I can add is... buy or lease?
Leasing seems a plus for those not driving many miles (Audi allows 12K/Yr max), and for cars with long warranties, but very high part and service expenses once the warranty has expired.
In this case the lease might be structured to only span the warranty period, at the end of which the leaser lets the dealer/leasing company buy back the car. That gives the driver the enjoyment of the vehicle for 4 years, and none of the post warranty headaches.
Just my 2 cents
My wife has a 16,000 mile per year lease on a 3 year term.
Mine is 45,000 miles (an Audi) -- and Audi will gladly lease their cars for almost any term and mileage. A sales person who works for me just got a new Cadillac CTS with a 54,000 mile lease for 36 months ($515 per month, for 35 months, loyalty lease.)
I thought I addressed the leasing issue from a broad point of view as suggested by my CPA firm:
Buy that which appreciates in value.
Rent that which depreciates in value.
Cars, generally speaking are in the latter category.
This does not mean that leasing will or even can work for everyone.
The point, often, is that the effects of on buying and leasing are the same and the key ones are "the cost of money, opportunity costs and time/miles, all of these things contribute to residual value" which is a critical factor in leasing, financing or buying -- and I would argue equally so.
A
Leasing seems a plus for those not driving many miles (Audi allows 12K/Yr max), and for cars with long warranties, but very high part and service expenses once the warranty has expired.
Leasing is not generally any more of a plus for those not driving many miles. It might be, but the same factors that are a plus for a lease with respect to miles driven per year have a similar effect regardless of the method chosen to actually possess the car for x period of time and miles.
Audi will lease a car for 10,000 12,000 15,000 and more miles per year. There is no technical max although there are practical reasons to not lease a car that you will drive 45,000 miles per year.
The length of the warranty is not a factor in leasing any more than it is a factor in paying cash or financing -- how could it be? Why would it be?
A leased car that is out of warranty (and any factory or dealer sponsored service agreements) will cost EXACTLY the same to maintain as a financed or 100% owned car. There are no special additional charges for a new power steering pump on a leased car that is out of warranty versus a car that is owned, for instance.
Most leases are called "closed ended" leases -- this simply means that there are no hidden charges at the end of the lease.
I agree to pay you $515 per month (for a 2006 Cadillac CTS with two popular option packages which retails for about $40,000) for 35 months (and use it for 36 months) during which time I must maintain the car (if I want to keep the warranty in force) -- I have agreed with you I can drive 54,000 miles without any charge per mile during this time period and I agree the car will be returned "clean and with normal wear and tear and tires that are legal to be driven on the street of a size and composition similar to the OEM tires delivered on the car."
The long warranty cars and short warranty cars can be leased with equal ease and aplomb.
The thing(s) that has (have) the greatest effect on the lease price are identical for you even if you plunked down 100% cash on the barrel-head:
MSRP
Cost of money (yours or the financial institution)
Depreciation over time (aka residual value).
A $40,000 car that can be leased with no upfronts for 24 months @ $399 per month and driven for 30,000 miles is a "subvented" lease -- it is hard to imagine even a 0% interest loan beating this deal when depreciation is factored in.
Leasing is NOT for everyone. Neither is paying cash or financing.
But, the information and conclusions you presented did need some clarification. :surprise:
Would also be good to know if the VW GTI R32 will make a reappearance in the USA next year. Seems to offer all the driving advantages of and way cheaper than the Audi A3 3.2.
Want to order "sports seats" for the GTI? You get the Sirus or XM radio with it, or no seats.
Nice ripoff, VW. That kind of nonsense screams old school selling.
:mad:
I do, however, think that mass customization is so easy, so possible, so affordable, that I would wonder why Sat Radio is not a stand alone option.
But, if your only issue is that they force you to get sat radio -- take it, it will KILL AM and FM.
Regardless, I had a free sat. radio subscription for several months and loved it, but once he free session ended, i didn't continue it. Hard to justify the monthly expense when I just travel to and from work, 30 min each way, and the radio stations come in clearly. Now if my car were the family vehicle we took on weekends and the kids didn't insist on listening to their Barney CD every time
PS - I'm annoyed the VW site won't let you configure a Jetta GLI! It's been out long enough, VW!!!!
Audi does not seem quite as restrictive in that respect.
Thanks
Robert
If you want luxury and can afford it, I would suggest jumping to Lexus, or Acura if you want performance and luxury.
Lexus recomendations - ES and the IS. The IS is more sporty.
Acura recomendations - TL and the RL. The RL is pricey - 50,000
Hope this helps. Stay posted
Can the professionals here help me out?
I'm 6'0'' (no corolla), male in the late 20s looking for a sedan or coupe that has leather seats. I'm considering reliable brands such as Honda, Toyota, Mazda. And I'm considering both 2006 or used cars, as long as it is still under warranty.
In addition to leather seats, it would be nice to have
- quiet and comfortable ride (not necessarily for long-distance, but comfortable if I'm stuck in traffic)
- fun driving experience (no camry), don't care about 0-60 seconds though.
- better than average MPG, drinks regular gas
- as assumed, reliable.
Right now it comes down to 2006 Mazda3 s GT or a 2002-2003 Honda Accord EX-L. Too bad Civic doesn't have leather seats. Am I asking for too much?
I appreciate any recommendation for any new or used model.
It's definitely a car marketed toward the young male crowd (roughly 18-25). Not sure how old you are, but he is 20 years old, so he's exactly the target market for that car.
Thanks
For safety results, I've been consulting both IIHS and Safercar.gov. The IIHS site lists rear crash tests, which is very helpful. There are very few perfect scores, but Saab and Subaru stand out.
I could buy a Subaru, but it has no Electronic Stability Control which I gather is pretty important. Right? Even with AWD?
I could buy a Saab 9-3, 2004 or 2005 models, Arc only as Linear is so maligned, but I'm worried about reliability.
I could buy a Volvo S60 (the S40's too small) which got strangely opposite scores from the two safety sites, namely: IIHS rated it good for Front, but only acceptable for Side crash, and Safercars (Govt crash site) rated it 4 out of 5 stars Front, and 5 out of 5 Side.
I'm happy to buy a used (ideally certified, right?) model to keep the costs down, esp as I need an automatic, and would like leather seats (maybe even heated!)
The IS 250 and the BMW 325 garnered excellent across-the-board safety ratings from the IIHS only in the 2006 (therefore too expensive) models.
Happy BTW to get a hybrid, but: the Prius has not so great rear crash results; also, am I the only one who finds its rear visibility is poor, due to the horizontal bar that divides the hatchback window..?
In any case, my local car rental company loves me too much. I need to buy something soon. Please advise.
Safety can be made up of some factors beyond crash results and star ratings.
Don't get a one star with a bunch of electronic assists on the other hand.
If, for instance, there are 4 star ratings, look at only 3 and 4 star offerings, but consider:
#1 AWD
#2 ABS+Brake Assist+ESP (or whatever the pitch and yaw control system is called by a particular mfgr.)
These technologies will typically improve both performance and safety. Couple an inherently safe vehicle (the number of stars, for instance) with some performance/avoidance technologies, such as #1 & #2, and you may find a 3 star with betters a 4 star without.
In your price range you will probably not be looking at cars that include lane departure warning technology or ACC (automatic cruise control) which will provide automatic braking based on proximity of other vehicles.
Consider, too, that there are arguments for "high performance" options as safety enhancers and that there are often (moreso in the lower price ranges) optional extras, such as additional non mandated airbags (often costing at full MSRP a few hundred dollars) that you can add.
Run flat tires? Hmm -- safety or convenience? Many would say "both!"
Homework ahead. :surprise:
Yeah - don't buy a VW, Audi, or Volvo! None exactly what I would call on top of the reliability heap.
I know this is going to sound crazy - but take a look at the Mazda 3s-Grand Touring sedan. I spent $21,400 (MSRP $22,810) and got DVD-based navigation, leather, automatic climate control, automatic xenon headlights, rain-sensing wipers, tire preasure monitoring, BOSE 6-disc sound, side/curtain airbags, etc. and it's one of the best driving and handling cars I've ever owned.
Excellent reliability rating from Consumer Reports.
And please feel free to start a specific comparo amongst the three of them. Just go the Sedans Comparison board, hit the Add a Discussion link and go for it.
Consumer Reports reliability ratings:
Audi A4 - 3/5: Average
Volvo S40 - 3/5: Average
Volkswagon Jetta - 2/5: Fair (new model for '06 untested)
If you are price neutral, go with the Audi.
If you are price cognizant and concerned consider the Volvo and check out the availability of a service and/or mntce plan for at least 50K miles.
The Jetta can't be had with AWD but if that too is a neutral issue, it is the "biggest" bargain even though it has had some hard knocks in the dealer service and even in the FOR (frequency of repair) dept.
The Audi is the "best" car based on content and performance overall. Styling is always subjective.
The Volvo is "nearly" an Audi considering its price. The dealers are ? with Volvo? Probably better than the VW's and Audi seems to run hot and cold here, too. Most Audi dealers have stepped up over the past few years. They are not universally up to the standards of the Lux class that their cars generally are consider to be a part of.
My dealer would get a "9" overall and many "10's" -- I have read some contrary opinions.
I have driven the Audi and the Volvo. They are both good to very good. The Audi seems more, uh, "refined" and also more sure footed.
But it is the most expensive of the trio.
Maybe you gets what you pays for! :surprise:
Acura TSX ($363mo)
Volvo S60 Loaner w/7k mi ($368)
BMW 325i ($429/mo)
I'm concerned w/price- but if the BMW is really worth it, I'd pay the higher mntly fee.
Audi - it's the sportiest and most luxurious of the bunch
Volvo - if you get the T5, it's the 2nd sportiest and least luxurious of the bunch. If you don't get the T5, then it's sportiness is on-par with a 4 cyl Jetta
Jetta is the 2nd most luxurious. If you were to opt for the GLI model, it'd be just as sporty (maybe moreso) as a T5.
sportiness (handling/accelleration)
luxury/comfort
safety
reliability
On the whole, I'd say the TSX is a great combination of those things, but I'd like to know what you value more.
Also, the TSX & BMW are compacts while the S60 is mid-sized. What are your size-needs? If you're fine with a compact, why the S60 and not the S40?
1-lux.comfort
2-safety
3- sportiness
I assume they are all equal on the reliable factor- But i service is free at BMW and Volvo- a nice perk.
Mainly, I want to get the coolest car w/o having to eat raman noodles every night:)
I had been leasing a passat for 340/month and could go a bit higher, but it is just a car.
The S40 seems kind of dinky(??)..didn't really think of it being the same size as the TSX and BMW. I usually drive solo, so a compact is fine with me...
IIHS is interesting as it does a rear crash test ... which most cars do poorly at.
Question #1: the Volvo S60, which has good rear scores, has scored 'good' on Front impact and 'ok' on Side Impact in the one site, but scored the reverse in the other site (i.e., 'ok' Front, 'good' Side). Anyone know about these sites and what this could mean?
Question #2: the other car I've in mind is the Subaru Forester, which has no stability control (s.c.), but is AWD, and scores great on IIHS crash tests. Stability control is for skidding and has been much discussed by the professionals as an important safety feature, and there are other (namely German and Swedish) cars with both s.c. and AWD, so AWD is NOT the reason Subaru does not need to have s.c. [One Subaru dealer told me it was a cost issue: Subaru didn't want to pay for the cost of s.c.] So does an AWD car need s.c.?
Any thoughts, anyone, on both these questions?
A2. AWD/4WD system mainly help traction when accelerating and not with braking and conering - this is where stability control comes in to keep your vechicle in the safe and controllable direction.