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 7/22 for details.
Options

What's the best vehicle for my needs?

1151618202128

Comments

  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I was just now looking up the Jettas. I'm not sure what the difference is between these lines - I'm seeing the 2.5, the 2.5L, GLX, A5. Is one of these the turbo variety?
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I just did a sample quote from Geico. Looks like insurance isn't nearly as much as I thought it would be. The last time I got a quote for insurance, I was 20, trying to get a J30 and they quoted me $6,000. I guess I had that quote stuck in my head ever since. It's definitely low enough where I don't have to worry about it.

    I had a feeling there was a catch to the CL600!
  • sebring95sebring95 Member Posts: 3,241
    The 2.5 models are 5-cylinders, the 2.0T models have the turbo and are the quicker of the two.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    As indicated the 2.0T is the turbo, the sportier version of the car that has that engine is called the GLI. Not that you have to buy the GLI to get the turbo engine.

    While they don't have AWD, they do have ESP (VW's designation of ESC). This helps a lot with handling in slippery conditions. IMO, if you had to choose between the two I think you are better off with ESC than AWD, if you are driving on roads that are normally going to be plowed but possibly slippery. We've lived in N. IL and S. WI all our lives and have never had AWD, but my wife now has a Jetta with ESP and loves how it handles winter weather.

    AWD gives some driver's a false sense of security because it enables them to go and it leads to driving too fast in snow and then ending up off the road in a ditch with their AWD or 4WD vehicles, because they can not stop or turn any better than FWD vehicles.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Also, look up videos on youtube about awd tests/comparisons. The problem is that AWD is only usable for stopoping and getting going in snow and a bit of mud and the like unless it's fully engaged all the time(Subaru and Audi do this, for instance). At speed, any type that transfers back and forth can't react quickly enough or in many cases, just fails completely. Literally. Car tries to climb a slight incline that's muddy muddy and stops dead while its computers get a headache. You have to see the videos to believe it.

    The word you are looking for is "4WD". Switch into 4WD with snow tires or knobbies/mudders on it and a SUV or truck will creep and crawl over most anything. If you want real safety in the rain, get a Subaru or Audi. If you want it for the snow, switch to 4WD and go slower.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Oh you know, I probably should have mentioned - I can't drive stick

    I think its challenging to find a fast slushbox (automatic) with an AWD vehicle in that price range. One of the things you didn't mention was fuel economy, so that might be the trade off value for you. Also, everything mentioned so far, the WRX, the G35, the VW, and the Volvo require/recommend premium unleaded.

    How fast/expensive is a Subaru Legacy GT 2005+ or Forrester with the 2.5 turbo?

    I don't know that the slushie Audi A4 Tq meets the speed cut off, and the 330xi might be pricey to maintain, or older to meet pricing constraints.

    You might want to be a bit more subjective about the 0-60 and instead look at 30-60 or 50-70 times, since that is more relevant to merging in traffic.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116

    The word you are looking for is "4WD". Switch into 4WD with snow tires or knobbies/mudders on it and a SUV or truck will creep and crawl over most anything. If you want real safety in the rain, get a Subaru or Audi. If you want it for the snow, switch to 4WD and go slower.


    I disagree. Full time AWD with limited slip differentials is pretty good in the snow. 4wd with open differentials leads to 3 wheels stopped and one wheel with no traction spinning its heart out. 4wd low locks the transfer case, but then you are going ~12 mph and its not so practical for highway travel.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    I just looked up the S60. It says it has a 0-60 of 9.5 seconds. Does that sound right to you? If so, that's a bit sluggish. I was hoping for 7 or less.

    No way. That must be the number for the base 2.4 non-turbo model. Our XC90 has the same 2.5T as the S60 and even it hits 60 in less than 9 secs. The S60 is about 1,000 lbs lighter. All you can do is drive one and judge for yourself. I don't find them slow, personally.

    Shame about the G35x in your area. I can probably find a dozen in a few minutes here in NJ.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    >>The problem is that AWD is only usable for stopping and getting going in snow

    Getting it out of my driveway after a fresh snowstorm is about all I need it for. I'm not a particularly reckless driver, so I tend not to drive faster than 85 in any condition, and I don't usually hop into narrow spaces in traffic. So I've driven RWD cars before when renting and never had a problem handling even during snowstorms because I'm not an overly aggressive driver.

    It would really just be nice to see an opening in the lane next to me when my lane gets clogged and not lose it every time to the guy behind me because his car accelerates faster than mine. :) I think that's my ONLY motive.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I just saw a listing for an AWD 2004 Jaguar X-TYPE 3.0 X-type 3.0. 35k miles, at $13,500. 0-6 in 7 even. Anybody have an experience with this car? Any drawbacks?
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I also just now saw a 2002 bmw 330xi awd for sale - 13k. Also gets 0-60 in 7 even. All things considered, which is better between the 2004 x-type 3.0 and the 2002 330xi?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Getting it out of my driveway after a fresh snowstorm is about all I need it for.

    Use the money you save by not getting AWD to buy a snow blower.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    haha, it's a condo complex. They're better about cleaning up the driveway some days than others!
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I've noticed that AWD versions of many vehicles will add 1 second or more to its 0-60 time in general. The 330i has a 0-60 of 6.5 manual, 7.1 auto, and the 330xi is 8.6!!!

    It seems the only cars in that entry luxury family that maintain good performance in AWD mode are the Quattros, the G35x and the x-type 3.0, with the G35x easily being the best of the group, at least in performance.

    I would also consider the mazdaspeed6, but I'm having a hard time finding them used in automatic.

    So, I've been fortunate to find 2004 models of all three of these cars. Based on your expertise and experience, what's your take on the winner here, considering performance, maintenance costs, reputation, features, etc?
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    You might want to be a bit more subjective about the 0-60 and instead look at 30-60 or 50-70 times, since that is more relevant to merging in traffic.

    I didn't know they recorded those times. I don't remember seeing figures like that. I saw 0-20, 0-40, and 0-60. I would love those 30-60 or 50-70 figures. Is there a website that maintains them?

    To answer your question, I'm not too concerned with fuel economy. I get reimbursed for gas by my job.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    Is that a Fiesta? What year?
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    would also consider the mazdaspeed6, but I'm having a hard time finding them used in automatic.

    They were never made with an automatic. That might explain it :P
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Getting it out of my driveway after a fresh snowstorm is about all I need it for.

    Use the money you save by not getting AWD to buy a snow blower.

    That opens up ALOT of options for you. I think a V6 Camry or Altima can meet your 0-60 numbers. Snow tires might make up the difference as well.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    The thing is, I have no real means of accommodating two sets of tires. I have one parking space, and I'm not allowed to put anything there except the car. So that's why my only real option is one set of tires with AWD. Unless FWD with traction control is equally useful for getting out of snow jams.

    But as it stands, I think I have some decent 2004 AWD options to work with - the Audi Quattros, G35x, and Jag x-type 3.0. I've heard that there are some reliability problems with Jags, but I'm not sure if that applies to this model. If anybody has opinions or preferences between these models, I'd love to hear them.

    Thanks so much for your opinions and help! This will go a long way towards helping me settle on a great car.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    that's a sad bit of viral marketing.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    The audis have reliability problems.
    The X-type is just a Ford Contour.
    Both have HORRIBLE resale value.
    The G35 is superior in both regards.

    Where do you live? I know you said Illinois. I just searched Cars.com and found 11 G35Xs with 72k miles or less for $17k or less within 50 miles of Chicago zip 06601. (I went to $17k to allow for negotiating, of course)
    Of note, there is an '04 with 32k miles for $16,999; an '05 with 47k miles for $15,995; and an '06 with 57k miles for $16,999.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Well, "horrible resale value" is a good thing for one who is looking at buying a used car.

    I don't think it is accurate to call the x-type a ford contour. We actually considered one of those new in 2004, when they were offering about a $6000 cash-to-dealer incentive...for those who bought at $7-8000 below MSRP the resale value is probably not so horrible, btw. One of the concerns was the really awful reliability reported at that time and confirmed by the very high cost of an extended warranty. I don't know if that has changed.

    Anyway, I think the need for AWD is over-stated by most. Everyone who thinks they need this is surrounded by people who live in the same area and drive on the same roads without it. I don't think trying to plow through deep snow with an AWD car (these will still have low ground clearance) is such a great idea anyway and in any other conditions FWD and stability control are likely to be adequate.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    Well, "horrible resale value" is a good thing for one who is looking at buying a used car.

    lol, that's exactly what I was about to write. As a second owner, I would probably just drive it into the ground and trade it in. Horrible resale value is a plus for me!

    Reliability, on the other hand, is a BIG concern (which may be why they have horrible resale value in the first place). if a car is not reliable, then I at least want it to be cheap to fix. If I'm spending 25% of what I paid for the car each year to fix/maintain it, then it's a bad deal. On a $16,000 lux car, for 25% of that per year, I could lease a new car of that same model.

    I don't know if calculations are done anywhere for reliability costs, but to me, if any of these cars cost more than $1800 a year to maintain after five years or 70,000 miles, then I'm better off going new. Maybe even a lease takeover.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    I think the G35x is the winner, then. I've seen great reviews for it all over the internet. I haven't read much of anything about the x-type, and the Audi seems to have its loyalists, but most people prefer G35x head to head, so I'm gonna go with your suggestion.

    Thanks for telling me about cars.com as well. I'm in Chicago, but I hadn't checked there. Since I never bought a car before, what's a reasonable price to talk a $17,000 car down to?
  • morin2morin2 Member Posts: 399
    Unfortunately, its far harder to negotiate the price of a used car because only the dealer knows what it cost him and he must get for it. New cars are easy - everybody should know what the car cost & so, its easy to negotiate a fair profit for the dealer.

    If you are inexperienced, do you know anyone who is more experienced at the art of negotiation? A former salesman, perhaps? The most important thing is to obtain a knowledge of what these actually sell for (comparables) - not the asking prices, and then match or beat it. If you buy the car on the first day of negotiation, you paid too much. Do not appear to fall in love with it. Negotiate from a lower point than your final, and leave when it reaches an impasse. You'll get a call back. My daughter is driving a car I bought when it was 3 years old & priced at 10,295. After 3 days of negotiation, I paid 5750 cash from a new car dealer. That's about typical of my used car buys. Work only with new car dealers (on local trades with perfect history) - they are the pros at this. Be professional, respectful, and stick to your guns. I have bought used cars this way for 35 years, always with cash. A good dealer will recognize and respect you more than if you paid his asking price - so much so that I have been offered jobs by the dealership owners after getting the car at my price. Good luck !
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    Well, "horrible resale value" is a good thing for one who is looking at buying a used car.

    Eh... to an extent. There is kind of a happy medium. Some cars that depreciate rapidly in the first few years will continue to do so and that can still hurt even if buying used.

    OH, you're right on the Jag. Apparently it was the Mondeo, not the Contour (see wikipedia).

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Edmunds gives estimated maintenance and repair costs in their "true cost to own", looks like they go back as far as 2004 models:

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/cto/intro.do
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    But what does 'hurt' mean?

    I looked at an '07 Lucerne with more than a year of the BTB warranty left and dealer asking $23k under msrp. ETCO says to pay $3900 less than that. It also said it would depreciate about $9500 in next 5 years or about $2k a year, if driven 60k miles in those 5 years. So a $47k car turns into $10k in 67k miles?

    Does $2k a year hurt in a car that was once $47k? I hope not.

    someone on here posted they bought a $56,600 msrp Lexus for $15,500 at 5 yrs old and love the car.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAHPMUkhj5Q&feature=related
    All wheel drive is a marketing joke for almost all vehicles.

    If you notice the wheels, they get into trouble and stop moving at ALL when they get in trouble. 1:52 shows this - stop, then the rear wheels transfer and it gets confused/gives up.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooQRxlChvMw
    You can also see it here, more obviously. The problem is you need power all the time to all wheels in snow or mud. The ramp test is especially telling on some cars - you'd figure the rear wheels would lock and push past the obstruction at least like a rear wheel drive car at that moment. This also holds true in the rain - unless it can transfer power in milliseconds(read - Porsche and a couple others do this on a few high-end and others do it in some of their pro/racing cars), it's useless to have part-time awd while hitting a sudden patch of ice or water at speed. 1/10th of a second is ~5 feet at 60mph. If it takes half a second as it appears in most of these videos, that's 20-30 feet and that's well past the problem in many cases.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7dVFY5CxT0
    Be patient. Ignore the first few minutes. Seriously. It sucks - be patient :) What you want is at 4:40. Wet suddenly makes it a whole different game. The Volvo's part-time system engages and the instant it does, it gets in the way and honestly it would have been better to just stay in 2wd mode. Also watch the hill climb on dirt.

    Most any SUV or truck with 4x4 will grunt major hills as if it's not even there.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDN091_WLBw
    That's a ski run. I chose that because it's a stupidly heavy SUV with stock equipment on it - worst case scenario. Still gets up it.

    http://www.expeditionswest.com/equipment/reviews/patriot/index.htm
    The Jeep is another way to deal with it - it locks the diffs and xfer cases so that you have temporary 4x4. The Toyota Rav-4 also has a similar "lock" mode. Of course, the trick here is to get Patriot with manual as it is then a pure 2wd/4wd system without the computers getting in the way. No low-range, though, but almost nobody really NEEDS that for snowy roads and winter driving, really. Both turn off at anything over slow speeds, though, so it's really not a true solution, IMO.

    The real question is whether you need a vehicle for mud and snow and winter driving or something that gives you great rain and accident avoidance. If the former, get a 4x4. If the latter, get a Subaru or Audi
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,672
    >someone on here posted they bought a $56,600 msrp Lexus for $15,500 at 5 yrs old and love the car.

    A neighbor has been buying nothing by Acuras that way. They are a few years old with something in the range of 100K miles. He has an independent Honda mechanic to whom he takes his vehicles for servicing and preventative maintenance based on that guy's recommendation--not a dealer who's selling extra servicing. He did get burned on his most recent purchase, one of his newest. A couple years old RL and lower mileage off lease. It wasn't running right and he took it to the dealer. $1300 later he had a new EGR something or other... He was not happy.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    The real question is whether you need a vehicle for mud and snow and winter driving or something that gives you great rain and accident avoidance. If the former, get a 4x4. If the latter, get a Subaru or Audi

    Interesting links. Like I was saying before, my biggest motive for wanting an AWD vehicle is to be able to get out of a snowed-in parking space. I rent pretty often now, and I've found that to always be the only real thing that drove me crazy about winter driving. Waking up in the morning, and seeing 6 inches of snow, plowing for 20 minutes and still having to rock the car for another 10 minutes to get out of the space. And worse, coming back in and seeing that all of the spaces are still covered with at least four inches of snow because the city didn't get around to plowing yet, forcing me to try to park over the snow - another 20 minute struggle. Generally, anything that would help avoid that (but not an SUV) would make winter driving enjoyable.

    I've never had any issues with winter driving once I was actually on the road. No slips or slides or loss of traction or anything else. Maybe once or twice ever the car would veer off a little bit for a second, but I always got control back right away.

    For anybody who has had a G35x, when it gets to around 60,000+ miles, does the maintenance cost begin to skyrocket? Or is it pretty stable for several years after that?
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    Edmunds gives estimated maintenance and repair costs in their "true cost to own", looks like they go back as far as 2004 models:

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/cto/intro.do


    Oh my god...according to this, it costs $7,803 in 2009 to take care of a 2004 G35x. $650.25 a month? On top of the $400 a month finance? So over $1000 a month to own a 2004 car? From your experiences, does that sound right to you? Because I currently pay $850 a month to rent a car, and all expenses except gas are included. So it doesn't seem right...
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    6 inches of snow? IIRC, a Tacoma would ignore that as it has about 8 inches of clearance in stock un-lifted trim. No rocking or anything - it would ignore city/light snow like that. Plus, 4x4s are cool and all that :) Hold their resale value as well. A 10 year old Tacoma 2wd can't be given away, yet the 4x4 versions still sell for 5-6K+. So buying one a few years used might mean well under $1000 a year depreciation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Tacoma
    IMO, you want a 2004 model. This is the last year of the older smaller body. Less plastic and cheaper to maintain. It should also be right in your price-range. (about 12-15K should get you a good condition low mileage one)
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    6 inches of snow? IIRC, a Tacoma would ignore that as it has about 8 inches of clearance in stock un-lifted trim. No rocking or anything - it would ignore city/light snow like that. Plus, 4x4s are cool and all that Hold their resale value as well. A 10 year old Tacoma 2wd can't be given away, yet the 4x4 versions still sell for 5-6K+. So buying one a few years used might mean well under $1000 a year depreciation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Tacoma
    IMO, you want a 2004 model. This is the last year of the older smaller body. Less plastic and cheaper to maintain. It should also be right in your price-range. (about 12-15K should get you a good condition low mileage one)


    Allowing you want to drive a truck. There is going to be a big difference between ride quality, handling, fuel economy, and various other things comparing a G35 to a truck.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    True, but the G35 is really a pretty hard riding car as well, being a barely civilized 350Z. I don't find a small truck to be a problem to drive around. They really drive a lot less like trucks now, but without the huge weight penalty of a SUV. So they are a bit rough and bouncy around the edges but don't wallow and lurch around, either.

    To be honest, it's all about degrees here. My Friend's 5 year old 4Runner is big, heavy, and smooth as glass on the highway. With the V6 in it, he gets almost 20mpg highway as well. It doesn't feel like a truck. Not all SUVs are created equal.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I don't know about all their cost estimates, I was really only refering to it as a source of repair and maintenace costs. Also I would look at it as more of a comparison between models, to get an idea of the relative differences. The AWD G35 shows a total of $8600 for 5 years and 75,000 miles.

    You could look at models you are considering and see if there is a big difference...for example a 2006 GLI comes in at about $8800 for repairs and maintenance, so it looks like there would be little difference between that and the G35. In contrast the one that I mentioned being a bit scared of, the 2004 x-type comes in with almost $21,000 in repair and maintenance costs...so still scary.

    For most cars I have looked at there is not enough difference to affect our decisions, but once in a while there is one like that x-type.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    With 10 of the 12 inches on the ground at 7AM, I shoveled away enough to get the door open, fired up my low ground clearance FWD and drove off on unplowed streets that had one set of tracks already that morning. The floorpan was into the snow and backing up in the unplowed street packed one of the exhaust tips.

    Years ago with my V6 M5 Camaro, I backed into a driveway to turn around and barely got up a very slight upward slope to get out of the driveway. There was 2 inches of snow that day. maybe it took 30 seconds of spinning to go the 20 feet.
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,274
    Many tire shops will store the spare set of wheels and tires for their customers for a nominal fee. You might look into this as an option since you say you're not allowed to store them in your parking space.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    To be honest, it's all about degrees here. My Friend's 5 year old 4Runner is big, heavy, and smooth as glass on the highway. With the V6 in it, he gets almost 20mpg highway as well. It doesn't feel like a truck. Not all SUVs are created equal.

    From Cars.com - '04 4Runner vs G35x
    0-60mph (estimated) 7.6 seconds 5.4 seconds
    1/4 mile (estimated) 15.5 s @ 90 mph 14.1 s @ 96 mph
    Lateral acceleration .79 G .84 G
    Slalom 57.4 mph 60.1 mph

    So over 2 seconds slower, .05G lower, and 4mpg under in the slalom, and that is a better performing SUV...

    If I HAD to drive an SUV, I would, but I can't think of a reason why I would ever HAVE to do that.
  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    yeah, an SUV isn't really an option for me. I've never liked them, the ride, the handle, nothing. The whole SUV thing never caught on for me at all. i haven't test driven the G35x yet, so I can't comment on the ride quality, but in general, I do prefer smoother rides.

    For those of you driving cars with traction control - does it significantly help pulling into and out of snowed in parking spaces without the aid of ripped up cardboard boxes and two people?
  • exb0exb0 Member Posts: 539
    I don’t know about $600 a month, but luxury cars cost you more in maintenance and repair relative to “normal” cars. First of all, parts are more expensive and dealers charge much more for their service because they think that you can afford it. Secondly, these cars have more “features” and electronics in them, more “stuff” to repair.

    For example, a set of four tires for G35x will cost you $1K, and they don’t last as long since there are performance tires. Same applies to brakes, cost more and don’t last as long.

    My rule of thumb is, if I can’t afford to buy a car new, I wouldn’t be able to afford to maintain this car used.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    I have a G35 (not the x, though), and I can testify that yup, maintenance costs are more expensive. ~$800 for tires, and it chews through rear brakes & rotors with regularity.

    However, the one thing I can say in favor of the costs is that I've spent exactly $0 in repair over its 92,000 mile lifespan. Nothing's gone wrong - just regular maintenance stuff like brake pads, tires, and just replaced the belts.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    Hmmm... well, that's what you get for going to the dealer. ;b

    I don't know what its more expensive than. So far, parts have been comparable to my other newer cars, and the only reason I've gone through tires faster is the way I drive it. I bought a set of Sumitomos for the track for ~$440 and another set of all-seasons for the bad weather for ~$500.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    But what does 'hurt' mean?

    I'll give ya an example. I bought an '03 Lincoln LS V8 with 30k miles in October '05 for right about $20k. It was a decent price. Trade value was about $18k. About 18 months later, trade value was $12k. So it depreciated somewhere in the 55-60% neighborhood in the first 2 years and went on to depreciate like a rock after that.

    Like I said, it CAN hurt.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    Your example was over $5500 a year. A lot depends on how you get rid of it. trading is asking the dealer to give you $4k less than PP. I spend about $30-40k a decade on cars and a decade later they are worth 10% or 20% of that. Recently I bought 3 used cars/trucks for $15k total and they combined for far less depreciation than my new '98 Astro by itself. My next one will still be new, but only because I don't drive 100 miles a day anymore.

    If I buy it new, I fix everything that goes wrong with it. When I buy used, I find 3 or 4 expensive things wrong with it within a year and I never get them fixed.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    Yup, like I said, it depends. I only said it CAN hurt, not that it always does. I've done quite well on cars, too. I bought a 350Z from a dealer used and traded it 9 months later at just a $1500 loss. That's only $167/mo. I couldn't come close to even leasing for that price.

    trading is asking the dealer to give you $4k less than PP.

    First off, if you get $4k more PP than trade-in, you've found yourself an incredible sucker. Typical dealer asking price is $4k over trade. Typical selling is more like $3k over trade. Private party, best case scenario, is more like $1500-$2k over. Take out the ad fees, detail cost, repair costs, and lost tax advantage (in my state, anyway), and trading is no worse than selling PP on vehicles over $10k.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • demigawddemigawd Member Posts: 26
    Say, I've been reading up on turbocharged cars. I like the idea of a car with the fuel economy of a 4-Cyl, but the power of a V6 or V8 - BUT, I've heard mentions of a "turbo lag". I figure it's not a big deal when accelerating from a stop. But is turbo lag going to negatively affect my ability to pass in and out of traffic quickly? I'm a lot more concerned about navigating high speed highway traffic than zooming up the fast lane, so I'm not sure if turbo is the way to go in that case.
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,274
    Depends on the engine. VW's 1.8T engine had pretty noticeable turbo lag, but the 2.0T does not. Also, I didn't notice lag with Volvo's light-pressure 2.5 liter turbo five-cylinder.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    Turbo lag only affects the car from a stop in most cases. Once the engine is spinning at a couple thousand RPMs, the lag isn't there, so passing is not an issue.

    However, "the economy of a 4-cyl with the power of a V6 or V8" is marketing BS, for the most part. Power costs gas, no matter how it is achieved. For example, a WRX STi gets 19mpg combined (300hp turbo 4 AWD). A 335ix gets 19mpg combined (300hp turbo 6 AWD). A G35X gets 19mpg combined (300hp NA 6 AWD).

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I would assume that if you actually use that power, you will not get the 4 cyl mpg and if you do not use the power, why'd you buy the turbo?
Sign In or Register to comment.