Chronic Car Buyers Anonymous

cdnpinhead

It's pretty clear that none of you drive to Alaska, or much of anywhere else, for that matter.

Different strokes. . .

greg1288

85% chance of travelling to Conn. on Friday and purchasing a Toyota Crown Platinum. Upon inquiring if there were any additional fees above the internet price, along with a few additional questions regarding registering in NY, whether it has a spare or any obvious imperfections etc. the reply informed me that there were additional doc fees, dealer fees, etc totaling $2200.

The color of the car - Machine Grey/Black Bi-tone was the one I liked the best and because there are very few used available I asked if he would come off $1000. He replied we could split the difference and I agreed. I told him I could leave a CC deposit and could come this week to purchase it if as described. I told him no financing needed and he told me he likes to do hand shake deals even over the phone and told me no deposit was needed. I was very surprised. He told me he would hold it for me and remove it as a sellible car.

stickguy

Hand shake is better for him. That way when he sells it out from under the customer they have nothing tangible to fall back on like a deposit!

laurasdada

au1994 said:

laurasdada said:

roadburner said:

@laurasdada said:

Almost four years of PHEV charging (120v) in the garage and I, along with my humble abode, remain singe-free.

Knock wood veneer.

I’ve had the same experience. The thing is, when the 95B recall was issued Jeep recommended not charging the Jeep as well as parking it outside. Some people immediately freaked out while the majority were at least borderline reasonable.

To be honest, if Audi issued a similar recommendation, it would certainly begin my "time to consider moving-on" wheels spinning.
The closest issue for the A7, iirc, was to not use the portable EVSE supplied with the car for 240v (120 was okey dokey; I only have 120 in the garage), it was swapped out under recall for a more robust unit.
Growing pains; but I still enjoy the option of local drives without waking the sleeping dinosaur. Still considering a Lucid lease, if the wheel of spending lands on "moving on!"

The Lucid is a very attractive package. I am concerned with long-term viability of the company though. The upcoming SUV looks cool too.



Hence doing something I've never done before, lease.
I've got the premium dino-fueled M240 for any trips I deem an electric to be a bridge too far and the wife's X3 for backup.
But still just a thought. Gotta also save my $ for a Gaza timeshare!

mjfloyd1

@stickguy said:
latest update, after much discussion she told the salesman that has been very patient with her she wanted to go ahead and do it. and found out they just sold that unit. So they are getting all her info together while they go on the hunt for another one (she wants a specific color combo, jet black (good luck with that since she is not known for washing her car!) over red leather which looks really sharp. The dealer is also going to appraise her car again to see if it works out better to just give it back, or trade it in, and go from there. Advantage to trading it in, no worries about the lease end inspection and getting dinged for damage! That might be important in this case.

Isn’t the trade in appraisal the equivalent of an inspection and getting dinged for damage?

roadburner

I'd like to bid on these two tomorrow...

stickguy

mjfloyd1 said:

@stickguy said:

latest update, after much discussion she told the salesman that has been very patient with her she wanted to go ahead and do it. and found out they just sold that unit. So they are getting all her info together while they go on the hunt for another one (she wants a specific color combo, jet black (good luck with that since she is not known for washing her car!) over red leather which looks really sharp. The dealer is also going to appraise her car again to see if it works out better to just give it back, or trade it in, and go from there. Advantage to trading it in, no worries about the lease end inspection and getting dinged for damage! That might be important in this case.

Isn’t the trade in appraisal the equivalent of an inspection and getting dinged for damage?

effectively, and that will come into play when deciding (bird in the hand and all). what I don't know yet is who and when they make that determination. Really don't want to turn it in and take your chances with no recourse. But as long as the trade value is not more than $1,000 below the residual and remaining payments due, it will be a better deal even if there is not damage assessment to pay.

stickguy

certainly will get noticed in either one of those. Go for it. Consider it a reward for taking on the 2nd career that just ended. Figure out the cost, and take on enough fill in trials to cover it, and they will basically be free!

sb55

greg1288 said:

85% chance of travelling to Conn. on Friday and purchasing a Toyota Crown Platinum. Upon inquiring if there were any additional fees above the internet price, along with a few additional questions regarding registering in NY, whether it has a spare or any obvious imperfections etc. the reply informed me that there were additional doc fees, dealer fees, etc totaling $2200.

The color of the car - Machine Grey/Black Bi-tone was the one I liked the best and because there are very few used available I asked if he would come off $1000. He replied we could split the difference and I agreed. I told him I could leave a CC deposit and could come this week to purchase it if as described. I told him no financing needed and he told me he likes to do hand shake deals even over the phone and told me no deposit was needed. I was very surprised. He told me he would hold it for me and remove it as a sellible car.

Congrats on the potential Crown. We currently have a 2021 Toyota Venza and just test drove the 2025 Crown Signia. It is a nice car/CUV. It's more wagon-like than the Venza and it has some nice features. But since car is so new dealer is not dealing. So we'll will wait to see if they become more affordable. Since it's made in Japan, maybe the price won't change too much if tariffs do take effect.

28firefighter

2025 Forester and Crosstrek Hybrids announced today - look intriguing.

benjaminh

A positive review of the 2025 Forester hybrid. Pricing starts at $35k + destination for the Premium, which is about $2800 more than the standard Premium. At that price difference probably around 7 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings, but it will be more powerful, have a better 0-60 time, and a longer range between fill-ups. Pricing is about $1200 less than a CR-V Sport hybrid with AWD.

https://media.subaru.com/pressrelease/2280/1/subaru-announces-pricing-new-2025-subaru-forester-hybrid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NWYZIeJ_TA

ab348

I watched the Motormouth couple give their take on it today. Over $50K in worthless Canadian dollars and has a combined 191HP, less than the RAV4. Seems like unless you’re fixated on getting a Subie, there are better choices.

Sandman6472

Infotainment system is the reason I won't consider the Mazda CX-30 [non-permissible content removed] it's the perfect size & vehicle to replace the Golf. Now, if they were to replace their ridiculous system, I'd seriously consider switching. The dealership moved from across the street to a few miles away a couple of weeks ago. But as of now, no way would I even consider it. I had read somewhere that Mazda was going to revamp their whole infotainment system like in 2024 but obviously, I was wrong. And we do like Mazda...had our 2005 Mazda 3s for just over ten years. And she would've gotten a 2015 but didn't like a few things like the infotainment system.

Sandman6472

Checked out some Subaru's last Friday after I delivered a sold vehicle to Subaru of Pembroke Pines. Like the Impreza for it's smaller size, our kids are on their second Impreza right now. The Crosstrek is also nice but don't think either will fit on my side of the garage. Don't think I'd want to go CPO truthfully even though I saw a real nice Impreza model last week, a few years old with just around 20K on the clock. Was their top of the line model with alloys instead of wheel covers & a more upscale interior then the base model for just around $20K. Did think about test driving it today as I was off for a couple of days, but just decided to wait a bit. Looked real clean and all, inside & out, as it didn't have a cloth interior thankfully. They tend to get stained way to easily especially if it's an ex-rental. Trust me, from what I've seen over the years, would never ever consider an ex-rental!

corvette

benjaminh said:

At that price difference probably around 7 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings, but it will be more powerful, have a better 0-60 time, and a longer range between fill-ups.

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

Sandman6472

Getting closer to 79 K on the Golf and things are going great. It's driving just great now though the pedal is a bit low for me. Glad I had that work done and will need to check the manual about when to deal with changing the tranny fluid. Think if it's still around for another couple of years, might just have it done since the majority of my trips are short ones. The engine never really gets to put on much mileage with my current driving pattern, mostly trips between 4 to 8 miles, give or take. I really need to get it on the road and let it stretch it's legs sooner then later. Planning a trip to St. Augustine & Orlando sometime in May so might just take it instead of renting one from work. Think a good 3 to 4 hour trip would do the engine some real good. But we get a really great deal renting, so it might just pay to do it for the week.

Sandman6472

Just waiting for the new 2025 GTI to debut to help me make a big decision about purchasing one. Just hope they go back to one of their recent alloy designs as I'm not a fanboy of the black ones folks seem to prefer these days. I think the right alloys make any vehicle look special and I'll know it when I see it. Glad their changing the size of the infotainment system and going back to traditional dials for volume & tuning. Having to scroll on the screen with one's fingers while driving is dangerous & plain stupid!

I'm still glad to this day that I swapped out the OEM alloys that came on my SE model for a different design they offered me. It was a quick decision done under stress within the 5 minutes management gave me to decide really but still think I made the right choice in the end. Overall, I still get that same stupid grin on my face every time I see my car, even after all these years...I've only had one other vehicle I like so much, and that was my quirky looking 1988 Corolla FX hatchback. And liked it even more after I had the bolt-on wheel covers installed a few weeks after I bought it!

stickguy

corvette said:

benjaminh said:

At that price difference probably around 7 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings, but it will be more powerful, have a better 0-60 time, and a longer range between fill-ups.

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

was just going to say this. People spend more all the time for upgraded engines (in Subaru, turbo over NA) and that does not seem to cause all this drama. The hybrid is an upgraded powertrain, so makes sense that it costs more just like the turbo.

roadburner

My wife is now ready to take over the Wrangler so the X1 is going to be sold. I really liked it, but its departure makes room for something a bit more fun for both of us- think: E30 325is or some flavor of R230...

Michaell

roadburner said:

My wife is now ready to take over the Wrangler so the X1 is going to be sold. I really liked it, but its departure makes room for something a bit more fun for both of us- think: E30 325is or some flavor of R230...

E30 I know; I assume the R230 is an MB of some sort.

stickguy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_SL-Class_(R230)

Michaell

stickguy said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_SL-Class_(R230)

Thank you.

benjaminh

corvette said:

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

True.

But for some of us the power of the standard engine is enough. And so then the question becomes how many years of driving for the hybrid to make sense. To some degree the answer depends on what state you're in. In Louisville the cost of regular at our local Costco is currently 2.65 a gallon, while some people in California are paying around 4.50. The national average for gas is apparently a little less than 3.20 at the moment.





The hybrid Forester will get a combined epa city/hwy mpg of 35, compared to 29 for the regular model. If you drive about 12,000 miles a year that means you'll save about 72 gallons a year, which at 3.20 a gallon is an annual savings of only $230. The additional cost for the hybrid is about $2900, which means that it takes about 12 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings. Gas prices might go up in the future, but even at 4.50 a gallon it's about 9 years for it to pay off. And at my current local Costco gas price of 2.65 it takes about 15 years for it to make sense.

Hybrid batteries have gotten better, but most of the time they don't last as long as engines. It's possible that after a dozen years or so the Forester's battery would need to be replaced, at a possible cost of $4k or so for parts and labor. That's probably something for the second or even third owner, but that's still a cost that someone has to pay at some point, or the hybrid Forester will just go to the junkyard. My understanding is that once the battery fails on a hybrid it really can't function.

So I'm just saying that the economics of hybrids don't always pan out.

The exceptions are where the hybrid is included as standard equipment, like with the Maverick or the Camry.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense.

benjaminh

ab348 said:

I watched the Motormouth couple give their take on it today. Over $50K in worthless Canadian dollars and has a combined 191HP, less than the RAV4. Seems like unless you’re fixated on getting a Subie, there are better choices.

The Subaru does have some advantages, like a better awd system, higher ground clearance, bigger rear windows/better visibility, and a lower price (at least in the US).

benjaminh

A new Edmunds comparison between a kia K4, a Corolla hybrid and a Civic hybrid. Their overall winner (if you can afford it) is the $33k Civic hybrid Touring. But if you're on a budget the Corolla and K4 make more sense, since they are c. $4k-7k or so less.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVS0BMMrU5M

benjaminh

A Toyota mechanic gives a rave review to the new CX-50 hybrid. He says it gives you the quality, durability, and mpg of a Toyota hybrid powertrain, but with an interior quality almost at the Lexus level, and all for a price slightly less than a RAV4.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkM1JdN_qnA

stickguy

That’s what my princess wants!

benjaminh

The CX-50 is a nice vehicle, but from my pov the review above minimizes some of its drawbacks, including significantly smaller cargo space (56 cubic feet in the CX-50 with the seats down, compared to 76 in the Outback and CR-V), jittery ride in the CX-50 with the torsion beam rear suspension, somewhat tight back seat in the CX-50 compared to the competition, an infotainment system with that dial in the center console in that would take some getting used to, and poor rear visibility in the CX-50 compared to the Outback or Forester.

nyccarguy

benjaminh said:

corvette said:

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

True.

But for some of us the power of the standard engine is enough. And so then the question becomes how many years of driving for the hybrid to make sense. To some degree the answer depends on what state you're in. In Louisville the cost of regular at our local Costco is currently 2.65 a gallon, while some people in California are paying around 4.50. The national average for gas is apparently a little less than 3.20 at the moment.





The hybrid Forester will get a combined epa city/hwy mpg of 35, compared to 29 for the regular model. If you drive about 12,000 miles a year that means you'll save about 72 gallons a year, which at 3.20 a gallon is an annual savings of only $230. The additional cost for the hybrid is about $2900, which means that it takes about 12 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings. Gas prices might go up in the future, but even at 4.50 a gallon it's about 9 years for it to pay off. And at my current local Costco gas price of 2.65 it takes about 15 years for it to make sense.

Hybrid batteries have gotten better, but most of the time they don't last as long as engines. It's possible that after a dozen years or so the Forester's battery would need to be replaced, at a possible cost of $4k or so for parts and labor. That's probably something for the second or even third owner, but that's still a cost that someone has to pay at some point, or the hybrid Forester will just go to the junkyard. My understanding is that once the battery fails on a hybrid it really can't function.

So I'm just saying that the economics of hybrids don't always pan out.

The exceptions are where the hybrid is included as standard equipment, like with the Maverick or the Camry.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense

Fixed that for you

benjaminh

nyccarguy said:

Fixed that for you

So are you saying you don't think there's an environmental benefit to hybrids?

Michaell

nyccarguy said:

benjaminh said:

corvette said:

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

True.

But for some of us the power of the standard engine is enough. And so then the question becomes how many years of driving for the hybrid to make sense. To some degree the answer depends on what state you're in. In Louisville the cost of regular at our local Costco is currently 2.65 a gallon, while some people in California are paying around 4.50. The national average for gas is apparently a little less than 3.20 at the moment.





The hybrid Forester will get a combined epa city/hwy mpg of 35, compared to 29 for the regular model. If you drive about 12,000 miles a year that means you'll save about 72 gallons a year, which at 3.20 a gallon is an annual savings of only $230. The additional cost for the hybrid is about $2900, which means that it takes about 12 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings. Gas prices might go up in the future, but even at 4.50 a gallon it's about 9 years for it to pay off. And at my current local Costco gas price of 2.65 it takes about 15 years for it to make sense.

Hybrid batteries have gotten better, but most of the time they don't last as long as engines. It's possible that after a dozen years or so the Forester's battery would need to be replaced, at a possible cost of $4k or so for parts and labor. That's probably something for the second or even third owner, but that's still a cost that someone has to pay at some point, or the hybrid Forester will just go to the junkyard. My understanding is that once the battery fails on a hybrid it really can't function.

So I'm just saying that the economics of hybrids don't always pan out.

The exceptions are where the hybrid is included as standard equipment, like with the Maverick or the Camry.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense

Fixed that for you

And sometimes you just want the latest tech, both inside and outside the car.

My stepdaughter bought a new car last fall - she wanted a BEV, but we talked her out of it due to the changes in technology happening so fast in that industry.

Then, she wanted a PHEV, but those were hard to find in the color combination she wanted - the nice thing about PHEV in CO is that there was an additional $5350 in incentives available through the state, which made up for the price hike over a regular hybrid.

She ended up getting a hybrid - Kia Sportage SX Prestige (top line trim). Her money, her choice. I don't think she cares a whit about how long the payback will be versus an ICE version of the same car.

She likes it, she drives it, she's happy.

nyccarguy

benjaminh said:

A Toyota mechanic gives a rave review to the new CX-50 hybrid. He says it gives you the quality, durability, and mpg of a Toyota hybrid powertrain, but with an interior quality almost at the Lexus level, and all for a price slightly less than a RAV4.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkM1JdN_qnA

This is the Hybrid powertrain of the current RAV4 Hybrid, correct? Not the new one that's in the Camry & rumored to power the next generation RAV4? Brilliant move for Toyota and Mazda.

graphicguy

benjaminh said:

The CX-50 is a nice vehicle, but from my pov the review above minimizes some of its drawbacks, including significantly smaller cargo space (56 cubic feet in the CX-50 with the seats down, compared to 76 in the Outback and CR-V), jittery ride in the CX-50 with the torsion beam rear suspension, somewhat tight back seat in the CX-50 compared to the competition, an infotainment system with that dial in the center console in that would take some getting used to, and poor rear visibility in the CX-50 compared to the Outback or Forester.

I think the general consensus is the CX5 is the better vehicle over the CX50. But, the CX5 has been around a while, yet people still buy it. So, Mazda keeps making it.

kyfdx

Mazda is definitely not the vehicle if you put a premium on interior space.

But, if that isn't your issue, they're very satisfying, compared to the competition

benjaminh

kyfdx said:

Mazda is definitely not the vehicle if you put a premium on interior space.

But, if that isn't your issue, they're very satisfying, compared to the competition

When it comes to the CX-5, I'd say that one is sporty to drive and had nice handling with its independent rear suspension. But I didn't feel that way about the CX-50.

In terms of interiors, both Mazdas were nicer inside than our CR-V. But about the same as the Outback in terms of comfort and quality of materials.

But we use the extra space. We have a small house, and somehow over the years with two kids (now grown) got a storage unit that we had for about five years. Finally, a few months ago, we got rid of stuff with Goodwill and then moved the rest back into our garage. Multiple trips in our filled up Outback. Would have taken more trips in the CX-50, and I think some stuff just wouldn't have fit in the Mazda.

Mazdas are definitely small on the inside compared to most other cars.

nyccarguy

benjaminh said:

nyccarguy said:

Fixed that for you

So are you saying you don't think there's an environmental benefit to hybrids?

Do they achieve better fuel mileage? Absolutely. The way the materials to make the hybrid batteries are mined is far from clean. Getting the materials from the mine to the factory isn't clean. Producing the batteries themselves makes for some dirty emissions. What happens to these hybrid batteries at the end of their 10-15 year lifecycle?

BTW, I'm not against hybrids, plug in hybrids, or even electric vehicles.

nyccarguy

Michaell said:

nyccarguy said:

benjaminh said:

corvette said:

If it's more powerful and faster, I worry a lot less about the payoff time for a modest price increase vs. the lesser model.

True.

But for some of us the power of the standard engine is enough. And so then the question becomes how many years of driving for the hybrid to make sense. To some degree the answer depends on what state you're in. In Louisville the cost of regular at our local Costco is currently 2.65 a gallon, while some people in California are paying around 4.50. The national average for gas is apparently a little less than 3.20 at the moment.





The hybrid Forester will get a combined epa city/hwy mpg of 35, compared to 29 for the regular model. If you drive about 12,000 miles a year that means you'll save about 72 gallons a year, which at 3.20 a gallon is an annual savings of only $230. The additional cost for the hybrid is about $2900, which means that it takes about 12 years for it to pay off in terms of gas savings. Gas prices might go up in the future, but even at 4.50 a gallon it's about 9 years for it to pay off. And at my current local Costco gas price of 2.65 it takes about 15 years for it to make sense.

Hybrid batteries have gotten better, but most of the time they don't last as long as engines. It's possible that after a dozen years or so the Forester's battery would need to be replaced, at a possible cost of $4k or so for parts and labor. That's probably something for the second or even third owner, but that's still a cost that someone has to pay at some point, or the hybrid Forester will just go to the junkyard. My understanding is that once the battery fails on a hybrid it really can't function.

So I'm just saying that the economics of hybrids don't always pan out.

The exceptions are where the hybrid is included as standard equipment, like with the Maverick or the Camry.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense.

But for those who want a bit more power and a bit more range + a small environmental benefit, it definitely can make sense

Fixed that for you

And sometimes you just want the latest tech, both inside and outside the car.

My stepdaughter bought a new car last fall - she wanted a BEV, but we talked her out of it due to the changes in technology happening so fast in that industry.

Then, she wanted a PHEV, but those were hard to find in the color combination she wanted - the nice thing about PHEV in CO is that there was an additional $5350 in incentives available through the state, which made up for the price hike over a regular hybrid.

She ended up getting a hybrid - Kia Sportage SX Prestige (top line trim). Her money, her choice. I don't think she cares a whit about how long the payback will be versus an ICE version of the same car.

She likes it, she drives it, she's happy.

"She likes it, she drives it, she's happy"

This is the most important part of any car purchase. Once you figure out whether or not you can afford it of course.

benjaminh

Yes, I agree with you @nyccarguy....the mining of materials for batteries has a lot of environmental costs, and sometimes have questionable labor practices.

And then the recycling at the end of the battery life is a challenge. Seems like somewhere around ninety percent of a battery can probably be recycled, but then the other ten percent is toxic and they don't seem to know what to do with it yet. So the environmental picture is complicated and difficult to try to figure out.

And I don't know the answer to this question, but it seems like some hybrids maybe don't last as long as gas engine cars because of eventual battery failures?

If a Prius from 2010 needs a new battery that costs 6k in parts and labor, for instance, but is only worth about that anyway, seems like there's a chance it'll just go to the junkyard. A Camry from 2010, on the other hand, might also only be worth about the same, but since it doesn't have the battery issue it might be cost effective to keep it going another five years or so.

In the long run if an average gas car with good maintenance lasts maybe 18 years or so, but some hybrids die at 10-15 years bc their batteries go bad, that would seem to mean more cars in more junkyards sooner, which might also be an environmental cost of the hybrid not fully thought about? Idk.


PS Found some info on the average age of a vehicle in the US when junked....Seems to undermine my theory, because on average the Camry and the Prius apparently to go to the junkyard at almost the same mileage.

https://autorecyclingworld.com/what-is-the-lifespan-of-a-vehicle-in-the-usa/

"Todd Bialaszewski, founder of Junk Car Medics, provides insight into the lifespan of vehicles in the USA, which averages 16.58 years with an average mileage of 156,470 miles when junked. This analysis is based on over 50,000 records from 2023, revealing variations in vehicle longevity and mileage across different states."

benjaminh

I'm surprised the KIA Optima and Nissan Rogue have such short lifespans.

But it's good to see that in terms of mileage at least the Acura TL is in the top ten.

corvette

benjaminh said:

I'm surprised the KIA Optima and Nissan Rogue have such short lifespans.

A lot of them have had 6+ owners by the time they hit the 11-12 year mark, with the final few buying them from a BHPH lot.

oldfarmer50

nyccarguy said:

benjaminh said:

nyccarguy said:

Fixed that for you

So are you saying you don't think there's an environmental benefit to hybrids?

Do they achieve better fuel mileage? Absolutely. The way the materials to make the hybrid batteries are mined is far from clean. Getting the materials from the mine to the factory isn't clean. Producing the batteries themselves makes for some dirty emissions. What happens to these hybrid batteries at the end of their 10-15 year lifecycle?

BTW, I'm not against hybrids, plug in hybrids, or even electric vehicles.

Driver100, what have you done with nycarguy?🤣

benjaminh

Trying to avoid grading another in my stack of student papers, I read the Subaru press release on the new Forester hybrid.

https://media.subaru.com/pressrelease/2280/1/subaru-announces-pricing-new-2025-subaru-forester-hybrid

It says that the entry-level hybrid Premium model has as standard a power rear gate as well as blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert. Those two things cost $1200 extra on the regular gas Forester, which means that the hybrid isn't $2900 more but only 1700. The hybrid also has an extra sound deadening material, as well as a digital instrument panel not found on the regular model. If those last two things were thought to add another 500 in value to the hybrid model, that would mean the actual price difference would drop to only $1200. That would mean it would take only 4-5 years to pay for itself, depending on gas prices, and so it seems like a better value than I thought in my earlier post. And meanwhile you get more power. So...I've changed my mind lol, and now think the Forester hybrid is a good deal after all.

oldfarmer50

As to longevity:

Cars like Mustangs might have shorter lifespans due to accidents. I can believe that a Kia was on the list of poor longevity. I also wonder how much rust, maintenance and CVT transmissions have to do with skewing the results.

suydam

Reading those stats about how long cars last is a non-starter for me. I’ve never kept a car more than 8-10 years. Getting two new vehicles last year seemed like questionable economics, but as you say, we are very happy with the practical results. Had my son, my daughter, son-in-law, their two very small children, and his parents visiting the last week as they are all on their way to a wedding in LA. We were able to get everyone, including the car seats and all the baby gear, into both cars — 4 in the Sportage and 5 in the Blazer, in actual comfort. Charged the Blazer once while they were here, and the Sportage 2 or 3 times. Everybody was happy!
We finally realized that we do have people visit us often, so it isn’t just about us and the dog.

explorerx4

Considering between 10 and 15 million vehicles are scrapped each year, 50K seems like a small sample.

ab348

benjaminh said:

Trying to avoid grading another in my stack of student papers, I read the Subaru press release on the new Forester hybrid.

https://media.subaru.com/pressrelease/2280/1/subaru-announces-pricing-new-2025-subaru-forester-hybrid

It says that the entry-level hybrid Premium model has as standard a power rear gate as well as blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert. Those two things cost $1200 extra on the regular gas Forester, which means that the hybrid isn't $2900 more but only 1700. The hybrid also has an extra sound deadening material, as well as a digital instrument panel not found on the regular model. If those last two things were thought to add another 500 in value to the hybrid model, that would mean the actual price difference would drop to only $1200. That would mean it would take only 4-5 years to pay for itself, depending on gas prices, and so it seems like a better value than I thought in my earlier post. And meanwhile you get more power. So...I've changed my mind lol, and now think the Forester hybrid is a good deal after all.

In Canada, Subaru is apparently only offering one model of the Forester hybrid, the top trim level, so that is why it is over $50K Cdn.

stickguy

My daughter has a cx 30 now. Compared to the 30 a 50 is huge. She is also 5’2” and has no kids. It will have plenty of room for them.

And the power is. Real thing. Neither the base NA Mazda or Subaru engines is all that zippy. And the turbo upgrade to cure that is more expensive than the hybrid while also having a MPG hit. So it isn’t just about the mileage increase. Plus the interior on the Mazda is really nice!

ab348

benjaminh said:

https://autorecyclingworld.com/what-is-the-lifespan-of-a-vehicle-in-the-usa/

"Todd Bialaszewski, founder of Junk Car Medics, provides insight into the lifespan of vehicles in the USA, which averages 16.58 years with an average mileage of 156,470 miles when junked. This analysis is based on over 50,000 records from 2023, revealing variations in vehicle longevity and mileage across different states."

Some interesting things on those lists. I imagine the Ranger and the Blazer (based on the S-10) benefit from being rather anvil-like in terms of both powertrains and having minimal tech, adding to their longevity. I know most Rangers of that era I see locally all have rear frame crossmembers missing due to rust (you can tell by the spare tire living in the bed) but have been repaired by local welders.

On the short lifespan models, most of them were cheap to begin with and probably suffered from lack of maintenance as the years went on. The Cruze had a turbo engine in a lot of models so the failure of that might lead to junking it as time went on. The Chrysler products were from the beginning of the dark ages for that brand. The Traverse was probably in the days of the 3.6 engine having problems, now apparently fixed. I don't know if the Kia Optimas in question had the problematic H/K engines that liked to blow up, but that might mean the last ride is to the junkyard.

xwesx

explorerx4 said:

Considering between 10 and 15 million vehicles are scrapped each year, 50K seems like a small sample.

When you're talking EOL, I imagine you would need to remove those that were artificially shortened (e.g., crashed or flooded) from the group before finalizing the sample. I sometimes see "old" cars at a recycling yard that are crunched, but I never see "new" cars there that are not crashed.

kyfdx

My D-I-L has a 2001 CX-30 and one of the selling points was the power, compared to competitors (Seltos, HR-V, etc). 180 hp in the base model vs. 146 hp in the other ones.