Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Help Me Select a Wagon
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The 6-sp AT offered on the Mazda6 s is new for 2005, but I don't know if it's from JATCO.
Technically Subaru only requires 87 octane, but they recommend premium and so would I.
I believe Toyota's 3.3l and Nissan's VQ prefer premium as well.
-juice
One thing that's kind of interesting about my PT GT is that if I'm in first gear at 20 mph, which puts it around 3200 rpm, I can floor it (without touching the clutch) and often it will burn rubber. I've never had a car before that would burn rubber while moving unless I popped the clutch. I usually use mid-grade fuel. It runs on regular, but premium is recommended. I don't really notice a difference when I use regular.
Then again that was my wife's car, so you drove that model a lot more than I did.
How long does your PT take to spool up in that situation? Does it spin the tires right away, or is there a second or two delay to build boost?
-juice
Have not tested the PT GT for mpg with different octane gasoline. I have on another vehicle that recommends using premium and found that mpg dropped enough that it actually cost more per mile for gasoline to use regular instead of premium. Performance also dropped a bit by stop watch, but felt the same when driving.
-juice
Even if you're cruising along at 4000rpm, if you hit the throttle is has to build boost.
I think that's what they mean.
If at idle you hit the gas, the turbo kicks in well before most engines power bands do, even with VVT. It's just not called VTEC lag, it's simply outside of the power band.
But a VTEC engine, cruising at that same 4000rpm, will have quicker throttle response, immediate, really. It doesn't have to wait for boost to build.
So that's what they mean by more linear power and quicker throttle response.
Turbos are so much better than they used to be, now you get light-pressure boost systems with higher compression ratios for quicker throttle response. Subaru's 2.5T engine also has AVCS (their VTEC) to help it off-boost.
-juice
was looking for a wagon, but if Scion tC is as great as protrayed, I can make the satisfaction for the 2dr too. Please help...
Do you carry loads a lot? Hatchbacks are pretty practical. In fact the Scion xB is closer in terms of utility.
Coupes are trendy for a while, but then they look old fast. So only get the tC if you love the performance and that will keep you happy long-term.
Otherwise, the more practical hatches will serve you better.
-juice
Chrysler reliability isn't bad, especially with the Cruiser. A few years ago Toyota was having problems with engines and now Honda is having problems with transmissions. One can't count on past reliability reputations as a for sure predictor.
Juice gave good advice. I'd add that it is sometimes possible to get practical utility along with something that is fun and economical to drive, with a high probability of reliability.
I have a PT GT that is a blast to drive, very easy to get in and out, holds four full size people with room to spare, is the best assembled car I have ever bought (better than my Acura, Toyota, Mazda, and Nissan), and has been very reliable. The only downside is lousy mpg.
A Mazda 3 isn't as roomy, but gives great mpg by comparison and is fun to drive too.
I find the two Scions (A and to be underpowered and not much fun, but utility is good. Haven't seen a tC yet
For example, if you ran out and bought the first New Beetle, now you're stuck with a cramped Golf and poor resale, and it's not even all that fun to drive.
If you bought a PT Cruiser, at least it's still practical. So when the honeymoon ends, it's still a useful tool to keep around.
So if you buy, say, a Mini Cooper, fun-to-drive had better be very, very high on your priority list.
-juice
Consumer Reports has rated the PT Cruiser highly for reliability and most people that have owned one are very happy with it. It seems as though they are very reliable, though those people who DO have problems with them seem to have multiple problems.
My two 2002 PTs have been very reliable so far, in addition are very comfortable and flexible cars. I have had no regrets with either car, in fact my happiness with my wifes car was what encouraged me to get one of my own.
Unfortunately, no matter how many positive posts you see, there is a very good possibility that you would still "hear the footsteps" and never be happy.
-juice
-juice
Or the VW Jetta "Wagon"?
Because typically, "Sport Utility Vehicle" denotes a truck based (or, recently, a raised car-based) platform with four or all-wheel drive. See: Toyota 4Runner, VW Touareg, FOrd Explorer. Wagons are almost always variants of a sedan platform (or sometimes the sedan is derived from the wagon; either way, they share common underpinnings)- your aforementioned Taurus/Sable, Legacy, Volvo V50 and V70, Mazda6 wagon, Passat and Jetta wagons, Mercedes C and E class wagons, BMW 3 and 5 series...the list goes on.
I'm trying to figure out by which criteria the Taurus and Sable can be considered "wagons" that excludes all the other models I've mentioned.
Hatchbacks are usually sedans with a back pack. The roof line is similar but it has a lift back instead of a trunk. Protoge5, Spectra5, WRX, etc.
And yes, the WRX is to me more of a 5 door hatch vs. a true wagon. The Forester is based on the same platform and that's more of a wagon, though it's raised up a bit.
-juice
The test drive was another story. Acceleration was terrible. I did not feel at all comfortable merging. Cornering was also sub-par. I really needed to hit the break to keep from feeling like I was going to tip over. Noise was OK, but certainly not the best I've experienced.
I really hate how much I don't like driving the car, because it's so perfect for what I'm looking for. But I would never feel safe with that poor acceleration.
My husband and I stopped off and drove the MPV again. He also likes it. I love the way it handles. I still have to try the new Subaru Outback, and I'm going to try the Odyssey now that rear windows go down. So far I'm leaning toward the MPV if we end up with triplets and the Passat Wagon if we have twins or single. (Ahh, infertility.) The question has been pushed off since my mother-in-law gave me her 1997 Toyota Avalon and we're fine with that for now. In any case, I will need a much longer test drive with my final contenders.
Joy Elyse
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
I suggest, however, you wait for the '05s to get the (supposedly bulletproof) 6 speed auto transmission. If it's a manual you want, go for an invoice or below invoice deal (before rebate) on an'04 off the lot.
I need to drive the Outback and the Passat back to back, which should be easy if I head out of the city a little further. There's a VW dealership, next to Subaru, next to Honda. I'll probably head over there later in the week when the new Odyssey comes out. With the Mazda dealership down the street, I can hit my final four in a row and make a good comparison. (Kind of funny to include the Odyssey in my final four when I've never driven it, but it's perfect on paper.) I had really wanted a wagon, but I'm leaning more toward the mini-van. It seems the best kid/dog mover. Is there anything less cool I could want next?
If the MPV had better emissions/gas mileage, I think I'd just go with it, but I really want a more environmentally friendly car. I love driving it so much. I just don't know how to reconcile my conscience with my desires.
Joy Elyse
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
I need to drive the Outback and the Passat back to back, which should be easy if I head out of the city a little further. There's a VW dealership, next to Subaru, next to Honda. I'll probably head over there later in the week when the new Odyssey comes out. With the Mazda dealership down the street, I can hit my final four in a row and make a good comparison. (Kind of funny to include the Odyssey in my final four when I've never driven it, but it's perfect on paper.) I had really wanted a wagon, but I'm leaning more toward the mini-van. It seems the best kid/dog mover. Is there anything less cool I could want next?
If the MPV had better emissions/gas mileage, I think I'd just go with it, but I really want a more environmentally friendly car. I love driving it so much. I just don't know how to reconcile my conscience with my desires.
Joy Elyse
Remember you have to pay $32,000 for the Odyssey that gets good mileage, while all Siennas are just about as good (1 mpg worse) In fact both Sienna and Odyssey (the expensive one) do better on fuel than the Mazda 6 wagon.
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
I beg to differ that the four vehicles I'm looking at are all the same Emissions-wise. At the moment, the wagons are better than the mini-vans. We'll see what happens with the New Odyssey. Interestingly, I couldn't find the LL Bean model's pollution score at the Subaru dealership. The base model is an ULEV, but they didn't know about the LL Bean.
MPV
MPG (City) 18
MPG (HWY) 25
Greenhouse gas emissions 9.3 tons
EPA Pollution Score (scale 1 (worst)-10 (best)) 4-LEV
Honda Odyssey 2004
MPG (City) 18
MPG (Hwy) 25
Greenhouse gas emissions 9.1 tons
EPA Pollution Score (scale 1 (worst)-10 (best)) 4-LEV
The new Odyssey will be a ULEV vehicle and have 20/28 MPG. More specifics are not yet available.
Passat Wagon (4 motion, 6 cyl)
MPG (City) 19
MPG (Hwy) 26
Greenhouse gas emissions 8.8 tons
EPA Pollution Score (scale 1 (worst)-10 (best)) 6-LEV
Subaru Outback LL Bean 2004 (2005)
MPG (City) 19 (19)
MPG (Hwy) 26 (25)
Greenhouse gas emissions 8.8 tons (NA)
EPA Pollution Score (scale 1 (worst)-10 (best)) 6-LEV (NA)
It's way more work than it should be to get this information. While you can find it on EPA websites, etc., it's not usually on Edmunds or Cars.com or in reviews. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.
Also - what about Sienna? Mileage of 19/27 (epa pollution of 9 and 8.6 tons of GHG)
The Sienna was perfect on paper, but the steering was so mushy. I can imagine parallel parking it in Boston. I just didn't like it. That's why I'm holding out hope for the Odyssey. It's similar, but supposed to steer better. We'll see.
A wild card could be the Malibu Max. It has limo like rear seat room, though a little less cargo room than the wagons. Decent mileage (23/30). Heavily discounted right now (6k off of sticker for an 04). It is even available with a rear DVD like some minivans.
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
Good luck with the fertility thing. Put it this way, I hope you need the 8-seat Sienna. )
-juice
So, when it came down to deciding between the 3.0R VDC or the 2.5 XT, I opted for the 3.0R VDC. The 2.5XT is certainly quicker, but I preferred the refined/smooth ride of the 3.0R VDC, added safety of VDC (it works extremely well), and the reliability. If I went with the 2.5XT, I would definitely have spent the extra $1500 or so on the extended warranty.
My experience with four turbo cars is they don't 'run' any hotter than a car without a turbo (water temp about the same as non-turbo), but there is residual heat from the turbo after shut down. In addition, because the turbo itself is very hot the oil around the turbo tends to cook after shut down in addition to having a hot spot to go through while the engine is running. Using synthetic oil takes care of the heat with respect to oil. My Volvo 740 turbo (with boost kit and some extra boost too) did not show any signs heat related wear and tear under the hood after 8 years. All of the hoses and belts were OE and were still soft and flexible. Same was true of my Mazda turbo and my VW turbo. My Cruiser turbo doesn't have the miles or years of the others, but so far shows no sign of heat related wear and tear.
None of my turbo cars use(d) more oil than my non-turbo cars and there has been no sign of mechanical wear and tear - but I do use synthetic oil.
BTW, I like the refinement of the 3.0 too.
It's nice to have 3 engine choices.
-juice
I always use synthetic oil and take great car of my car (garage, etc.), but the fact is that the heat generated by my turbo vehicle has affected its engine. When I speak of heat, I'm not referring to engine coolant, I'm referring to the temperature in the engine compartment. Fact is that a turbocharger is an air pump run by hot exhaust gases exiting the engine that pumps more air into the engine generating more power which creates more hot exhaust which makes more power to pump more air which..., well these things get pretty hot.
I know the automobile makers are building better systems to cool the turbochargers, but they always run hotter and, thereby, cause some wear on the engine and its components. Some more than others.
Again, in my experience (everyone has there own), my turbo V70R has had some expensive bills to replace/repair items that normally wouldn't wear out so quickly if the car was a non-turbo.
I think Subaru acknowledges this wear/reliability issue somewhat by charging a few hundred more for an extended warranty on the turbocharged vehicles than on the non-turbocharged models.
-juice
While I don't doubt higher temps and pressures would result in more wear, the question is during what relevant range of time? Is there a significant difference after 5 years? After 10 years? I have a feeling that with modern-day engines, the owner's driving style and adherence to a routine maintenance schedule probably has far more impact on the engine's longevity than the presence of forced induction.
Ken
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
That's why I wanted gray. Ended up with a squall blue pearl wagon with gray interior, and I like the medium gray with the blue very much. I've got 3K miles on my wagon and have almost no complaints. Even my teenagers love it. I caught a man circling it in a parking lot last week. Pretty sure he was admiring it, not looking to steal it.