What Car is Right For Me? Help Me Choose!

mr_gone · November 2012

A Cruze is "far superior" to a Mazda3? A Hyundai Elantra? C'mon. Decent car I'm sure, but not "far superior."

And let's stop all the "Mustangs get 30 mpg" nonsense. Look at a Mustang owners forum. The guys posting there say they're averaging 20-22 mpg combined city/highway. Some are thrilled to hit 24, in highway-only driving. A lot say they're getting 16-18 mpg in typical driving. You'd have to believe in fairies to think a heavy car with a 300-plus engine is going to get 30 mpg, and if you try to baby it to squeeze out an extra mpg or 2, you'll lose all the fun.

One downside to the new Mazda3: The new, fuel-efficient engine is supposed to be a bit of a dog compared to previous versions.

bpizzuti · November 2012

Superior where? It's got fewer HP than the Mazda3, gets fewer MPGs, and doesn't offer a hatch option. Not to mention being heavier and much less fun-to-drive.

markwillis · November 2012

Personally, I'm not a fan of the Cruze. I looked into it briefly and nothing about it really caught my eye. Not to mention I've heard much more praise about the Mazda3.

maxx4me · November 2012

One downside to the new Mazda3: The new, fuel-efficient engine is supposed to be a bit of a dog compared to previous versions.

....and, it is a two seater; it is time to get over that too. I simply would never buy a car that cannot fit two adults in the back. Some of these manufacturers aught to just skip the back seat altogether and have a flat floor for hauling/loading. As in the case with the Mazda 3, and many versions of Subarus, the designers seem more intent on providing room for an umbrella than thoughtfully planning out adequate space for adults. If I want a two seater, I'll get a Miata. Please don't continue to charge me 20+ thousand dollars for a car with little/no useful space behind the driver's seat!

sebring95 · November 2012

I would think if hauling adults comfortably is a need....you would just buy a more appropriately sized car to begin with. I used to commute in a VW Jetta diesel that allowed the front seat to go back so far it rendered the back seat useless. That was fine by me because it was one of the few small cars I was extremely comfortable driving (i'm 6'4). I find many much larger cars to limit the travel of the front seat to a point I don't have enough room. It's been awhile but I had a Mazda3 rental and don't recall having any issues. One of the worst in recent years was a Pontiac G6 which is bigger than a Mazda3 but was not comfortable at all. I also don't find the Impala all that comfortable and that's probably considered a full size today.

plekto · November 2012

The Reason I think the Cruze is a better car than the 3 is because it actually has a usable and decent interior. It certainly drives better thanks to the weight and wheelbase.

Almost all of the magazines seem to be calling neck and neck between the two. Remember, that this car is a re-badged version of GM's best selling small car in Europe and is made by Opel. So it feels a lot better than the GM of old. Or essentially it's caught up with the imports.

But $16K? (including the destination fee!) That's 2-3K less than the nearly identical driving 3. Plus it has a usable rear seat. I have to give the Cruse the win here based on that crazy incentive program. And 0% for 5 years financing.

Also note that according to the EPA, the Cruze is actually a mid-size sedan and GM is marketing it as a compact. Where it is doing very well as expected. Of course the heavier and beefier built chassis will drive smoother. Of course the rear seat can fit normal people. The trunk in the Cruze is almost 50% larger than the 3 as well.

If the prices were the same, I'd probably get the Mazda. But at 16k? Grab it while there are still some 2012s left on dealer lots.

backy · November 2012

The Reason I think the Cruze is a better car than the 3 is because it actually has a usable and decent interior.

Huh? Have you SAT in the back seat? I have. What a joke... more cramped for leg room than even the Mazda3. One of the main reasons I took it off my list a long time ago.

I will say the dash is pretty nice on the Cruze. And the car has a nice solid feel. But so too does the Mazda3.

And the Cruze has no steering feel. A problem the Mazda3 does NOT have.

Leftover Mazda3i Touring sedans can be had for $16.5k in my town. I'd take that any day over a Cruze LS. Does that even offer cruise? I don't think so. (kinda funny... no cruise on the Cruze). And not the turbo 4 either, on that LS. And plastic wheel covers, vs. nice alloys on the Mazda3i Touring. etc. etc. etc.

markwillis · November 2012

Same here. I've received multiple quotes for about 16.5K on i Touring 3's, AFTER destination fee and BEFORE military rebates (which I believe is only $500, but still, that's 16K which in my opinion is an INCREDIBLE deal). With that, I'm sold. No need to sacrifice options or anything. That's the price of most BASE models of cars in the same class with half the options. I believe the only way my mind can change is if the offer isn't available in a month, which I don't believe will happen because dealers will still be trying to clear the 2012s off the lot, and I know end of December sales can be very rewarding, possibly even more than November.

Not to mention, sure I can get a Cruze at the same price, but that's a stripped down Cruze with no options, not even cruise control! No thanks. I'll stick with a 3 i Touring, which mind you is the second most option-happy trim the 3 comes in, second to the i Grand Touring (unless you count the s Touring and Grand Touring models, which I don't because of the mpg hit for only a little more horses) which comes with leather and a few other bells and whistles, which I wouldn't call a necessity by any means.

benrey23 · November 2012

The Cruze has almost 3 cu in of cargo space in the rear, has a longer wheel base which will give you a better ride/feel along with the 17 in tires verse the 16 in on the 3. Cruze has 40,000 more miles on the warranty PT and roadside assistance to go with it. Ipod hook up, The steering you dont like allows for better response. It does have less HP but the same tourque and achieves better fuel economy (owners have validated the fuel economy). There may be a little less room in the rear seat but the areas used 90% of the time are better than the 3. Cruze hands down.....

backy · November 2012

The Cruze LS that Pletko was talking about doesn't have 17" wheels, does it? Just 16" steelies I believe... vs. 16" alloys on the Mazda3i Touring. I think you need to go all the way to the 2LT to get 17" wheels on the Cruze, right? 17 inchers are available on the Mazda3 also... as are 18" wheels. If that's important to you.

The Cruze has almost 3 cu in of cargo space in the rear...

I don't doubt that.

The steering you dont like allows for better response.

The reason I don't like it because it doesn't have good response or feel... especially compared to the Mazda3.

... achieves better fuel economy (owners have validated the fuel economy).

Better than the Mazda3 Skyactiv? Please show me the numbers... especially compared to the Cruze LS. Mazda3 owners have validated the excellent FE on their cars also. Also, in CR's tests, the Mazda3 Skyactiv got better FE than even the Cruze Eco.

There may be a little less room in the rear seat but the areas used 90% of the time are better than the 3.

Let's see... I use the steering and suspension pretty much 100% of the time. Also the engine (which uses fuel). I think the Mazda3 is superior in all those respects to the Cruze.

mattsnowboard · December 2012

My fiance and I need a second car. We have a 2001 Toyota Camry with about 110k miles right now. It has no major issues but we want a second car so we aren't sharing.

It needs good gas mileage, so we're leaning toward another mid-size sedan. It will mostly be used by one of us to get to work 5 days a week, so we don't want to spend a ton on gas.

We want something reliable. I've owned that Camry and a Honda Accord in the past, both purchased with high miles because I knew they would last long and be reliable. I'm open to any suggestions but my instincts say it should either have low miles or be a model that is well-known for reliability.

We also want it to be able to handle driving to the mountains for snowboarding. We're from Michigan so we're used to driving in snow, but now we're living in Seattle so we'd be taking it to the mountains (we'll also need some tire chains). It would also be nice if the trunk was wide enough to fit a 156cm long snowboard, like my Toyota can now, but as long as there is some way to fit the boards in back seat or something that is fine. I thought AWD would be nice, but I'm thinking that the cost of reduced fuel efficiency isn't worth it for the weekend trips to the mountains. From what I've heard it isn't that important anyway.

Our budget is $10k, but I'd like to keep it closer to $8k.

Ideally this will last us about 5 years and hold up a decent portion of its value in that time with regular maintenance.

Just looking for some ideas as to what to look out for in our search. Some make/model/year suggestions in that budget would be extremely helpful. Thanks!

maxx4me · December 2012

At that price range, I'd suggest a Pontiac Vibe AWD or Toyota Matrix AWD. I'm not sure what you will find in a Subaru at that price range, but if you can, one of their hatches or wagons would also suite your driving and storage needs.

sebring95 · December 2012

Since you seem to like the Toyota/Honda offerings, there's no reason not to look at a newer model of either. Frankly, I think the Camry that would fit into your budget is a dud and would recommend the Accord from 2004-2006. These should fit into your budget with careful shopping and are a much nicer vehicle than similar years Camry. I also would not recommend awd for your location and how often you expect to need it. Snow tires would be a far better investment and would actually help out a lot in rainy Seattle at well. Not only does the AWD requirement narrow your choices down drastically, the mpg is not impressive nor the performance. I'd take a FWD with snow tires over an AWD car with all-seasons any day. You may still need to chain up in the mountains depending on the local laws, but that's not a big deal really.

There are certainly other vehicles out there to pick from but you didn't give any other requirements beyond reliability and fuel mileage...and I thing Toyota and Honda have it wrapped up in this price range. There are more interesting or better performing or better looking vehicles...but Accord and Camry are just so plentiful and generally reliable I can't see much argument for anything better.

mr_gone · December 2012

I second the vote for an Accord, but I'd further refine that choice by noting that not all of the models had side curtain airbags until 2005. That's a big safety advantage. There are many, many Accords out there, and you should be selective when shopping. Because of their durability, you would do well to look for a model with high miles and a careful owner who did the maintenance required. Don't be afraid to get one with 150,000 miles -- you might need to accept that level to get into the sub-$10,000 range.

Avoid the V6 because of mileage concerns as well as the need to replace its timing belt every 100,000. Early Accords from that series (2003-2007) had auto transmission problems, so research that, too.

Regarding the Matrix/Vibe, drive one after you've driven an Accord. I don't think you'll like it much. Rough ride, noisy, not a lot of fun. Reliable and practical in terms of their shape, sure, but when I had to drive one as a rental years ago I couldn't wait to give it back.

mattsnowboard · December 2012

Thanks, I'll look into that! (still open to other suggestions too)

Quick question, I've always just had all-season tires in Michigan. If I got winter tires in Seattle, would I have to change them in the summer? I'm not sure how much of a hassle this would end up being living in an apartment with limited storage space. Or would they work okay year-round because it doesn't get too hot? I'm guessing that even though the climate is pretty moderate, it would be warm enough in the summer that the winter tires would wear down faster.

sebring95 · December 2012

There are certain snow tires that you could run year round. You end up with an all-season with better than average snow traction...but obviously not as good as a true snow/ice tread. I used to run Nokian WR's on a VW Jetta diesel and they were great in the snow/ice/wet and even on warm days drove really quite nice. I was putting about 50k a year on that car and got two winters out of them plus drove them through a summer to burn them all the way down. They weren't as amazing as Blizzaks...but didn't handle as poorly or wear out as quick. So it's always somewhat of a compromise. The other option is to find a tire shop that will store your winter/summer tires for you.

mattsnowboard · December 2012

Thanks, I'll look into that option of finding a place that will change/store them.

I thought I found a good deal on a 2008 Accord (87k miles, $9900, clean carfax, too good to be true?), then I came across this: http://www.carcomplaints.com/Honda/Accord/2008/

Looks like I should look at anything but the 2008 model. The 2006 model has few problems according to that site (or very few people report it to that site). How accurate is that website on car complaints? Is it true that the brakes issue is a problem on the 2008 Accord, or is it something that could be fixed for a couple $100?

bpizzuti · December 2012

I'm having good luck with Continental ExtremeContact DWS tires myself.

mr_gone · December 2012

The 2008 model was the first year of what's known as the 8th generation of the Accord (2008-12). Given the complexity of designing and manufacturing a car, there are issues that often aren't discovered until the new design has been produced, sold and driven extensively enough for those issues to emerge. This was a known phenomenon among American manufacturers for decades, but the Japanese quality control systems seemed to have been sufficiently robust to avoid the issue in years past. The 2008 Accord was, from my understanding, proof that even Honda can suffer from the first-year-is-the-worst-year malady. It's probably best just to avoid 2008s and look for 2005-07s that meet your requirements. By 2007, Honda had four years of experience with that (7th-generation) design, which was new in 2003. Many Accord fans prefer the 7th generation to the 8th generation for other reasons as well.

sebring95 · December 2012

Exactly why I left the '08+ off my list. Bigger, heavier, less performance/economy and too much cost trimming (aka chintzy bits) for the 8th gen. The 7th gen had a nice feel to it and my experience is there really weren't any major problems on the 4cyl models. I have a friend that is a service manager for a Honda dealer. On the side, he buys these with 150k-200k miles, goes through them to make sure they're serviced and takes care of any needed repairs. He has a waiting list of buyers....

suydam · December 2012

Not sure the Accord would be a fit for your board. Did they even have split folding rear seats? -- The Vibe/Matrix may be boring but they definitely have a ton of room, get good fuel economy, do well in bad weather with all season tires. What I'm not sure of is if they have the oomph for mountain driving. I have one but I live in Ohio where it's fairly flat or just hilly. An older Subaru Impreza hatch or even the Legacy wagon might be good. Fuel economy isn't horrible and they are quite reliable and dependable. I saw a lot of them in Oregon. Of course another Camry would probably do just fine too.

mr_gone · December 2012

The Accord has a back seat that folds down. If you're just carrying snowboards, a sedan with a folding seat is plenty sufficient. I don't think I'd go the AWD route if you're trying to save gas. I've lived in the Northwest and AWD isn't really necessary.

qbrozen · December 2012

Protege5 or mazda3 hatch. I know you said mid-sized sedan, but you did say you are just "leaning" that way. A compact wagon will obviously fit your board.

Used Camcords just aren't worth what people wind up paying for them, IMHO.

mr_gone · December 2012

Only problem with the Protege5 and Mazda3 is that they're not particularly safe. Check the results of the Highway Loss Data Institute/ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Accords and Camrys fare better. They're bigger, heavier cars than the Protege/3, which are in the same size category as the Civic and Corolla. And the 3 in particular is more of a gas hog than you would expect (at least until the SkyActiv system came along this year.)

qbrozen · December 2012

I'm aware of the fuel situation, but... for example... paying $10k for an Accord to get 30mpg vs $6k for a protege5 to get 28mpg doesn't make sense.

I'll leave the safety issue up to the buyer. Its not something I concern myself with when purchasing.

plekto · December 2012

I'd give a 2005 Rav4 a serious look as well. It's basically a small car/hatchback that's been lifted and has 4WD added. It'll do very well in snow, though, as they can be had with a locking diff, which makes it good for actual bad roads and snow as opposed to something to get you out of your driveway in the morning (as most AWD systems tend to be, especially in older vehicles in your price range)

It can also be had with 4 cylinder and manual, which gives it pretty good MPG. (19/25 - new EPA ratings) I had a co-worker who had one and he said he would consistently get closer to 30mpg highway if he kept a light foot on the gas.

Most AWD vehicles are lucky if they can get 18mpg by comparison, as they are all saddled with a V6 and a huge amount more weight.

mr_gone · December 2012

Indeed it wouldn't make sense if a used Mazda3 cost $4,000 less than an equivalent Honda Accord, but in fact it only cost about $400 less. I just ran the numbers on Edmunds' TMV calculator. Similarly equipped, 2005 models, identical mileage (85,000), condition, color and location: Mazda3 dealer price is $7,898. Honda Accord is $8,320.

They're both good cars, and the market recognizes that fact and prices accordingly. With so much information available so readily these days, I don't think there are a lot of wildly overpriced or underpriced cars anymore. Years ago, in comparison, not that many people realized that a Geo Prizm and a Toyota Corolla were the same car with different badges. The Geo became a used-car bargain because of it. The same situation is in place today with the Pontiac Vibe and the Toyota Matrix. But people KNOW they're the same car and Edmunds' TMV numbers reflect it. Price them out and equivalent models are within about $100 of each other.

qbrozen · December 2012

Well, I did say Protege5. I honestly think its a better car than the mazda3.

At dealer auction, '03 P5s with under 100k miles trade for $3500-$4500 range. Similar Accord LXs seem to be made of gold and average more in the $6k range. So about a 50% difference.

TMV isn't exactly reliable. A 2005 Accord LX sedan is right around $7k at the block. I doubt dealers would let those go for just $1300 over on average.

I can't pull up '05 mazda3 hatch data for some reason, but the '06s are a tad under $7k.

fourtires · December 2012

My wife has only use of her right eye. She drives, but carefully. Was thinking about which cars have blind spot cameras. The normal blinking light on the mirror itself is not much use to her since she can't see the mirror. What I am thinking about is a blind spot camera system like in the new Honda Accord, but that car only has the system for the right lane, not the left lane. She has an Infiniti M45 now. Thanks for any suggestions!

plekto · December 2012

You might consider one of those add-on backup camera systems. Mount it so that it's on the body near the mirror that she can't see. I know of people who use these for off-roading as well, as it allows them to see the wheels as they go over objects and rocks. But it should work fine for this as well.

Yes, there will be a small screen on the dash, but it's about the size of a portable GPS.

Sandman6472 · December 2012

A dismal car, at least the one I was in...totally cheap looking and feeling...just reminds me of a rental car sweetheart! If I had to buy one, I'd have to get the 2LT or LTZ but why even bother when there are better choices out there. The Elantra is just a better, more comfortable ride. The '13 Civic looks very promising and though I don't trust the electrical gremlins from popping up, a Jetta should work. And for a little bit more, the Buick Verano is a nice package...very nice looking with comfortable, upscale appointments. For being a Cruze cousin, it's just so much more at a higher price point of course!

The Sandman :sick: :shades:

bpizzuti · December 2012

Quick, someone call Uplanderguy! :shades:

Actually, I don't think the Cruze is all THAT bad. It's quiet, got a lot of low-end torque, reasonably responsive throttle. Runs out of breath at the top end but that's typical GM, low end torque and nothing when you rev it. Seats felt OK, dash seemed high quality in a subdued, non-techie way.

Downside of being quiet is that it's heavy, and it drives like it. Steering is fairly numb. Doesn't transition well. Not much at the top end of the rev range to tap. And it's got a trunk, which I just hate. Especially when the decklid is maybe an inch or two, max, what's the point??

prat_dev · December 2012

I am looking to buy a used/new toyota Corolla/Camry for my wife who would be using it for driving to work every day on an average we would be driving this car around 1200 miles per month

We plan to use it for roughly 3 years & thinking what car would be most bang for the buck, should we go for a certified pre-owned or new car?

backy · December 2012

For bang for the buck, I'd go used definitely. Toyotas hold up well, and you'll save a bundle on the new-car depreciation.

I'd go with the Camry. I really detest the current-gen Corolla--lousy steering feel, uncomfortable driving position, cheap interior bits, antiquated 4-speed automatic, tight back seat. The Camry is a much more comfortable car, roomy back seat and trunk, still gets good fuel economy with the four cylinder.

IMO there are better options for a used car than the Corolla or Camry, but you asked specifically about those so that's what I'll stick to.

mr_gone · December 2012

I agree with your endorsement, although for the criteria laid out by the poster I don't know what would be a superior choice over a used Camry. There may be other cars that are more engaging to drive but given the utilitarian requirements implied by the O.P. the Camry seems the safest choice.

prat_dev · December 2012

Thanks a lot guys!! generally how many maximum miles i should go for, please note that my range is limited to maximum 16,000 bucks

backy · December 2012

Not sure where you live or whether your $16k includes TT&L but I just did a search on one of the main used car search sites for the Twin Cities area and found 22 Toyota Certified Camrys within a 30 mile radius of me, list price under $16k and miles as low as 26k. So you should be able to find something within your budget. Best deal in that search was a 2009 LE with only 26k miles for $15k.

mr_gone · December 2012

What you have, essentially, is a cost-of-ownership math problem. Keep in mind that you'll likely need to replace some parts -- tires, if nothing else -- during the 45,000 or so miles you'll own the car. In terms of depreciation, the older the car when you buy it the more depreciation has already been factored into the price, which means you'll take less of a hit when you resell it. Because Camrys are both plentiful and reliable, I'm not sure you need to take a pre-owned, certified car from a Toyota dealer. You're paying a premium for that certification and you're restricting the number of cars to consider. It's a bit trickier to do, but if you could find a mechanic who would recommend someone's, say, 5-year-old Camry that you could get for $11,000 you could budget a bit for replacement parts and end up selling it in three years with much less of a drop in price than a $16,000 certified model. Either way would be fine, but the route I've laid out may be the cheapest on the basis of dollar-per-mile.

kyfdx · December 2012

Agree with this... "certified" only means that it has an extended warranty.. I woudn't restrict your search to just those....

Go another year older, un-certified, and save $3K-$4K...

backy · December 2012

Well, there's a little more to it than an extended warranty...

The Toyota Certified Used Vehicles Advantage:

* 12-month/12,000-mile Limited Comprehensive Warranty 1
* 7-year/100,000-mile Limited Powertrain Warranty 2
* 1-year of Roadside Assistance 3
* 160-Point Quality Assurance Inspection
* CARFAX® Vehicle History Report 4
* Certified customers are eligible for standard new car financing rates

(for details on footnotes, see http://www.toyotacertified.com/)

Probably the biggest things beyond the long powertrain warranty are the 160-point inspection and, maybe for some buyers, the new car financing rates (although I can get that from my local bank, so maybe not a big deal).

FWIW, I think you'll need to go more than a year older and un-certified to save $3-4k. I searched ALL used Camrys from 2009-up and under $16k and found very little difference in price on certified vs. non-certified, for cars at dealers. You can save a little more buying from a private party, but then better have a mechanic check it out thoroughly and buy the CarFax... and there's time/hassle/cost involved there.

You can get a low-miles certified Camry for around $15k or less. That fits the OP's budget. Less risk with the warranty, also in my experience used cars from dealers are preferable to those from private parties because it's really like getting a new car, in terms of condition. The last few used cars I've purchased at dealers were 3-9 years old and except for the odometer reading it was hard to tell them from new. Might not be important to some people... I liked the new-car appearance along with the savings.

sebring95 · December 2012

If you find one that's still within the original warranty, you can add a Toyota warranty for ~$1,000 and it will be better than the certified warranty. We recently traded our 2011 Sienna Ltd with 30k miles and we contemplated keeping it and addding a warranty (it had a lot of issues). I found a Toyota dealer online selling Toyota Platinum $0 deductible 7 year/125k bumper-to-bumper and it was right around $1,100. 5 year/100k miles was only around $600. I'm assuming the warranty on a $45k Sienna with every option would be more than a Camry...but perhaps that pricing is the same for all models. Either way I think that option is a much better value than certified.

backy · December 2012

Yeah, if you can get 7 year b-to-b for $1100 on a 2-year-old car that would be great. But... can that be added to a 2nd-hand vehicle? If so, I would think there would be almost no market for Certified cars, if a long b-to-b warranty is that inexpensive.

Or get a 2-year-old mid-sized car with 15k miles that already has a 5-year b-to-b warranty on it, then no extra cost for warranty for the time the OP expects to own the car.

sebring95 · December 2012

Ownership or how the car was acquired is not an issue...it just has to be within the original factory warranty (3/36k). Certified is basically a really good marketing program. Dealers have to pay to participate (and pay for the certification process on each vehicle) but people seem more than willing to pay extra for them! The Toyota extended warranties are also transferable so it can be an incentive when you go to sell. I normally never buy an ext warranty though, odds are in the favor of the warranty company....otherwise they wouldn't be making money selilng them!

foladar · January 2013

I'm looking in the <6000 range, I know generally the 2001-2004 Corollas and 2000-2004 Civics might fit in the range with the 2001-2003 Civics having transmission issues. I'm also only looking at automatics. What other vehicles are considered "reliable" like a Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic?

I'm assuming Nissan Sentra fits in the same category, but I can't find out what other cars are 'reliable' in this category.

plekto · January 2013

GM makes the most reliable automatic transmissions. The problem is that almost all of their cars are about as interesting as paste from that era. Are you willing to consider other options like a coupe, roadster, or a small SUV? It would greatly increase the number of cars on your list.

Myself, I'd spend $6K on a classic car instead, but that's because $6K and less often buys you something that eats a lot of cash over time in repairs and doesn't give you a penny back as it still depreciates to nearly nothing in a few years. At least a classic car (or future classic) holds its value a bit and it's like everyone else's jellybean.

maxx4me · January 2013

ah, this is an easy one. Pontiac Vibe; hands down. I found over a hundred of them out there for sale under $6,000. For the money, you are getting a Toyota Corolla (engine, tranny, and most components) and a very reliable car. I have owned both generations. When you do your search, you will (no doubt) incur a pretty high mileage vehicle for sale. No matter. The Corolla engine is good for 200,000 miles or more. The only issues you will have on such a vehicle is:
- burns oil at a higher than normal rate (typical of all Corolla engines)
- the radio was a GM piece of junk which Toyota replaced in their 2006 and later Matrix models)
- paint chips
That is about all the negative I can come up with. Great car. And to give you a bonus suggestion, the Toyota Matrix is the same vehicle, so now you have two models to search against. Don't waste your money with a civic or corolla sedan when you can have the versatility of a roomy wagon to haul things in too.

backy · January 2013

I've owned both a 2001 Elantra (sedan) and 2004 Elantra (GT, hatch). My sister now owns the 2001 and it's held up pretty well, but has needed some parts replaced as it's aged. The 2004 has about 80k miles on it now, is in its 9th Minnesota winter (almost always parked outdoors) and it's been great as far as reliability. Brakes have been replaced once, I put in a new stereo ($100) a few years ago as I never liked the OEM unit, and I've replaced the headlight bulbs a couple of times (all but one replaced under warranty). You should be able to find a 2004 Elantra for ~6000 in good shape, although KBB on mine is nearly ~7000 now because of relatively low miles and excellent condition. (And I only paid $13,200 for it, loaded with leather, moonroof etc. Pretty low depreciation for a nearly 9 year old car!)

plekto · January 2013

Take Backy's advice with a little grain of salt, though, as he's known on this site for recommending almost nothing but Hyundai cars.

The problem with Hyundai cars is that they are not any more reliable than your average cheap import once they start to get around 8-10 years old. This presents a major problem as repairs on any older econobox can start to add up quickly (say, 120K+ miles). Cheap initial price means cheaper, well, everything. From the wheels to the paint to the knobs and switches. Let alone options and safety features. But it's common sense that a $15K car won't be built as well as a $25K car.

Your best bet is a semi-luxury model as they are built better and last longer in general. IE - A Buick/Cadillac, Lincoln, Acura, Lexus, and so on. Avoid German and upper-end luxury makes and models unless they have a manual transmission and no sunroof or extra electronic goodies. A good example of a fine choice would be something like a Lexus GS300. It's overbuilt but it is larger, safer, and if driven lightly, should last for many miles without much breaking.

Another good choice would be something overbuilt like a Grand Marquis. Now, you could probably find a 2005 for that much money. Sure, it gets 18mpg, but it's indestructible and parts are dirt cheap. A Buick Park Avenue is essentially the same, just GM's version. Just be sure to get one that was never a fleet/rental/police/etc car, whatever you purchase. Yes, these cars are rather large, but they are also much safer and have a better ride. Just something to think about.

backy · January 2013

Take Backy's advice with a little grain of salt, though, as he's known on this site for recommending almost nothing but Hyundai cars.

Absolutely not true and you know it. But it so happens I have actually owned Hyundais, unlike some people here who have no ownership experience but still think they are experts in the cars.

For example, everything you said in your post is inaccurate.

* Paint on all Hyundais I've owned, including the one that's 12 years old and now with my sister, has held up very well. On my 2004, the paint still shines like new albeit has some surface scratches and a few dings from parking lots.

* Knobs/switches are as good as on any car I've owned. I always loved how smooth and damped the HVAC controls on the 2004 Elantra are--even have rubber rings around them for easy gripping. FWIW, the cruise control used on my 2001 Elantra is exactly the same as the one used on many Toyotas for many years--and still used even though almost every other manufacturer has switched to on-wheel controls instead of a stalk.

* Hyundai led the industry in use of safety features like side airbags, ABS, and ESC. Even the 2001 Elantra has side airbags standard--how many 2001 compacts had those? My 2004 has ABS with traction control--how many 2004 compacts had that?

No, an economy car like the Elantra is not the same quality as a luxury car like the Lexus GS300. But no other economy car is either. See what kind of GS300 you can buy for ~6000. That's what the OP asked for recommendations on... not luxury cars like the GS300.

Kirstie_H · January 2013

It's also worth noting that many luxury vehicles have higher maintenance costs. For example, on my previous Infiniti, rotors had to be replaced when brake pads were replaced, and a rear lighting assembly was $600 in parts alone. Tires for that vehicle were also a lot more costly than the ones I just put on my Escape. These are factors worth checking into before buying a "luxury" vehicle.

Also, a larger sedan is - obviously - not going to have anywhere near the fuel economy of the smaller sedans mentioned by the OP.

What Car is Right For Me? Help Me Choose!

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles