Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
Unless you owned Volvo & Mercedes minivans, the comparison isn't really a great fit versus a minivan of any make.
My Chrysler minivan did just fine - but I went in with my eyes wide open and knew I wouldn't be keeping for more than 5 years and it would never see 100K miles. If I HAD kept it longer, it would have been with the anticipation that every driving experience could well be its last.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Chrysler does make good vehicles. If you follow the following formula:
1: Manual transmission only.
2: No electronics or accessories at all.
Something like a base model Wrangler, Patriot, or Ram 1500 is decently reliable and cheap to run - and will likely outlast most of us. But that's because it's got nothing *to* break and the manuals are crude as a box of rocks, but tough as rocks as well.
If you could manage with seating for 5, and really need the minivan for cargo, you might consider the Patriot simply because at $15K new, it's dirt cheap and will have a new warranty on it versus something several years used. Use it, abuse it, toss it after five years. If you want, pay a couple of thousand extra for an extended warranty. It's a good deal and few people regret getting one.
The manual transmission also gets pretty good MPG, or about a realistic 30 highway. 4WD is only 2K extra, and is far better than AWD in bad weather. The interior is basic but not too bad, actually, considering the rock-bottom price.
If I was considering buying a Chrysler minivan and could manage to live with two less seats, I'd get the Patriot instead. Also, the 2011 model got a much needed refresh - it's not nearly as chunky inside as you'd think. The rear seats also recline nicely, like in the Fit. I like to think of it as a mega-Fit.
Lastly, consider the following:
$19-20K gets you this:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/equipment/reviews/patriot/index.htm
Well, that's a real SUV there. With minivan type MPG or better. Just no 3rd row seat is all.
And how many do you think are available with a manual transmission.
I just think there are much better choices.
However, I really think someone is living in the past. Chrysler has come a long way since all those bad '90s vehicles.
Btw, dad has had a few RAMs over the years. All were very reliable and a couple are still running strong, serving as yard workhorses at his shop with over 200k on the clock. And he buys his loaded with all options.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
And the manuals are perfectly fine.
I mentioned the Patriot simply because while it's not as nice as a used T&C, it can be had for about the same price new, or close to it (unless paying cash - banks offer about the same rate on 12K used as 16K new). With a 5/100K drive-train warranty and nobody else's farts or sweat in the fabric, either.
It's a good basic low cost box to get around in if you get the manual and keep it simple. At least you'll know that you can drive it without worries for the life of the payments. :P
Having previously owned a first-generation Wrangler Unlimited, I've always thought the Patriot was a neat little vehicle. And while we only require seating for five, our three children are still using car seats or boosters which would require more width than the back seat of a Patriot could offer. Mrs. MC would like the 4WD (our current Venture is AWD) for sloppy weather, but giving up the convenience of sliding doors would be a tough sell for us.
So who offers a two-row vehicle that's:
1. Wide enough to accommodate three across in boosters/car seats
2. Not a gas-swilling Tahoe/Suburban/Expedition, etc.
3. Not a princely sum (no more than about $22K used)?
These questions are what keep bringing me back to a van of some sort.
Thanks in advance for everyone's continued input!
http://www.motherproof.com/news-rants/story/2011-jeep-patriot-car-seat-check/
It'll easily fit two full-size car seats from the pictures and probably one booster. It's worth measuring, IMO. The only thing that's going to fit three car seats in the rear will be a large truck. Again, take something like a Buick Lucerne. Because of the way that the seats are sculpted and the fact that the rear pillars are angled, it leaves you with not really enough headroom. It has to be literally square like a pickup or maybe something older style like a Grand Marquis. (MPG is an issue, of course)
It looks like the Patriot has 51 inches of seat room and 54 inches of shoulder room. So that means you could probably wedge three seats in of they are no wider than 17-18 inches. The Wrangler unlimited and Liberty have 56 inches - as wide almost as a Crown Vic or Buick Lucerne. But, remember, the arms are meaningless for hip room - the doors just have to close.
I'd get the kids and the seats out there to try some Jeeps Maybe one will fit you
BTW, our T&C has everything possible ...except moonroof. Thought it odd that they would build one with the slide Navi/hard drive unit and dual DVDs, but no moonroof ... but that's what ours is.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
It drives far, far better than any SUV or Minivan and has very nice interior features. It absolutely will fit three full size car seats in the rear. I've had a same engine/transmission (and weight) Park Avenue eek out 30mpg with cruise and a fairly flat stretch of highway, with the A/C off. (note- the Park Avenue is also a great used choice, but they stopped making them in 2005, which might be too old for your needs.
Note - the V8 powered Lucerne CXS is worth also considering, IMO. Massively upgraded suspension and a bigger engine. It drives like a late 90s Mercedes S420. You sacrifice some MPG, though, but it'll still get about 25 highway. And by massively improved, I mean like comparing a BMW 3 series to a M3. It really should have been a whole other model, since it drives and handles so much better. The base has a 3.8L engine and normal suspension. This has a Cadillac V8 and the same suspension technology they put in the Corvette. It was a total sleeper that nobody paid attention to because of the vast volumes of rental fodder trims that it was buried in. Finding one is like finding a bit of diamond in a coal pile.
Only the CXS model has any of this - all other trims are plain vanilla. Good choices, but nothing that makes you wonder where the "Buick" DNA went to.
Other CPO or used (aiming for a 2007/2008 or so here) options that are good used as well, and aren't horrendously expensive:
- Toyota Avalon. It's also largely forgotten but basically clone of the Buick in many ways. My uncle has one because of his large kids. Very nice. Basically a poor man's Lexus ES. Win-win for a cheap CPO box to get around in as it has zero market impact and most dealers will be happy to offload one at or near their cost if it is on their lot to make space for something better/with a higher profit margin.
- Buick Lacrosse (new 2010 model) - possibly too new to be in your price range. (18-20K used) It is large and is very solid. Fantastic interior. Rear visibility while parking is problematic, though.
- * Pontiac G8 - Superb car. 58 inches hip room in the rear. (same as a Grand Marquis or Cadillac DTS). Only the CTS drives better, IMO, out of anything GM makes/made in the last 5 years. The asterisk is because this actually edges out the Lucerne in... everything *except* for MPG. It'll get about 25mpg or so highway vs the Lucerne's 27-30mpg in overdrive.
But compared to a minivan, this flat out is a better option if you have only 3 kids. And, it's very, very fast. You hit the accelerator and it doesn't want to move, then think about it and then eventually get there. It jumps and pavement starts to go by at a very quick pace.
The V8 powered model is even more silly, as you can haul 3 kids around in extreme comfort while also lighting the rear tires on fire. Basically this car was a cross between the old Pontiac GTO (also made by Holden) and a CTS (same engine and suspension, pretty much). It's still made in Australia and is the #1 selling car in the entire country. I personally think it will probably be the replacement for the Impala in a year or two.
- Cadillac DTS. Big, cheap used, and bulletproof. V8 engine isn't as frugal as its brother vehicle, the Lucerne, but it's a lot quicker and actually approaches proper luxury inside. Then again, most Minivans wish they drove as nice. Incredible used value.
- Chevy Impala. Dated, but acceptable. Dirt cheap used, which is good. The 3.5L engine is not quite as reliable as the 3.8L in the Lucerne, and it's quite slow, but it does get a mpg or two better. 30-32mpg highway with careful driving is possible.
I got a question, why would someone buy a CXS when a DTS is about the same price? I realize that the suspension is better but the DTS is a Caddy. That counts for a lot for most people.
What should a loaded 2008 CXS go for? What about a loaded DTS?
It's also easier to find one as a lot of them were ordered with the handling package as it was an option as well as part of the Platinum and Performance models. Several hundred certified examples nationwide versus a few dozen as a result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magneto_rheological_damper
The CXS/DTS with this suspension drives almost exactly the same as a late 90s Mercedes S420. The giant square ones that were built like tanks. That's amazing, actually, when you think about it.
The difference between a GM car with the system on it and one without it is so drastic that it's like comparing a Mac&Cheese out of a box to something your grandmother took all afternoon to make. Or like comparing plastic fake champagne glasses to the real thing - just a vast, shocking difference. Zero wobble or bouncing, flat as a table cornering, almost no road vibration. Solid, and as planted as a BMW or Mercedes.
The Audi R8 and the new Ferraris use this type of system as well. As does the CTS-V and Corvette. I wouldn't buy a GM car without it.
A 2008 CXS goes for:
http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp?tracktype=usedcc&csDlId=&csDgId=&listin- - gId=60899546
About 20K, certified. For the money, it's a total no-brainer versus a new Malibu or similar.
A 2008 DTS with the suspension option goes for:
http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp?tracktype=usedcc&csDlId=&csDgId=&listin- - gId=63415292
That's the difference - about 6-7K for what amounts to essentially different badges and a few nicer interior options. But then again, I'd take a used DTS like this over a new Camry for 26K any day. NOTE - a 2007 DTS like this is about 20-21K as well, so if you have to get the Cadillac, you're looking at maybe a year older car - no big deal, IMO. 2008 CXS vs a 2007 DTS Performance? Tough call - I'd try both and make a decision.
EDIT - A 2007 STS is about the same price and has this suspension standard. The tradeoff is that the V6 models have the same engine as the CTS in it, so it's not quite as nice, IMO, given that it's bigger and heavier than the CTS (it really needs a V8). Like buying a base model Lucerne with the premium suspension. It's not quick, but it is RWD, has the Cadillac bling to it, and IS a better engine than the 3.8L in terms of power and refinement.
But the difference in MPG is only 1 between the 3.6 and the V8 engines. IMO, get the V8 - it's quicker and, well, it's a big V8. The advantage of the STS is that the base model is much cheaper than the other STS models and just as nice inside as the Lucerne CXS.
All three will fit 3 child seats in the rear (have latches for three seats built in). The DTS and Lucerne, though, do have a more bench-like seat in the rear which is a bit easier to deal with. But it's a minor difference between the three.
How would the CXS compare with a 300C in terms of driving and price? I am from PA and AWD would be a nice option.
When I said the 2006-2008 CXS (and only that exact model) drives like a S420, I mean *exactly* the same driving feeling. It was a magic moment for GM like the IS300 was for Lexus - and then they tweaked it further and it wasn't quite as special any more. The Super pushes the envelope a bit too far and feels a lot like the IS350 does - more of a muscle car feel to it instead of a perfect balance.
The big deal, though, is that the 4 speed in these cars is ~$1600 to fix. It's a much cheaper car to operate over the years, than, say, a CTS or the new Lacrosse. The DTS uses the same setup, IIRC.
The Magnetic Ride (MagnaRide) suspension is what transforms the car. The 300C couldn't handle 140mph+ on the Autobahn the same way. The CXS because of this suspension (which, incidentally is similar to systems BMW and Mercedes use), could do it easily. Total sleeper and the best Buick ever made. Yes, the Super in theory is "better", but it's also got a huge premium on it for more HP than you really need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Lucerne
2006–2008 4.6 L Northstar LD8 V8 279 cu in (4565 cc) 275 hp (205 kW) @ 6000 rpm 295 lb·ft (400 N·m) @ 4400 rpm
15/23 mpg
2008–present 4.6 L Northstar L37 V8 279 cu in (4565 cc) 292 hp (218 kW) @ 6300 rpm 288 lb·ft (390 N·m) @ 4500 rpm
15/22 mpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Northstar_engine#LD8
"it is designed to provide more torque than the high-revving L37"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Northstar_engine#L37
"it is tuned for responsiveness and power, while the later LD8 is designed for more sedate use"
They put an older design L37 in the *new* cars. They destroyed the torque curve and actual mpg as a result. The LD8 hits its torque plateau several hundred RPM lower. This is exactly like how they tuned the Lacrosse CXS - it's a CTS 3.6VVT engine. But tuned for torque. Which it hits its plateau (pretty much a flat line, though not quite max) at 1400-1600rpm. The CTS requires you to rev it a consistent 500rpm more to really get going. Which both do quite well.
The result, though, is that the same era LaCrosse CXS drives like a diesel in that maximum power is available just off of idle. But with a gas engine top-end as well.
Why does this all matter? Overdrive.
You can hypermill the 2006-2008 CXS of both the LaCrosse and the Lucerne much easier as a result, since it will float up to speed with a much lighter throttle. And not shift out of overdrive to make modest transitions. It's the same way that a S class can go really fast but it is perfectly happy sedately floating around town *until* you need it to destroy some asphalt. Which, if you've ever driven an S class, it does quite easily. :P
NOTE - The L37 IS quite a bit faster once you hit 80mph+, where it pulls ahead quickly. But below that (or less than about half throttle), the LD8 simply runs better. It's basically the same torque and hp for both engines, but imagine the LD8 being rotated 15 degrees clockwise. The top end pretty much runs out past 4000 rpm, but the rest is better - the L37 comes alive past 3000rpm, much like a turbocharger kicking in.
But I don't drive Buicks or Cadillacs like that - there's no need in today's traffic. For normal driving, the LD8 runs better overall.
EDIT - the short answer: Better for normal driving base DTS engine. Performance/Platinum DTS suspension. 25% less cost, certified. win-win-win for the Lucerne vs the DTS. And it looks SO awesome in black and dark gray. The 4 little holes (vs 3) in the side is the only visual clue that you've got a sleeper rolling around town
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-forum/t-28869.html
Note BeelzeBob's response 2/3 the way down (@ 01-14-05, 02:07 PM)
The LD8, especially if you get stiffer compound all-season tires on it (get something with a 60-80K mile warranty) will net you a realistic 2-3mpg overall difference due to taller gearing and better low-end torque.
Their listings do say "Price excludes registration and title fees and taxes or vehicle mechanical and reconditioning fees" and they also mention a lending fee, so I was not shocked to find something like this on the contract. I will admit I was happy that they had the car, I was afraid it was going to be a bait and switch situation (there were a couple of comments on the dealerrater website about that, although their ratings were overwhelmingly good).
If that's the one at a Dodge store with 37k... I tried to buy it. FWIW, I'm the used car manager at a Hyundai store in Jersey... $11,500 is still a steal for that car if it's nice, I'd expect it to do that or better at auction right now so you did very well. I did notice on the Carfax report that they had the car for 60+ days so that's probably why it was marked down so much.
TMV is actually kinda low on these... Elantras are bringing huge money wholesale right now.. the 10s are still in the mid $13s and the 11s are just insane.
Enjoy it, they're nice cars!
Bill
One thing I did find sad was how many sleazy used car dealers list on Autotrader. Really makes it hard to find cars worth looking at. They should be forced to show the dealer's rating in the listing and let you select based on that. Of course, that would hurt their business, which I'm sure is why they don't do it. Are there any car search engines that have that feature?
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
And I doubt Autotrader would do that, dealers pay to list there.
As far as the prep of $595 goes, I don't do that. NY dealers are limited to a doc fee of $75 or so, perhaps that's why they charge it. It's still important to look at the total price you're paying and if it makes sense, it makes sense.
We charge the standard fees here in Jersey... $389.50 doc, $189 etch. We do not charge any fee for financing or for prep. And our fees are standard whether or not you buy or lease or finance or trade or whatever.
I'd go to another dealer just out of principle if they tried to pull crap like this. Because the vast majority won't. A used car is a used car. All they can charge you is the doc fee. Anything else, and I mean literally anything else is part of the asking price of the car. It may be some odd paint protection fee or prep charge or ugly bling-o-riffic rims they slapped on it (they're sure to have the originals somewhere - ask for them instead).
New cars, of course, are a whole other thing. You're paying a hefty premium for the luxury of being the first owner. But there's literally tens of thousands of used cars clogging up dealer lots, probably just in most large states.
plekto- I agree that the $595 charge is wrong and under other circumstances I would have walked. But I needed a car for my son (who was leaving for school in 3 weeks and was taking it with him), and I was having a lot of trouble finding a reasonably priced low mileage Elantra (for those who say there are plenty of them out there, I wish you'd been there to help me find one). Even with the $595 charge, the price on this car was less than I would have paid elsewhere (and that assumes no bogus fees at the other places), and $1200 less than the retail TMV ($100 more than the private sale TMV).
im_brentwood -- I'm curious to know when you tried to buy the car and what they told you. They still have it listed for sale on Autotrader (and their own site), I'm going to be curious to see if/when they take it down. I wonder what would happen if someone contacted them online and asked if it was still available (the salesman told me that they used to have problems with their online inventory and telling people that cars were still in stock when they were not but claims that was fixed a few months ago). I know that my local Hyundai dealer, (who had one with 10k more miles for $1500 more) took their listing down, so I guess they sold it.
$12,100 for that car is still cheap... they do that at auction. $1000 more for a CPO one with more miles is still cheap.
Im selling 2010s CPO'd in the 16s-17s and they sell quickly.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Is this a dealbreaker? Or is a minor accident like this nothing to worry about?
If it was crazy to buy a used car that was in an accident, there would be very few used cars to buy, especially at 77k miles and 6 years.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
We all expect a car dealership to try to get away with some things, but Chicago Motor Cars in West Chicago goes above and beyond taking advantage of people. Definitely stay away from them. All I can say is do your homework; Read multiple reviews and forums. At least I got everything in writing.
I see that they aren't listed in our dealership database (we're in the process of adding used car-only dealerships), but we don't engage in the practice that you complain about on our competitor's site.
It's possible that our group could add them - if you want to submit a request, just start by clicking the "help" link at the top of any Edmunds.com page and ask that this dealership be added so you can review them here. If not, I do encourage you to get the word out about your experience by posting on other review sites. It is, indeed, a shame that some sites are more interested in protecting the dealership's business than they are in making sure the consumer has access to objective content!
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews