Hyundai Azera vs Toyota Avalon vs Ford Taurus vs Chevrolet Impala

barnstormer64 · January 2007

4 to 5 years is likely an average and it has more to do with people just tiring of a car and/or being seduced by that newer shiny one.

I have no doubt that the average is closer to 4 or 5 years. However, I also have little doubt that it IS based primarily on tiring of a car and/or getting seduced by the new ones. If that weren't the case, then *surely* the foreign-car owners would all be keeping hteir vehicles for 10+ years, right?

Based on real reliability statistics (CR type of things), however, and to feed your apparent appetite for something to 'discuss', if your do want to drive something for 10 years, it should probably be a 'Japanese' brand name - and it has been that way for a lot longer than that....

I prefer to based it upon my OWN experience (and that of my brothers, who own the foreign cars). That way, at least, I can be assured that the vehicles are being maintained properly by people who care and know how to do it and can afford to do it.

Clearly, I have a much smaller database to work with . . . but I feel the fact that I know how the vehicles were treated offsets this.

snakeweasel · January 2007

I have no doubt that the average is closer to 4 or 5 years.

I would think the average would be under 4 years when you take into account how many 2 year leases are out there and how many people just trade in after a few years.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

I would think the average would be under 4 years when you take into account how many 2 year leases are out there and how many people just trade in after a few years.

Probably so. And for those people, resale value becomes very important.

The ironic thing, though, is that they *think* they're being so frugal by buying cars with high resale values, when they'd actually save more money by keeping the car 8 to 10 years.

rpfingsten · January 2007

I'm 52 years old and have never ever kept a car for less than 10 years.. I always thought I was saving $$ but think now it may be six to one half a dozen of the other. True if you trade in a 5 year old avy after it's paid for you get a higher trade in. But if you keep it for 8 to 10 years and just put approx. car payment of 325 a month away for lets say the 5 years after your car is paid for, you would have about 19k in hand. If you traded the car in after 4 or 5 years, your trade in value should be 15 to 20 depending on the condition of the vehicle.. and when you consider the escalating cost of the cars on a year to year basis, it really does seem to come out a wash.. just a matter of personal preference... nice, new and shiny, or older and paid for... kinda like the old commercial.. you can pay me now or you can pay me later.

Roland

floridabob1 · January 2007

RE: 567
If you are a long time holder of a car, the extended warranty like Hyundai's 100,000 mile ten year bumper to bumper at about $1000.00 makes good sense.
You only pay for tires, brakes, wiper blades and normal maintainence items , such as oil change, alignment and wheel rotation and balance.

snakeweasel · January 2007

But if you keep it for 8 to 10 years and just put approx. car payment of 325 a month away for lets say the 5 years after your car is paid for, you would have about 19k in hand. If you traded the car in after 4 or 5 years, your trade in value should be 15 to 20 depending on the condition of the vehicle.

If your payment on a 5 year note is $325.00 then your loan amount was in the $17K range ($16,810.81 with a 6% rate), if you put $5K down on the car then the price of the car was just above $20K (without TTL). Its not going to be worth $15-20K after 5 years. That $325 a month could be enough to buy a brand new car for cash if invested properly.

and when you consider the escalating cost of the cars on a year to year basis, it really does seem to come out a wash..

That may have held true in the past but these days most cars should get at least 150K miles with few problems. My car at about 140K has had only one problem that would have cost about one car payment to fix if I had to pay for it, and that was at well over 100K miles.

akoni1 · January 2007

Thanks for the tip. I'll try Edmunds.

captain2 · January 2007

if I were in an Azera I'd be through their warranty in about
4 years whether I paid the extra grand or not. Car probelms also tend to be age related, making those extended warranties even more impractical.
Does anybody out there have any idea the average miles driven/year? Somehow just can't imagine driving only 10k/year, and do have several friends that have gotten 'in trouble' with leases but they too find they can not adhere to such limits. It would seem to me that it would be increasingly more difficult to justify the costs of any NEW car, if I'm either not going to use it for what it is intended or I'm not 'allowed' to per the terms of some silly lease contract.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

It would seem to me that it would be increasingly more difficult to justify the costs of any NEW car, if I'm either not going to use it for what it is intended or I'm not 'allowed' to per the terms of some silly lease contract.

Well, one could always try BUYING the vehicle.

floridabob1 · January 2007

RE: 571
Average car is driven aprox. 12,000 miles per year.

rpfingsten · January 2007

"Its not going to be worth $15-20K after 5 years."

I disagree. My son just traded in a 2001 gmc pickup
( 5 1/2 years old ) and got 12 grand for it. Surely a well maintained flagship car like the Avalon would bring in at least 3 grand more than that if not more. After all, that's one of Toyotas selling points...reliability and higher resale value.

"That $325 a month could be enough to buy a brand new car for cash if invested properly."

That may or may not be true depending the annual return of your investment.. and nobody can predict an annual return that will guaranty a return = to the sum needed to buy a 30K + car. not only that, how many people are actually disciplined enough to make that investment month after month. maybe a few... but I don't think many. jmo

snakeweasel · January 2007

I disagree. My son just traded in a 2001 gmc pickup
( 5 1/2 years old ) and got 12 grand for it.

1.) 12 grand is not 15-20 grand B.) How much did he originally pay for it?

That may or may not be true depending the annual return of your investment.

325 X 60 = 19,500. There are plenty of good cars out there that can be had for that or less. And that doesn't even include interest. Even with a low guaranteed savings account rate your at 21K. Consider the fact that a 325 payment is a loan of less than $17K.

rpfingsten · January 2007

1.) 12 grand is not 15-20 grand B.) How much did he originally pay for it?

snakeweasel, we agree there, it certainly isnt 15 to 20.. and thank you for helping me to make my point. he got 12 grand for a 5 1/2 year old gmc pickup... I think most people would assume that since the avalon is without argument, I higher end vehicle, that it is reasonable to believe that it would be worth more than 12k, more like 15 to 20, which is what I stated... the gmc new was 21K... my avy was 33+. that alone will justify a higher resale for the same amount of time. and again, we don't argue that putting that 325 a month into an investment is lucrative.. where I disagree is that it isn't a viable argument because 95% of the people do not have the discipline to put that $ into an investment every single month over 5 years. As I stated in an earlier post, I had never traded in a car before it was 10 years old.. in most cases, 12 to 15 years old. The net result was hardly anything on trade in and more out of pocket up front to get into a new car. Trade it in sooner, get more trade in.. like I said.. pay it now or pay it later. pretty much a matter of personal preference. To each his own.

tjc78 · January 2007

Leasing works for some people and not for others. For example I have leased my last three vehicles and never even came close to the miles (12K a year). My office is only 10 miles each way and I fly a lot (for work) therefore my car sits for a week or sometimes more. I know leasing probably costs me more money over the long haul, but I just like never having to deal with repairs. All I do to my car is an oil change and tire rotation every 5K. No tires, brakes, batteries, nothing. Just my preference.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

but I just like never having to deal with repairs. All I do to my car is an oil change and tire rotation every 5K. No tires, brakes, batteries, nothing. Just my preference.

How does leasing the vehicle keep you from having to "deal with" repairs? I know it keeps from PAYING for them, but that's not the same thing.

If you lease the vehicle, don't you still have to take it in to the dealer, etc?

tjc78 · January 2007

With the little amount of miles I put and the reliabililty of Toyota in 6+ years my cars have made only 2 trips to the dealer for something other than an oil change. Once was for the CD Changer in my '00 Solara and once for the Sunroof in my '03 Avalon.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

But given that history, why not BUY the cars, instead?

tjc78 · January 2007

Because of what I said earlier. After 3 years the car starts to need maintenance and repair I don't want to deal with. For example, when I give my lease back at 30k the car is ready for front brakes, tranny flush, radiator flush etc. I probably spend more money in the long run. However, it is worth it to me to always have a newer(trouble free) car.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

After 3 years the car starts to need maintenance and repair I don't want to deal with

But I thought those foreign cars were supposed to be soooooo much better than the Fords I've owned.

Because of what I said earlier. After 3 years the car starts to need maintenance and repair I don't want to deal with

I was assuming that you'd SELL the car before buying the next one. :confuse:

tjc78 · January 2007

The greatest car in the world still has wearable items that need to be replaced at intervals (brakes, hoses, belts, batteries etc.)

"I was assuming that you'd SELL the car before buying the next one"

I see what you mean, BUY it then trade or sell after 3 years. Not sure if I would come out ahead or not. I couldn't buy it cash, so between finance charges and depreciation, I think I would be in the same boat as leasing.

barnstormer64 · January 2007

Not sure if I would come out ahead or not. I couldn't buy it cash, so between finance charges and depreciation, I think I would be in the same boat as leasing.

The big advantage of the leasing is that you KNOW ahead of time what depreciation you'd be getting. That can go either way.

You are *probably* paying a higher interest rate with the leasing, I'd expect . . but that may not always be true.

By buying/selling, you'd avoid the risk of HUGE extra costs for going over on mileage. This may not be a problem to you, though.

motownusa · March 2007

Why would anyone buy the Montego or the 500 over the competition ? Even with front wheel drive, it is slow as a slug the AWD will be even slower. I would only consider the 500 or Montego if foul weather traction was an issue; otherwise any of the competitors is a better choice even the long on the tooth Impala.

cobrazera · March 2007

If you only keep a car 3 years, leasing makes a lot of sense, especially since ( at least here in Michigan ) you only pay sales tax on the lease payment ( the actual portion of the vehicle that you use) and not on the total cost of the car.

floridabob1 · March 2007

In most cases leases make the most sense for people who keep a car two to three years.

captain2 · March 2007

In most cases leases make the most sense for people who keep a car two to three years
And don't plan on using it much ? Lease limits are now typically only 10-12k per year and overmile charges are ludricruous. Leases make more sense to folks that buy things by payment size as opposed to those that really want to know what something is actually costing.

captain2 · March 2007

while I'll agree with you on the powertrain ruining what could otherwise be a competitive car, I think that the AWD 'gimmick' is overestinated by many in terms of foul weather traction simply because in most of this country, snow covered roads etc. are rare occurences. Meaning that it would be very unusual to find any road conditions that AWD would handle but FWD wouldn't.
The Impala should be better when it becomes the Australian RWD Holden, the Taurus/500 should, at least, have better power when and if Ford can finally get the thing on the market even if it does look like a Fusion.

floridabob1 · March 2007

RE: 589
Most leases can be structured for the anticipated milage of the term of the lease.
In the past, I have leased many high end cars for periods between 2 and 3 years, and have found that economically, it was a good practice.
For long time holders of their cars, purchasing usually proves to be the better choice.
As the resale value of an Azera after 3 years has yet to be determined, the lease option gives you a known total cost factor.

barnstormer64 · March 2007

Why would anyone buy the Montego or the 500 over the competition ?

Because they're better values.

snakeweasel · March 2007

I once kept a car for 3 years. However I put over 100K on it in those three years. Would a lease have helped me?

joe97 · March 2007

No. Generally the lease limit is about 12-15K miles/year, anything over makes little sense, since you'd have to pay per each excess mile driven.

Lease makes sense for some, while financing/purchasing are adequate situation for others. I have leased for over ten years now - better for me, lower payments, and a new car every two-three years.

snakeweasel · March 2007

I know I was being sarcastic. Leasing only is good for people who drive relatively little and want to trade out every few years. Even then it doesn't make much financial sense.

floridabob1 · March 2007

RE: 593
Probably not. The milage charges would probably have exceeded the depreciation. Even at $.15 per mile on a 15000 mile per year lease, the excess milage charge would be $8250.00 at 100,000 miles.

captain2 · March 2007

yeah right - the 500 already is having a great deal of trouble holding its value, can you imagine what will happen to that value when the model is discontinued and replaced by something called the Taurus that happens to have a real engine in it. You won't be able to give away a used 2005-07 500/Montego.
Going one step further - given that the old style 2006 Tauri can be had for $11-12k out of the rental fleets, on what basis are you supposing anybody in their right mind is going to assume that the new 500/Taurus is anything but another cheap Ford?

jcm68 · March 2007

havalongavalon · March 2007

Not surprisingly, the Avalon XLS came on top of its class, and ranked very close to the best Upscale sedans. Good to see that CR's Predicted Reliability rating is back to Above Average. Their Highs and Lows for the Av are right on, too. The rear headroom advantage of the Av over the ES350 is evident, and so is the price difference between these two models.

dborth · March 2007

Kia Amanti Highs..."Isolation" ?

snakeweasel · March 2007

Since its from Consumer Reports I wouldn't put to much stock in that report.

quietpro · March 2007

Since its from Consumer Reports I wouldn't put to much stock in that report.

Neither would I but Toyota buyers love being told how "smart" they are.

gamleged · March 2007

IF you don't mind the "Lows" of "agility, steering and brake feel"... :P

Azera owners are feeling pretty self-satisfied, as well, we just need to carry a little extra fuel in a jerry-can or two!

But as for the also-ran Ford 500 and the rest, well...

motownusa · March 2007

What you think about CR doesn't mean diddly sqat. But the fact is, and you may not like it, is that CR does influence people's car buying habit. A bad rating from Consumer Report could be the kiss of death. Consumer Reports is one of the reason Toyota is doing so well. It seems like even with all their quality issues, Toyota still rules the reliability chart.

bruneau1 · March 2007

Well, whatever the case, the renamed Taurus will be a significantly improved vehicle: new engine, transmission, more decoration, vastly improved NVH, etc, etc. It will still be the roomiest, with the biggest trunk, and its handling and ride, already good, will be improved. Its ingress-egress is superior to any of the other vehicles in this exchange and visibility great. Style is a matter of taste and not worth arguing about. Oh, and so far the reliability seems to be acceptable. In case anyone didn't know, problems reported in the CR survey must exceed 3% in order to receive below average. It shows how high standards are today

joe97 · March 2007

The Azera may be the sleeper in the class; best score in predicted reliability, best score in ownership satisfaction.

barnstormer64 · March 2007

the 500 already is having a great deal of trouble holding its value

Not a problem for those of us after VALUE . . we tend to keep our cars forever.

jcm68 · March 2007

Yeah including the Avalon................

bsparks294 · March 2007

That is a great post--what jumped out at me were the rankings of the three vehicles purchased mostly as "status" symbols--Hummer, Land Rover and Mercedes Benz as being dead last.

captain2 · March 2007

well, that's fine if you can put up with that DT that long, it was all I could do to get it back to the dealer on a 15 minute test drive. The 500 reliability over 3 years incidentally has degraded to 'average' - surprising because it uses very little in the way of 'new' components, but I guess good for a 'Detroit' car. The Avalon, meanwhile, is 'better than average' and is the indisputable resale value champ in this class. It's simple, you pay more and you get more back for it later.
I challenge you to put a pencil to it (or look it up on Intellicoice), the cost of driving the best is not significantly different than driving a 500 even over 10 years, never mind over something a little more usual for most auto buyers out there.
The wildcard has to be the Azera, first year reliability results have been very good - time will tell over a longer term - and since, at least' 'value' seems to equate to initially cheap by your definition - perhaps, then you ought to be waiting in line down at a Hyundai dealership, at least you'd get a real engine as part of the deal, and you would really have a defendable contention.

pigmy · March 2007

I am trading a 1994 Camry in on an Azera this week. It has 121,000 miles. That is less than 10K per year. My wife put 6000 miles on in first 3 years driving it 6 blocks to church and back. (those little old ladies really do exist) The Azera will see a lot more as we now live in the country - 60 miles to one dealer and 40 to another. (same distances to other forms of civilization) I just hope I love the Azera as much as I love the Camry.

barnstormer64 · March 2007

Sorry, but the reliability of the Ford vehicles that I have owned has been just as sterling as the Toyotas and Hondas that my brothers has owned.

So, why would I change?

Again, the Intellichoice "cost of driving" means NOTHING to me, until I can see all the assumptions they're making. I have a very strong suspicion that they're overestimating what I pay for my vehicles, for example.

captain2 · March 2007

the difference would be that things like the CR ratings are based on over 800,000 received surveys. Maybe a little more statistically valid than your experience with your brothers?

there is no doubt that CR, for example, does have its own motivations and values (eg safety, FE, reliability), but it remains probably the single most infuential publication to the autobuyer. Your comments about Intellichoice are more likely correct - they would have to base TCO on sticker, they would have no way of forecasting how cheap Ford, in this example, has to sell the 500, or that Avalons continue to fetch a few hundred over invoice.

snakeweasel · March 2007

Maybe a little more statistically valid than your experience with your brothers?

Maybe not since it is from the subscribers of CR which do not represent a adequate cross section of the automotive buying public. Its not a scientifically valid sample. A smaller better chosen sample would be far far more statistically valid than just polling CR readers.

Hyundai Azera vs Toyota Avalon vs Ford Taurus vs Chevrolet Impala

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles