Any Questions for a Car Dealer?

turboshadow · May 2004

Keep the subie.

For the life of me, I can't understand why people go through cars so fast. Do you have any idea how much money you are throwing away?

Then again, I've been told I put way too much time into researching what I'm going to buy, but I usually keep cars around eight years, so.....

Turboshadow

stickguy · May 2004

He really isn't throwing away anything, since the VW is used also (and depending on the model, may have depreciated more than the Sube). Either way, he will have a 2-3 YO car with 39K on it, and be in for the mid-teens.

So, financially, it really isn't a big deal (a couple grand including fees/taxs). Car wise, you will get a lot of opinions as to which is better, but you have to decide what you want, and are comfortable with.

From what I've read, the Sube has a better chance of being cheaper to run (aka more reliable), but from personal experience, the Passat is a nicer car (comfort/room/etc), and is really in a class above an Impreza.

Just make sure to have whatever you get inspected, and that it is really what you want.

I would question your sanity if you were looking to drop 40K on a new SAAB though.

zeitgeber · May 2004

Thanks for the replies & advice. You're right about the emotional buy - I usually do "the right thing", which is why I went with the Subie over the Passat a couple years ago.

Quick background - I had a great Honda Civic for about 7 years when I was looking for a new car in 2002. I expected to keep the car for about 8-10 years, during which time I'd probably have kids, so I got the Japanese, AWD wagon with the darker interior for cleaning up spills & stuff.

Two years later I'm bored to death with the car (especially the automatic tranny - yuck), and we don't have immediate plans for kids. I thought about getting a 5-speed Passat (which I love but am aware of the difference in quality) for a couple years until the kids come along. I'm just wondering how much it would really cost me. The 2 yr/24K warranty on the Passat was softening the blow a bit.

No doubt that keeping the Subie is the wisest, most financially prudent decision, but if I get hit by an exploding fuel truck on the freeway I think I'd rather be in the Passat with my right hand clutching that stick.

You all have good points, and I think I'm just going to slow down and think about it some more. I really do appreciate your input.

ldbricker · May 2004

the Subaru weighs more than the Passat and arguably does marginally better in crash testing based on IIHS testing. The 2/24 on the Passat helps however I'd be afraid of big(ger) expenses soon(er) on the Passat than the Subaru. In any event, best wishes that long term you are happy with your final decision.

isellhondas · May 2004

Is a VW a LOT more troublesome than that Subie, but if you do decide you need to dump it in a couple of years because of kids, etc, it'll be a whole lot harder to sell with that five speed!

damish003 · May 2004

FWIW, having been through a major accident with my Subie, where I walked away without a scratch from being rear-ended at 40 mph+ by a Dodge Ram pickup, I'll vote for the safety of Subie. Keep the car. My 2 cents.

-Dan-

turboshadow · May 2004

So, financially, it really isn't a big deal (a couple grand including fees/taxs).
----------------------------------------

Maybe I'm the poor boy in this group, but a couple of grand would be a lot of money for me.

Turboshadow

zeitgeber · May 2004

Sorry folks; didn't mean to start a Subaru vs. Volkswagen thread! Sometimes those can get out of control.

I'll keep my eyes open and continue to check out the posts here & elsewhere. I appreciate all your feedback.

tornado25 · May 2004

"Maybe I'm the poor boy in this group, but a couple of grand would be a lot of money for me."

Me, too. But, I think we're talking in relative terms here. Zeit isn't dumping upside down money into another upside down car and refi'ing the additional. Basically, he's out of pocket the 2000 difference (plus TTL) to get a car he will enjoy. For all we know, he may have saved the 2K for this day.

At any rate, zeit, I think you should do it. And here's why. You're not dumping an upside down car for another upside down car just 'cause "you gotta have it". You're bored with your car and can make a change without it being financially disastrous. The only 2 considerations I have when buying a car--because to me, a car is a WHOLE lot more than A to B. so, if I can have the car I WANT and not kill me financially, then it's a good decision.

jasmith52 · May 2004

Here's something to consider:

Consider keeping the reliable Subaru and consider buying a car that is say 8 to ten years old that you can play around with (Like maybe a 1994-1996 Passat stick shift). If you shop around you can find a very clean car that someone has taken care of for not a whole lot of money. Or maybe consider a really sporty car to race around with. For example the Edmunds TMV price on a 1995 Passat is under $3k. Shop around and you can probably beat that price and find a clean well taken care of car.

You might have to do a repair here or there - that comes with used cars. But in general if you don't drive your FUN car too much the repairs will be few.

That's what I do, I have a really great weekend car and a boring (and safe) weekday car that I know will start every morning that'll always get me to work. If my weekend car needs some attention I just store it in the garage until I get around to it.

Anyway - just something to think about.

Who says you can only have one car !

jwats · May 2004

If you can swing it, having a weekend fun car makes all the sense in the world--a miata really fits the bill--if you buy one right, it will hardly depreciate and give you untold pleasure and great reliability. My guess is that the Passat will never really been fun, but it is likely to be more troublesome over time--so what have you accomplished?
good luck

asafonov · May 2004

Interesting debate...

As for considering an Outback for kids, my personal opinion is that while it is very reasonable for one little guy or gal and parents, with two or more, just break down and get a minivan... Learned from personal experience.

I like the "second car" second opinion. The Outback has approached/is approaching its slower depreciation years, i.e., it will probably cost not much less than 14k in a year. Or two? At least in the NE and parts of the Midwest, it is hard to find a good 2001 Outback under 14k at a dealer.

However, I would stay away from pre-98 Passats. Apparently (this is based on the Lemon-Aid book, which I found right on many occasions - I never owned a Passat), before Passats were redesigned based on A4/A6 in 1998, they were quite unreliable.

Older cars available with manual transmission that are fun to drive and relatively cheap to buy? Both criteria are relative, but I can think of a Prelude, MX-3, 240X, pre-98 6-cylinder 626/MX-6...

bill100 · May 2004

Ok here it is.

Couple bought a 2003 Acura with 26,000 miles on it over Mother Day weekend.

The dealer bought the unit at a auction.

The couple signed a contract with the F&I guy. The F&I guy said they were approved at 3.74%.

Now the dealer called back and stated they could not get 3.74% rather they could get the couple 4.59%.

In the meantime the couple found more problems with the car and decided their not comfortable with the car. So they want to return it and get their $1000 down payment back.

Q: Since the dealer could not hold up to their promise of 3.74% on the original contract is it null and void now?

Can the buyer legally return the car now?

What is the buyers and dealers options?

Bill

driftracer · May 2004

"The dealer bought the unit at a auction."

Should read "The dealer bought the unit at AN auction."

If a contract wasn't signed at 3.74% and the F&I THOUGHT he could get that rate, but was wrong...who knows. No contract is NO contract.

If the consumer signed a contract, then the dealer eats the .85% of rate.

The consumer found a few problems with the car AFTER the sale? Didn't they look at it and drive it? Didn't they go over it (a USED car) with a fine tooth comb, salesman in tow?

Then, after finding those things, make sure the problems ended up on a WE OWE slip with a manager's signature?

Bill, you weren't dispensing your great car advice to another consumer, now were you? Need I remind you what your advice cost the last person you "helped"?

jasmith52 · May 2004

This isn't rocket science...

Buyer:

Can insist that loan be at original 3.74 percent or deal is off.

Or could take car at higher 4.59 percent (buyers choice).

Or could take loan at 4.59 percent and get dealer to fix problems that buyer has discovered or deal is off. (buyer and dealer must agree)

dealer:

could take car back (unwind deal)

could find financing at original rate (if available)

could try to renegotiate deal.

turboshadow · May 2004

I find myself in a dilemna.

I'd like to have a new (or used) car to replace the Shadow as the AC and heater don't work anymore. I can survive thru the SC winters, but the thought of driving it through another sweltering summer...well, I ain't as young as I used to be.

I've limited my budget to 10K, found an 03 Alero V6 and a 2001 Century that can be had for this price.

The problem is this...I drove a 2004 Corolla today that I can get out the door for 12,3. Great car. It's a stick and I love rowing my own gears. I think with a 100 mile round trip commute, the difference in gas prices will pay for extra 2,300.

Should I follow my head (one of the GMs w/ 30K miles) or my heart (Corolla)?

As Mike Meyers used to say on Coffee Talk, "Discuss."

Turboshadow

kyfdx · May 2004

The Corolla will be cheaper in the long run.. Follow your head and your heart... lower depreciation, higher gas mileage, higher dependability. It is all in the Corollas favor.

regards,
kyfdx

steine13 · May 2004

Corolla. 100 miles a day round-trip makes this a no-brainer.
If your head tells you to buy the GMs, you need a new head. Who cares what you save vs. MSRP???
In two years, the depreciation on the Corolla won't be any more than on the GMs.
-m

millspd · May 2004

Hey Turboshadow,

I don't have much to say about the pricing of the vehicles -- there are far better people qualified than me to talk about that.

What I will say is that it sounds like the Corolla would make you happy, and I think the Corolla is a high quality vehicle that will serve you well. You are going to be putting alot of miles on it, and I think the Toyota will hold up well over the long haul.

So, my vote would be to get the Corolla.

bill100 · May 2004

Had nothing to do with this transaction. Did not disperse anything to them. I just wanted to see what you guys would say about it.

To answer some questions though...

Yes, the buyer did sign a contract which stated 3.74%.

Drift I agree the couple should of went through the car with a fine tooth comb. They should of asked the dealer if they could take the car to a outside mechanic. But they didn't. They really didn't know what they were doing to make a long story short for you.

But bottom line is though now they don't want the car regardless because the dealer was not honest about the condition of the car in the first place ACCORDING TO THE BUYER. They simply want to give it back.

I agree they might be with holding some of the story but they state the dealer only pointed out minor flaws.

I know jasmith said they could insist on 3.74% or walk. But what if they don't want to insist on the 3.74 any longer? They simply want to walk. Is this possible even though they signed a contract at 3.74%?

Bill

dbgindy · May 2004

Qualifying question. Did the contract say the rate was 3.74% or did the F & I guy say we got you approved for 3.74% and the contract reads best rate available. That could possibly make it even harder to possibly unwind the deal (which I think is a long shot anyway if the rate is locked in and the dealership will honor the contract).

Just my .02

Duncan

driftracer · May 2004

I can't tell you how many times people have buyer's remorse and want to unwind deals - laws ARE NOT in place for that very reason - car lots would be full of 1,000 mile new/used cars because once they got home and talked to Uncle Ted, the "car" guy in the family (who hasn't bought a new car in 14 years), and they decided the payments/color/style/options were too much or not right.

Children under 18 years of age cannot sign legal, binding contracts like loan contracts or bills of sale for a reason - they're not old enough to be responsible.

The law assumes that someone over 18 is old enough and responsible enough to think before they sign - I have absolutely NO, ZERO, NONE, NADA bit of sympathy for someone who buys a car nowadays without taking their time to make sure everything is right with the car AND the deal. Services like Edmunds provides, plus CARFAX, your local mechanic, big brother, Dad, minister, whatever - someone to bless the car and make sure it's right for you if you don't have the common sense or education to make the decision yourself.

This is a $20,000 purchase (way more or somewhat less, depending on the vehicle) - why are people SO stupid to treat this like the Mickey D's drive-thru where they have to have the deal done in 3 minutes or less??

People keep their cars 3-4 years, in most cases - why not spend an extra 10 minutes, an hour, or a day to make sure you're doing the right thing??

turboshadow · May 2004

If your head tells you to buy the GMs, you need a new head.
______________________

You know, you might have a point :-D

Actually since I tend to keep a vehicle til the wheels fall off, my head was leaning towards the Corolla too.

Turboshadow

bill100 · May 2004

The contract states 3.74%

bill100 · May 2004

I am not disagreeing with you on this one. Your right. But if its true the dealer did not come clean about the condition of the car well then they need to take responsibility as well and take the car back. But if they did I really don't see a way out either unless the dealer can't keep good on the 3.74%.

Bill

driftracer · May 2004

it's a 2003 w/26k miles - it's still under warranty. Other than body damage, what could be wrong with this car that can't be fixed under warranty??

turboshadow · May 2004

I have to disagree with you on CARFAX. I totalled my truck in May 2002 and it started a new life in Miami 2 months later. No notice of being totalled or having the airbags deployed.

The rest of your post...yeah, you're right.

Turboshadow

keitarou · May 2004

What do dealers think of carbargains? Is it really worth the money you pay to get their service? Do dealers actually use this service?

Another question is, Do you think a 48 month lease is stupid even if the bumper to bumper warranty is for 48/50,000? I understand that the reason to lease would be to drive a new car often, but why is 36 month the way to go and not 48 month if some manufacturers are offering the longer warranty?

Jeremy

driftracer · May 2004

and isn't always right by any means, but has saved my skin a few times.

It's just one of the checks I feel should be mandatory by a consumer before buying a used car - the repair history (not necessarily maintenance history, I want to know what BROKE!), CARFAX, and a check over by your mechanic.

There's not much more that can keep you from buying the wrong car.

bowke28 · May 2004

the mechanics of leasing are the reason for doing short-term only. please try to follow..i might lose you...or maybe lose myself...lol.

lets say you have a $300 payment on a $20k car for 3 years. most vehicles will hold a residual value of around 50% (some domestics are less).

most 4 year residuals will be around 40%

so initially, you pay for half the car over 3 years, or 17% per year.

in the 4th year, your residual only drops 10% more...but you are paying virtually the same money.

most lenders will incentivise the shorter-term lease to get you in a new car sooner, so the difference in payment between a 36/39 month term and a 48 month term is negligible.

bottom line is that you pay about the same money for less return.

also, the 4th and 5th years of a car's life are when you begin to replace tires, brakes, spark plugs, coolant, tranny fluid, etc...your maintenance will make the scale tip even more.

kyfdx · May 2004

"also, the 4th and 5th years of a car's life are when you begin to replace tires, brakes, spark plugs, coolant, tranny fluid, etc...your maintenance will make the scale tip even more"

This is the most important reason to stick to 36/39 month leases.

Additionally, 4 years is a long time. Your circumstances may change financially, or your job may change and you may have to drive more, or you may have kids and need a bigger car, etc, etc..

Leases can be a good deal if you fulfill the terms of the contract. If you don't, the penalties can be financially harsh. Stick to the shorter terms, unless you can tell the future.

regards,
kyfdx

bill100 · May 2004

Again I agree the warranty will cover the repair work. The trans and the radiator have problems from what I am told. Bottom line though the couple is not happy with the dealer because they wasn't upfront with them. And the interest rate hike is really what broke the camels back.

So now they simply don't want to mess with the car or the dealer anymore.

Bill

bowke28 · May 2004

the dealer is not responsible for warranty issues, other than to repair them if its their own brand. tranny and radiator problems are covered by acura, so they already have the commitment to repair it from the manufacturer. the only leg they have to stand on is to make the dealer take the rate they signed for. other than that, they are on their own.

also, the dealer IS NOT REQUIRED to divulge mechanical problems on cars under manufacturer warranty. only branded titles and safety problems.

ethically, the dealer should honor the rate that was signed for, but they are not responsible for the mechanical part.

i would submit that if they knew about the problem to begin with, that they would have had it fixed, since it would be free to them. the dealer in your imagined scenario has no incentive to hock bad stuff.

stickguy · May 2004

Bowke: Brakes and tires yes if they wear out, but how many leasees are going to replace plugs, trans fluid, coolant etc. in year 4? If not zero, pretty close to it.

And, considering that many manufacturers have extended (or eliminated service requirements), they can't even be held accountable for it. Besides, you don't check for proof of service at turn-in time anyway, just damage, correct?

One reason I like private sales if possible. You can actually see the history of the car (although in some rare cases all service was done by a dealer and you can pull the history).

butchbr73 · May 2004

"because they wasn't upfront with them"??

Should read "because they were not upfront with them."

just curious here, but was the dealer aware of the problems before the sale? From what you described, they purchased at an auction, they may have not known of those issues depending upon what they are... either way, it can be repaired under warranty from Acura, no biggie. What are the transmission and radiator problems? Acura has had some prior tranny issues, but I thought they had that under control for the '03 models....

isellhondas · May 2004

A case of buyer's remorse to me.

kyfdx · May 2004

From my perspective as a buyer..

If I sign a contract to buy the car with a specified interest rate of 3.74%, and then they call me and say they can't get that interest rate.. All I have to do, if I want out of the deal, is say "No thanks.. here is your car, give me my $1000 back".

If they can't execute the contract as written, then there is no contract. If they can break it, so can the buyer.

regards,
kyfdx

zodiac2004 · May 2004

I am reminded of a situation where a girl (friend of a friend) bought a new Accord, made a right turn too early and ran over a curb and into a tree. Damaged bumper and right side headlights, maybe 2500 worth of damage. She was telling me she didn't want the car any more and wanted it totalled and reimbursed her purchase price. Because the car "has been in an accident" now and its subsequent resale would be affected.

kyfdx · May 2004

I think we all feel that way when we have an accident. One of the advantages of leasing... When the term is up, you walk away.

regards,
kyfdx

isellhondas · May 2004

The dealer should eat the rate hike. You don't tell a customer one thing, have them sign a contract and then change the terms!

dbgindy · May 2004

If the dealer is willing to find/subsidize the 3.74% rate they contractually agreed to the folks have to stick with the deal ( unless the dealer wants to unwind it).

Duncan

bill100 · May 2004

I agree that once a contract is signed and a buyer drives off the lot well then its their problem if they get buyers remorse. BUT personally I would feel guilty selling a car I knew had problems. To be fair to the dealer in question though I have no idea if the dealer was aware of the problems or not. Bottom line though if I was a dealer I would unwind the deal for the simple fact that one I am dealing with a military troop and two word of mouth can do alot of damage to my business. Alot of business for area car dealers comes from our military base and that would be the last thing I would want is bad publicity just because I forced a contract on someone.

Again we go back back to the theory 1 person on average tells 8. Those 8 tell how ever many and so on.

Bill

driftracer · May 2004

confirmed any problems or their nature!

I find that many problems are imagined or simply misunderstood -

What are the problems? Be specific, or is this another made up scenario?

rroyce10 · May 2004

.......... The rate is based on the *buyers* ability to "Qualify" for it ...

If the lender is "bouncing back" then it's for a reason .. maybe because of some debt ratio, or the trade (if there is one) has some negative equity and the advance is too much ~ or maybe the buyer was late a few times with his Sears card, who knows what this deal is all about .... obviously we are only getting one side of the story - and we all know there is 3 sides ~ his side, their side and the truth ...................

Terry.

bill100 · May 2004

Again I will stress the fact that I am going off what is being told to me by the buyer not the dealer. According to them yes the buyer and the dealer agrees there is problems with the car. I honestly don't know what is exactly wrong with the tranny or the radiator. All I know is according to the BUYER the car has problems.

Just to make you happy though I will ask them the specifics.

bill100 · May 2004

The husband has a 720 and the wife has a 735 credit score. Debt to ratio is about 28% - 30%. I was thinking the same thing as you are. So I asked them. Plus to even proof it further they applied at a local credit union here to secure a backup loan if they needed it and they were approved for the lowest possible rate of 4.25!

No trade was involved.

Bottom line is I think the F&I guy went off their credit score and THOUGHT he could secure the 3.74 rate and went ahead and made up the contract. I don't know why he would think that though because most lenders around here offers 4.25 and up.

bowke28 · May 2004

"most lenders around here offers 4.25 and up."

and you know this HOW???

rroyce10 · May 2004

......... I probably pull 100/150 Carfax's a month and their accuracy is only as good as the reporting agency ..

So this becomes a DMV/police/weather/computer/state/county/how ya doing thing ... are they 100% accurate.? .. nope, they can't be .. but I will say, they are as accurate as the info they can get at the time, which I feel is about 90%+ .. they are certainly more accurate than watching CBS news .l.o.l........

Terry.

driftracer · May 2004

"most lenders around here offers 4.25 and up."

That's what I was thinking - just looked through my F&I book - I have 23 lenders and only two currently offer rates below 5%, and that's for 750 and above.

Do we have another fish story? I smell bait.

rroyce10 · May 2004

..... ** The husband has a 720 and the wife has a 735 credit score. Debt to ratio is about 28% - 30%. **

               Ok, that makes for a nice conversation .. #1) did you see their scores..? .. #2) did you *actually* see their credit report and read thru it .?

                Last Saturday I sold an 03 Jag to a "hot shot" stock broker, makes $450k a year, 2 homes, 3 cars, big boat, wears a $10 grand watch and this guy also has a 720 score and swore up and down how his Credit union was going to pop him $45 Large at 4.99% for 66 months with -0- down ..

                  Well anyway, I just got off the phone with his Credit union and they will give him 4.99% -but- he was "conditioned" to $39,0 for 60 months and they want the rest down in "El Casho" AND he knew this from "jump street" ... I can get him done for the whole amount but his rate will be 5.99% .. Hmm, I guess he lost something in the English translation from his Credit Union too here ...l.o.l..

                          Terry.

Any Questions for a Car Dealer?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles