What car: reality bites edition

I've never even looked in the hood of a non-turbocharged Subbie. Don't some have a reputation for eating head gaskets?

Platinum90 wrote: if you wanted to go REAL cheap, the Saturn SL or SW series would fit the bill nicely. Perfect examples can be had for less than 2 grand, they are dead nuts reliable, filling up the tank is a joyful experience, they handle respectably, parts are cheap and plentiful. They aren't exactly ugly, but they aren't anything in particular to look at. if you get a twin cam MAKE SURE IT IS A STICK. the auto blows chunks attached to an SL2. it shifts at about 2750, and the twin cam 1.9 can easily rev out to 6500.

There isn't much i hate working on more than a twin cam Saturn, personally....

Otherwise, they're great cars.

Brett_Murphy wrote: In reply to paanta: I'll chime in with the Mazda 3 hatchback or Mazda 6 wagon crowd. While I do love the old cars for a variety of reasons, with the kids involved it's just easier on my peace of mind to have a modern car with modern safety features like LATCH. One thing that always bothers me is that a 5 star rated car in 1993 might very well get a poor rating under the modern safety standards. I've not done my homework, though, so I can't say that with any factual confidence, just parental paranoia. My *only* compliant with the 2005 Mazda 3 hatch I had was that with the rear facing car seat on the driver's side, it was a pain the the but to get the seat where I wanted it. If we didn't have to have the 6 year old on the passenger side for school drop off, it wouldn't have been an issue. The gas mileage/practicality/fun factor ratios are pretty good, in the '3, too.

It's not paranoia. You're still probably safer in an old car driven carefully than in a new car driven averagely, but if you want to freak yourself out, go here and look at how scores drop off with age on the master list: http://www.informedforlife.org/viewartcl.php?index=24

Computer processing power alone has allowed some pretty ridiculously fancy structural analysis on the desktop in the last 10-15 years. Add in increasing safety standards, access to previously exotic materials, better manufacturing techniques, airbags, stability control and just plain heavier cars and things have gotten seriously safer in the last decade or two. I'd rather be in any accident in a new Fiesta than in my E34, I think.

Pontiac Vibe.

Available manual, Latch equipped, believed to be a safe vehicle. Cheap, good gas mileage (34-36 highway), great cargo capacity Toyota reliability Pontiac depreciation. Mine currenlty has a rear facing car seat in the middle of the back, you could put it on either side. You could probably fit another engine in the engine bay there is so much room. Min has been trouble and maintenance free for 45K miles (currently at 67K). They are decidedly not sporty, but otherwise about the perfect car for all needs. You can pick up used manuals in the 5-7K range.

nocones wrote: Pontiac Vibe. Available manual, Latch equipped, believed to be a safe vehicle. Cheap, good gas mileage (34-36 highway), great cargo capacity Toyota reliability Pontiac depreciation. Mine currenlty has a rear facing car seat in the middle of the back, you could put it on either side. You could probably fit another engine in the engine bay there is so much room. Min has been trouble and maintenance free for 45K miles (currently at 67K). They are decidedly not sporty, but otherwise about the perfect car for all needs. You can pick up used manuals in the 5-7K range.

I've never given these cars any attention, but that description makes so much sense. This one may have to go on my list of recommendations for non-car people. Its the perfect storm, just like the Geo Prizm of yore.

Oooh, Vibe is an idea. That one completely slipped the radar. And I'd be able to haul crap after years of sedans.

Reality Bites Edition re-titled to:
What would Winona Ryder drive?
Then:

Now:

paanta wrote: I've never even looked in the hood of a non-turbocharged Subbie. Don't some have a reputation for eating head gaskets?

A couple of years did because they put the wrong post process on them. They did a TSB/recall. Just check the vin with Sub. I can pull an engine with out getting under the car. But I have arms like a gorilla (6'4") but lots of room either way.

I complete forgot the Nissan Maxima. You can get one with a VQ and a 6 speed.

Matrix/vibe is useful but I have been gun shy of Toyota's since the rack and pinion on my wife's 4Runner split.

Apparently she'd drive a DeLorean with the Time Machine option to travel back and forth.

jrw1621 wrote: Reality Bites Edition re-titled to: What would Winona Ryder drive? Then: Now:

Probably on this list:

http://www.latimes.com/sns-auto-top-stolen-cars-2010-pictures,0,5299466.photogallery

In reply to nocones:

I'd forgot all about the Vibe. I have no experience with them, but I guess it is worth a look for sure.

93celicaGT2 wrote:

Platinum90 wrote: if you wanted to go REAL cheap, the Saturn SL or SW series would fit the bill nicely. Perfect examples can be had for less than 2 grand, they are dead nuts reliable, filling up the tank is a joyful experience, they handle respectably, parts are cheap and plentiful. They aren't exactly ugly, but they aren't anything in particular to look at. if you get a twin cam MAKE SURE IT IS A STICK. the auto blows chunks attached to an SL2. it shifts at about 2750, and the twin cam 1.9 can easily rev out to 6500.

There isn't much i hate working on more than a twin cam Saturn, personally.... Otherwise, they're great cars.

Why do you say that? I have heard you utter this sentiment previously, and have always been curious.

I don't mind working on ours, it is simple as hell.

Platinum90 wrote:

93celicaGT2 wrote:

Platinum90 wrote: if you wanted to go REAL cheap, the Saturn SL or SW series would fit the bill nicely. Perfect examples can be had for less than 2 grand, they are dead nuts reliable, filling up the tank is a joyful experience, they handle respectably, parts are cheap and plentiful. They aren't exactly ugly, but they aren't anything in particular to look at. if you get a twin cam MAKE SURE IT IS A STICK. the auto blows chunks attached to an SL2. it shifts at about 2750, and the twin cam 1.9 can easily rev out to 6500.

There isn't much i hate working on more than a twin cam Saturn, personally.... Otherwise, they're great cars.

Why do you say that? I have heard you utter this sentiment previously, and have always been curious. I don't mind working on ours, it is simple as hell.

There's something about those accessories on the back on of the motor that make me want to claw my eyes out in an effort to get out of doing any work back there.

IE: Power steering pump, alternator. The starter isn't a whole lot of fun, either.

Basically, i swapped a motor into an SC2 a couple months ago, and i can say with the utmost confidence that it was the worst wrenching experience i have ever had in my entire life.

I've worked on MR2 Turbos. Celica AllTracs. 300zx Twin Turbos, and i've peeked into a 3000GT VR4.

This damn saturn trumped them all.

MOST things are very easy to do on them, i'm sure. I just can't get over those accessories on the back.

I dunno. Maybe there's tricks. But the local "saturn guy" hates doing that stuff, too.

yeah, I had to replace the starter once, I guess that wasn't too fun. I put a new transmission in it a while back though, and that wasn't all that bad.

I also did rod bearings in under an hour from drive in to drive out.

What year and model is yours? I think on the later SC2s, the first step to clutch replacement is: "Remove engine and transmission."

jrw1621 wrote: Saab 9-5 wagon for some style???? Manual available. Maxima

• 1.

How about a Ford Fusion? My wife and I are over 6' and are able to get a rear facing child seat with room to spare. We have a '10 SE model with the 2.5l/6 speed manual and it is a blast to drive (once the traction control is turned off). The first gen Fusion has depreciated quite a bit and I have heard good things about the 2.3l/5sp combo.

93celicaGT2 wrote: What year and model is yours? I think on the later SC2s, the first step to clutch replacement is: "Remove engine and transmission."

Ours is a 99 SL2, but it is the slushy box car, I HATE THAT TRANSMISSION.

When it gets taken off of active duty as the SO's car, I may swap in a manual and turn it into a daily/rallycross car.

Seriously, Nissan maxima. They are pretty cheap too. 5-8K will get a super nice 99-03. 99-01s go for $2-5Kish and they are great cars. the 02-03's added 3.5L vs 3L, nicer headlights, more features etc. MPG varys. 20-30mpg is pretty usual, but its not slow. Up to 99 they had 190hp, the 00/01s had 220ish, and the 02-03s had 255hp. The older lighter max's have gotten 32ish pretty easily on highway trips. I haven't read much about the newer ones, but Id expect similar.

I'm putting an engine in a 95 for my mom. Ive owned 3 other maximas. They are amazing cars. Good fuel efficiency for their size, super durable, plenty of space to work on things, and best of all its safe. IMO all nissans do better in real world crashes then their good test results point too. I wrecked my 90, and it took the damage well. Saved me a lot of aches and pains for sure.

Which is why I wanted my mom to have my car, the VQ series engines are awesome, and its easy to work on. Then the car its self is very safe, and great for back seat room. And parts are decently priced too.

~Alex

FlightService wrote:

jrw1621 wrote: Reality Bites Edition re-titled to: What would Winona Ryder drive? Then: Now:

Probably on this list: http://www.latimes.com/sns-auto-top-stolen-cars-2010-pictures,0,5299466.photogallery

Jesus, what a garbage article. Infiniti G47? Dodge Chargers look like this?

If I had to choose one of these econocars I would definitely jump on a maxima with a vq.

PS I just picked up a decent '99 SE 5 speed maxima for $1500. Needs a radiator, and some cleaning. Its pretty nice.

And the 3.5L's are available with a 6 speed manual. That transmission rocks. Has a great 6th speed for crusing on the highway. I can't remember what they go for but they are awesome cars.

~Alex

Reviving this thread...thanks to the posters who suggested an E39, I was in the same situation as the OP. I picked up a '96 525i/auto for reasonable coin, it has a few e39 niggles (faded pixels on dash, airbag light on) but is a whole lot of car. Pretty reasonable fuel economy so far too.

Reviving again: Ok, so say you had to choose between a couple people movers. One, a nice clean '05 Accord EX 2.4l MT with 117K for $8K; two, a ~2007 Ford Fusion 2.3l 5-spd with 60K on it. Over the course of 4 years/40K miles which do you think is going to be more trouble?

I'm torn. Accord has a nicer interior, drives a bit nicer, seems like it'd be easier to work on, and is probably more reliable all else being equal. Ford has half the miles and the duratecs seem well liked.

Thoughts?

I'd go with the Fusion. I think they are a pretty solid car for the money..