What two cars (family, not fun)

So the Freestyle is on borrowed time (assuming the longevity of the replacement remanufactured transmissions is similar), see:

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/off-topic-discussion/help-need-to-discuss-dd-replacement-quickly/37073/page1/

The best replacement we can think of is the Taurus X, which is the same thing, but with a better transmission. We like the carlike ride, the extreme amount of extra cargo capacity in various cubbies and the fuel economy (hovering around 30 highway). I can't think of a similarly priced (looking for about 10-12k in about a year) vehicle that can beat that and have three real rows and cargo behind the third (no mazda5, rav4 or the like) for that price and fuel economy. I don't think many minvans are A, reasonably priced or B, reliable (in terms of transmissions, typically, oddly enough).

Now for the second one, we currently have a PT Cruiser. It's amazing. It's never actually broken in a way that affects driveability, and the pieces which have died were so easy and cheap to replace that it pains me to think of replacing it, but at best we're talking 28 mpg highway and 24 in town. Is there anything else in the 3-4k range that's modern (roughly 2000 or better for safety reasons) and has amazingly better fuel economy without sacrificing any reliability? We're talking four doors, for real sized people, and cargo behind (hatchbacks/wagons are far superior).

For the record, I think we're pretty much stuck with what we have with the Freestyle->TaurusX switch in a year. These are appliances. Fun to drive is great, but not necessary. I don't want any 9 passenger 50's wagon with a ls3 type ideas, because I'll probably love them and implement them immediately.

Thanks

Mazda MPV plus a Mazda 3 wagon.

I like Mazda's.

1988RedT2 wrote: Mazda MPV plus a Mazda 3 wagon. I like Mazda's.

Like the Mazda 3 idea, but the MPV gets terrible ratings on fuel economy.

As I've said before, I always get a kick out of your posts because our situations are so similar. The kids, nanny, minivan (knock on wood, I've had good luck with ours), my wife's DD is a Honda Fit hatchback, my DD is a Volvo wagon.

That's a tough one, especially because of the fuel economy deal. For the van, anything that can carry 7 and cargo behind is going to be somewhat thirsty. Do you really get 30mpg with your Ford? I'd recommend our Sedona, but I can't lie and say we get that kind of mileage. We get 19mpg in mixed driving, about 24-25mpg on the highway. But we love it. Durable, storage room everywhere, and a great family hauler. Typical kid hauler...french fries buried in the seat tracks, fruit gummies embedded in the carpet, you know the drill...but while we try to keep it clean, we don't care too much. For what we paid for it, it's doing it's job.

On the car front, hard to find a low cost wagon to beat that fuel mileage. Not sure about reliability, but the Suzuki Reno was a cheap wagon that got good mileage. Saturn wagon? Did the early '00's Integras have a 4 door hatch?

Klayfish wrote: Do you really get 30mpg with your Ford? I'd recommend our Sedona, but I can't lie and say we get that kind of mileage. We get 19mpg in mixed driving, about 24-25mpg on the highway.

Yeah man, 21-24 driving around and 29-31 highway. We haven't tried highway without A/C yet, and I suspect that will be much better - tough cooling all three rows.

Klayfish wrote: As I've said before, I always get a kick out of your posts because our situations are so similar. The kids, nanny, minivan (knock on wood, I've had good luck with ours), my wife's DD is a Honda Fit hatchback, my DD is a Volvo wagon.

Weird, eh? I DDed a Volvo wagon as well, but found its reliability and parts availability unacceptable for DD use.

Unless you're just bored with the PT Cruiser run it into the ground - you're likely to lose enough money on the sale/purchase that it will take forever to recoup the better fuel economy.

Honestly I think I would just stick with the PT if there are no major problems with it. I believe the cheapest car is the one you already have.

Honestly, if the Freestyle is getting 30 MPG, I think the TaurusX switchover makes a lot of sense. I consider our AWD V6 RAV4 to get excellent mileage, and it gets 28-29 MPG on the highway (23-24 in mixed driving). If you can do better than that with more room, then stick with what you have (minus the transmission issue).

On the second one, it again sounds like you have something that fits your needs. That's great mileage that you're getting with it, I don't think you're going to touch anything with that combination of mileage/space at anything close to 3-4K. A Chrysler minivan might come close on the price, but won't touch the mileage of the PT Cruiser.

Minus the Freestyle to TaurusX, I think you're set for a while...

tuna55 wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote: Mazda MPV plus a Mazda 3 wagon. I like Mazda's.

Like the Mazda 3 idea, but the MPV gets terrible ratings on fuel economy.

Really? I've had an '05 MPV ES since new and it gets about 22 in day-to-day driving and maybe 25-26 on trips. Not great, I'll admit, but given the roominess and level of performance, I think it's fine. I've driven other minivans, and with the possible exception of the Odyssey, there isn't one I'd rather have.

My only thought is that you can get the nicest mercedes w123 wagon in the world for under $10k, and they get over 25 mpg easily (diesel) and last close to a million miles if they are taken care of. Parts likely have to be ordered, but using other than OEM parts (as in anything from kragens, napa, etc) on any car is a good way to quickly make a reliable new car into an unreliable old one.

http://charleston.craigslist.org/cto/2553757375.html Like that one. I have seen them with 3rd row seats before.

I've heard the KIA Rondo has 3 rows (6 peoples only) and storage, but I've never actually been inside one.

Mazda5's storage w/3rd row occupied is not great. Better than most hatchback's, but not great.

Our TaurusX doesn't get anywhere near 30mpg. Mileage indicator on the dash hovers around 22, and it spends a lot of time on the highway (probably 60% of its miles).