Which Car For $10,000 ???

Picus said:
...........

I would really take a close look at a 2000-2001 Acura TL. It will be pushing your mpg restrictions (I think they are 22/30), but it will have plenty of power and the performance shouldn't suffer with the a/c on. Another side benefit is the mpg shouldn't go down with it on, either. That's one thing I found moving from 4 cyl to 6 cyl, in a 4 your a/c can rob you off 5-10 mpg, in the 6 normally I might see 1-2mpg difference, if any.
Click to expand...



If you look into the 2nd Gen TLs. They do have a questionable transmission. The 00-02 are covered with the 7 year/100,000 warranty. Some of the 03s (like mine) are only covered 4 year/50K. Just a heads up. Otherwise I love the car. I avg 18-20 mpg with 80 city / 20 hwy. Best I've gotten to date is 27 mpg all hwy. Some guyz get better mileage....steady low 30s.
 
Dave N said:
1. At least 30 mpg on the highway

2. I don't want a "geek" car :cool: (a la Matrix, etc.)

3. $10,000 (may go a couple $G higer for the "perfect" car)
Click to expand...



1998-2000 Ford Contour SVT:

2.5L V6 Engine making 200 HP.

5 Speed Transmision.

0-60 in 7 seconds.

Sexy.



27_3.JPG
 
Porsche 944. You could find a very nice one for $10k. Hell, mine was mechanically sound with faded paint and only cost $2000.



Emanuel
 
Acura Integra GS-R 4dr

Honda Accord

Honda Civic





The two things I reccomend with a Honda/Acura are:



-A good aftermarket alarm

-Light colored paint (CC is very soft)





Other than that, they are champs.
 
as mentioned before, a 99/00 Honda Civic Si is a very fun and economical car. You might need to adjust coming from a V8 to a small, hi reving 4cyl.



other than that you can get an Integra GS-R, which is similar in performance as the Civic Si. They have less cabin space but more trunk space with the hatch.



Oh yeah, I'm a honduh fan. :)
 
lawrencea said:
What about a new Hyundai Elantra , About $13000.00 , full power pw pl etc , 60,000 miles bumper to bumper , and 100,000 power train. Best bang for the buck i.m.o..
Click to expand...





I second that & you'd drive a NEW car. Forget about power with any of the small cars.



Lots of low rpm tourqe is only found in German cars.
 
I'd consider resale value before buying a Hyundai or Kia- most all these cars seem to loose $3000 as soon as you drive them off the lot (like most other new cars) but continue to depreciate faster than most other vehicles. Personally, I'd go with an EX-model Civic which will get you 10-15 more horses over the LX, DX, VP Civics and a rear sway bar, moon roof, all power, and still get an average MPG in the lower 30's for all out driving.
 
After driving a couple of mid-sized cars (Taurus and Sebring), I have found that they are too small for me. I'm only of average size, but there just isn't enough leg room or head room. So I've decided that if I get anything, it will be a full-sized car like a Buick LeSabre, or something similar.



It's kind of odd, but consider gas milage and power of a Mazda Protege compared to a LeSabre:



2003 Protege 2.0L I4

HP: 130

Torque: 135

Gas Milage: 25/30 (auto)



2003 LeSabre 3.8L V6

HP: 205

Torque:230

Gas Milage: 20/29



My driving is mostly a highway commute, so I finally realized that wouldn't be saving much gas by driving a small 4 cylinder car compared to a larger V6. The Protege does 5mpg better in city driving, but that's really not all that great of a savings for the size and power you sacrifice. To get really meaningful gas milage savings, you have to go down to the smallest of small 4 cylinders with virtually no power. Otherwise the larger American V6's hold their own very well IMO.



Kind of interesting...
 
The 3800, for as much bashing as it takes about being "low-tech" is really a quite effiecient motor with great low-end power. If you drive it lightly, you shouldn't have any problem breaking into the 30's in mpg.



The 2000+ LeSabre is based on the Aurora platform, so enjoy! :D
 
I think you left a few important things out...





2003 Mazda Protege:



Curb Weight, lbs. 2449

Overall Length, in. 174.0

Front Head Room, in. 39.3

Max. Front Leg Room, in. 42.2

Rear Head Room, in. 37.4

Min. Rear Leg Room, in. 35.4



Ride: sporty :)





2003 Buick LeSabre:



Curb Weight, lbs. 3567

Overall Length, in. 200.0

Front Head Room, in. 38.8

Max. Front Leg Room, in. 42.4

Rear Head Room, in. 37.8

Min. Rear Leg Room, in. 39.9



Ride: boaty :(





As you can see, the interior room really isn't much different, with the exception of rear leg room. You say that you'll be commuting on the highway most of the time, so you don't really need lots of rear leg room anyway.



And you mentioned the power, but consider the enormous weight difference, and automatic vs manual.
 
White95Max said:
I think you left a few important things out...
Click to expand...

What? Egad! I can't believe it!!! :eek:



Seriously, I think that sometimes these numbers belie the actual roominess of an interior. For example:



1996 Nissan 200SX* Front Leg Room: 42.3 in

2004 Chevy Silverado Front Leg Room: 41.3 in





From owning both both the 200SX and Silverado, I can tell you that the truck has much more usable front leg room as the Nissan. There is absolutely no contest. I drove the Nissan with the seat all the way back and did not have room to fully extend my legs, but the seat in my Silverado is one or two clicks from the back and I have plenty of leg room. I don't know how they measure to get those specs, but sometimes they don't reflect reality.



In the end you just have to drive a car to see if it's right for you, and I'll admit that I've driven neither the LeSabre or Protege (although I have driven a 95 Protege and 94 LeSabre). I'm still trying to decide whether or not I actually want to change vehicles, and when I do I'll go for some more test drives.



*(I actually had a 95 200SX, but the 95 and 96 are the same; Edmunds listed no interior specs for the 95)
 
White95Max said:
And you mentioned the power, but consider the enormous weight difference, and automatic vs manual.
Click to expand...



To me, this makes the fuel economy similarity even more impressive. :) The Buick is a bit boaty, but then that's intentional. If you want a sportier ride, go for the Bonneville. :)
 
2000-04 Pontiac Bonneville:



Overall Length, in. 202.6

Overall Width, in. 74.2

Overall Height, in. 56.6

Curb Weight, lbs. 3590

4-speed automatic

Class: large car



What about it is sporty again?
 
White95Max said:
2000-04 Pontiac Bonneville:



Overall Length, in. 202.6

Overall Width, in. 74.2

Overall Height, in. 56.6

Curb Weight, lbs. 3590

4-speed automatic

Class: large car



What about it is sporty again?
Click to expand...



It has different suspension tuning than the LeSabre, so it is not as floaty. I would guess you've never driven one, since you are merely quoting specs. What specs = sporty? If I made a car that was 20" long, 10" wide, and weighed 10 lbs, would it be sporty?



Here's a video that might change your mind a little (or you could try lining up next to one on the street sometime): http://www.3800pro.com/movies/Tires_On_LSD.wmv



:wavey
 
I'd probably go with the Civic. I like my Mazda 626 but it has had more problems by 110,000 miles than my Honda did by 175,000 miles. Kind of scares me off any Mazda in the future, no matter how nice they drive.
 
A Bonneville (even with the non-s/c engine) would probably leave me way behind. My car has a firm ride and great handling, in a small package. That's what makes it sporty. It's not fast.



If I made a car that was 20" long, 10" wide, and weighed 10 lbs, would it be sporty?
Click to expand...



I wouldn't know, because I couldn't fit in it to find out.



I'd watch your video, but I have dialup so it would take me 23923456246238746 hours to download it. I'll watch it tomorrow at work on the T1 line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top