|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:
To be absolutely sure, pull your scores from myfico.com and look for your Fico 08 Auto score. I would recommend Experian in this case...Equifax and TU are used but most use Experian. It'll be 19.95 for a single bureau but there are plenty of coupons out there and you should be able to get one for $5 off. Whatever you get from myfico will 100% match what the dealer will pull. Auto scores are a lot different than what normally gets shown on those free credit score sites and it could be lower if you've never had an auto loan before. Again, this is only if you go through dealer financing. Credit unions pull whatever they want and it most likely won't be the so-called "Auto Enhanced" number that a dealer will pull.
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my general thoughts on the topic. So what you're saying is, invest in index funds? Because that plan could apply to any monthly expense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
I'll let the more BFC minded folks chime in and we may be getting offtopic in this thread, but yes, index funds should be part of your investing strategy. But "that could apply to any monthly expense" seems a bit broad to me. It can apply to any large purchases that you can get financing for. It does not apply to something like your Netflix bill, as that isn't a large expense that you are taking a loan out on. If your student loans are a lower percent, then yes. If your mortgage is a lower percent, then yes. [Edit: Also, I would emphasize that this requires you to put the money away and not spend it. I realize that can be difficult.] Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Aug 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
The missing piece there is cash flow. If you can meet the cash flow comfortably, while still achieving all of your financial goals, then it's best to borrow at the lower rate and invest it at the higher expected return instrument. If you're going to struggle to make a $1,000 payment each month to keep $60K invested, then I'd recommend against that. But if you can borrow at 1-3% and you have an expected return on index funds (in the long run) greater than that, I'd say go for it. I'd expect at least a 300bp premium though minimum to tie up my cash and cash flow. 6% conservative over a 6+ year timeframe isn't that improbable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:In 3 months I am buying a specific car for $63,000 (it's being built to order) put enough money down that you don't have to carry gap insurance. make sure that at any point in the loan if you wrap your car around a tree you can pay out on it especially if you are buying a sixty thousand dollar toy. otherwise do not put any more money down that you have to. typically, shorter loan periods have lower interest rates, so if you have the cashflow to support higher monthly payments you should do that. this will also help keep you from being underwater on the loan. shop it at a CU or your normal bank or both, get a rate in your pocket. let the dealer rate shop as well. even if you are buying a special order car, you still are probably eligible for some generic manufacturer incentives, even though there are probably no nameplate-specific incentives since the M2 is in high demand. if the dealer beats your pocket rates, great. if not, you have approval for a specific amount that you share with the dealer. down payments are check, card, etc - if they'll let you run it on a card at the negotiated price i'd do that and get them sweet points.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
therobit posted:Trip report: That's funny I had emailed that person about it. Wife didn't like the miles on it and the few body dings. Glad you picked it up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:put enough money down that you don't have to carry gap insurance. make sure that at any point in the loan if you wrap your car around a tree you can pay out on it especially if you are buying a sixty thousand dollar toy. otherwise do not put any more money down that you have to. Extremely helpful, thank you my friend (and fellow M2 owner/former owner?? I think?)
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Extremely helpful, thank you my friend (and fellow M2 owner/former owner?? I think?) M5 I own a real bmw 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
gently caress, that's THREE more M than mine
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
I'm shopping 2014-2017 RAV4s, CR-Vs, and CX5s for a new family car. In my area, they rank CR-V, RAV4, CX5 in order of increasing price and decreasing availability (I.e., more cheaper CR-Vs). They're basically identical on paper for my needs (higher seat height and ground clearance, AWD, space for dogs, kids, and the sort of poo poo middle class outdoorsy white people accumulate and carry around, easily serviceable where I live). My hunch is the RAV4 will retain value a little better, because that seems to be the trend with Toyotas. The CR-Vs are a little cheaper but seem to have nicer trim across the board. I know nothing about the CX-5 beyond what I read in Consumer Reports. I'm not interested in the Escape or Rogue, and my wife doesn't want a Subaru. Use will be primarily my wife's 8-10 mile/day commute, plus another 50 or so miles a week for weekend stuff and errands. There will be annual 2000-mile round trips between Colorado and Arkansas and monthly 80-200 mile trips in the mountains between 5000' and 10000', usually with dogs and gear. So between those vehicles: What are the major differences between the CR-V's CVT and the RAV4's 6-spd auto? Which has the best snow/ice performance? Which has the best fuel economy? Reports seem to favor the CR-V, but I never know how much faith to put in the reports on paper. Which is the most fun to drive? I'm sort of a driving enthusiast, but my wife probably won't be interested in that factor. But it'll see a lot of twisties, so it needs to handle pretty well. I'll compare insurance rates as well, which may end up weighting the decision. HenryJLittlefinger fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Aug 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
The RAV-4 will not retain value better than a CR-V in a meaningful way, especially if you are putting more than 18k miles per year on it. The CR-V is better than the RAV-4 in pretty much every way other than "is a Toyota" so unless that really matters to you, I'd buy the CR-V. The CVT, rather than shifting through gears, infinitely* varies the gear ratios to keep the engine in the peak of the powerband when you want to accelerate, or to keep the engine running at low speed when you do not want to accelerate. Some people do not like the way this feels because you do not hear the engine speed increasing as the car's speed increases. It's pretty easy to get used to, though. Old CVTs had problems, but low power applications are fine. CVTs generally get better fuel economy ceteris paribus. You should test drive the CX-5. I think it's the best car in the segment by a fairly wide margin. It has a great transmission and is engaging to drive, and has a more luxurious feeling interior than either the RAV-4 or CR-V. It is certainly the driver's choice. All of these cars will have less good snow and ice performance than a Subaru due to AWD design, but Haldex V+ is much better than older applications. As with any car, the most important driver of snow and ice performance is tires. Get winter tires. I really doubt that insurance will be all that different on the cars and it sounds to me like your decision process is really heavily weighted towards minor cost savings (holds value better, cheaper to insure) and not actually buying a car that you like that is going to meet your needs. Have you driven these cars yet? *not quite infinitely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I really doubt that insurance will be all that different on the cars and it sounds to me like your decision process is really heavily weighted towards minor cost savings (holds value better, cheaper to insure) and not actually buying a car that you like that is going to meet your needs. Have you driven these cars yet? No, I haven't driven any of them yet, so cost is the heaviest factor so far in the process. No experience leading me to like one more than the other. Hopefully I'll get to test drive one or two this weekend. I may also work the HR-V into the lineup, depending on size. This is an upgrade from a 2009 Matrix, specifically in the area of AWD and clearance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
There's also a brand new RAV4 coming out later this year, which looks to be a substantial change/improvement. Not sure how long you're willing to wait, plus I'm always a little hesitant to get a first model year of anything but it is a Toyota so it shouldn't be too bad on teething issues you'd hope. https://www.toyota.com/upcoming-vehicles/RAV4/ Or if you don't care, you might be able to find some killer deals on leftover MY18 RAV4s when the new ones drop. But also yeah, as of today the CRV and especially CX5 are where I'd be looking in that segment. Maybe also the Hyundai Tucson if you're especially cost conscious. Guinness fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Aug 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
In an ideal world, I'd like the hybrid version of one of those. I didn't mention a budget, because we don't have a hard one, but the newer models, and especially the hybrids, are definitely outside it. I'm kind of arbitrarily using $20,000 in my cars.com filter. Timeline is kind of soft, with my wife pushing for sooner and me being a little more laid back. We have a kid on the way, and we don't want to drive a child around in the Matrix in winter. But our number of icy days in town are actually low enough that maybe I can push for using my Tacoma as the kid transporter when the roads are slick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:In an ideal world, I'd like the hybrid version of one of those. I didn't mention a budget, because we don't have a hard one, but the newer models, and especially the hybrids, are definitely outside it. Just as a heads up the set-up in the RAV4 prior to model year 2019 was absolutely abysmal if you were going to have 2 car seats. Literally nothing else will fit in there because of the way they put the center buckle. The Outback or the CX-5 are also IIHS TSP+ award winners which is nice. Of course the (18 MY) RAV4 and CR-V are TSP winners, but not TSP+. If you just have one car seat, pretty much any of these is going to be great and probably overkill. The Outback also holds its value really well. EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Aug 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:Just as a heads up the set-up in the RAV4 prior to model year 2019 was absolutely abysmal if you were going to have 2 car seats. Literally nothing else will fit in there because of the way they put the center buckle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:No, I haven't driven any of them yet, so cost is the heaviest factor so far in the process. No experience leading me to like one more than the other. Hopefully I'll get to test drive one or two this weekend. Hard pass on the HR-V, it's not very large at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
We've owned a CX-5 fo almostr five years and it has been excellent. Gets great mileage, a joy to drive, and fits three car seats in the back. We have to sell it to get a three row car and my wife is miserable about it. Happy to answer any questions (or sell you mine if you're in the area).
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Cascadia Pirate posted:We've owned a CX-5 fo almostr five years and it has been excellent. Gets great mileage, a joy to drive, and fits three car seats in the back. We have to sell it to get a three row car and my wife is miserable about it. Happy to answer any questions (or sell you mine if you're in the area). The the CX-9 not work for her? Seems a natural fit given she loves the CX-5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:I may also work the HR-V into the lineup, depending on size. This was already mentioned but the compacts (CR-V, CX-5 or RAV4) are probably a better choice for you, particularly since you mentioned ”dogs,” plural. I have an HR-V and I think it’s a great car for a small family, but I wouldn’t consider it a viable option if you already have more than one dog and a kid on the way. FWIW, our setup includes a rotating (i.e. front/rear facing) toddler seat in the second row on the passenger side, and a dog crate in the back for a 20lb doggo. The crate leaves enough room in the back for a folding stroller or luggage. If we’re not taking the dog with us, we can take the stroller and keep stuff in the crate as it’s very roomy and easily holds four large bags of groceries. In the extremely rare situation that we need to haul more than, say, a couple of weekend bags, we can just lift the remaining second row seat section and boom, there’s room for two big rear end suitcases. That’s enough for us, but YMMV of course. Itchy Tony Manero fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 06:20
|
|
|
yeah I saw kids plural and dogs plural and if anything you might consider sizing up especially if you plan to drag said kids and dogs 2,000 miles in the thing
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:So between those vehicles: FYI, if your search includes 2014 CR-Vs, those will have a port-injected K24 and a five-speed Hondamatic, not the "EarthDreams" direct-injected K24 and CVT. I've had a 2013 CR-V for a bit over five years and 130k miles so far and I've been very happy with it. I have driven the DI K24/CVT combo once in a newer Accord though, and it's actually the first time I've ever preferred a CVT to a traditional automatic. Certainly not by enough to trade the CR-V in already, but the Honda CVT reacts very quickly to throttle input. It won't show up much in a 0-60 test but in the real world where you might be doing 30-60 or 50-70 pulls, the CVT is a major improvement. On the flip side, the port-injected K24 and Hondamatic is a combination that's been around roughly forever and I expect no problems out of it at any point in my ownership, and I don't plan on being rid of the CR-V before 200k miles. The total list of parts I've replaced, not including tires, fluid changes, turn signal bulbs, or the one set of brake pads: HVAC blower motor (easy and cheap) AC expansion valve (cheap, but holy gently caress this job SUCKED) One piece of chrome on the front (the tabs broke for no apparent reason. Dirt cheap part but pretty fiddly replacement) I also need to get a new steering wheel and left-side steering wheel switch. Apparently the way I hold the wheel on this car has caused part of the outer surface of the wheel to wear away exactly where my left hand sits. And it will probably need struts soonish (by mileage it's arguably overdue but it doesn't feel like poo poo when driving, but the boots have given up in the last few months). Snow/ice performance: The CR-V's AWD is actually particularly poo poo though. If you have a true zero-traction scenario on the front wheels, the rear half of the AWD system is so weak that the computer will just cut power instead. I honestly don't see it as any benefit over the FWD CR-V other than to check a box to make people feel better. Seems like the traction control with FWD is probably good enough for most conditions. Take this with a hunk of road salt because I've never driven mine in snow and probably never will. Fuel economy: drat near 30 highway if I keep it to 65. Realistically most tanks end up around 23-24 since I'd rather do 80. Fun to drive: I test drove the CR-V and CX5 and honestly couldn't tell the difference between the two in handling. The CX5 might have been a bit better but that's really not saying much. They're both price-sensitive crossovers, there's only so much you can do with the driving dynamics of something like that. CX5 was $2k more for no real reason so we bought the CR-V. IOwnCalculus fucked around with this message at 14:42 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
Cascadia Pirate posted:We've owned a CX-5 fo almostr five years and it has been excellent. Gets great mileage, a joy to drive, and fits three car seats in the back. We have to sell it to get a three row car and my wife is miserable about it. Happy to answer any questions (or sell you mine if you're in the area). Want to message me some info? Looking at your posts you’re in Seattle? I’m in Wenatchee and still car shopping. E: I see you don’t have plat... do you have an email I could hit up?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
GlitterBob posted:This was already mentioned but the compacts (CR-V, CX-5 or RAV4) are probably a better choice for you, particularly since you mentioned ”dogs,” plural. I have an HR-V and I think it’s a great car for a small family, but I wouldn’t consider it a viable option if you already have more than one dog and a kid on the way. KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:yeah I saw kids plural and dogs plural and if anything you might consider sizing up especially if you plan to drag said kids and dogs 2,000 miles in the thing Yeah, based on KYOON GRIFFEY Jr's earlier reply, I'm axing the HR-V. We have two 40-45 lb dogs and take them hiking, snowshoeing, and otherwise weekend travelling pretty much whenever we go, which usually means a bunch of gear plus dogs scrambling all over it. Thanks, though, that's the sort of empirical data I need. IOwnCalculus posted:FYI, if your search includes 2014 CR-Vs, those will have a port-injected K24 and a five-speed Hondamatic, not the "EarthDreams" direct-injected K24 and CVT. I've had a 2013 CR-V for a bit over five years and 130k miles so far and I've been very happy with it. I have driven the DI K24/CVT combo once in a newer Accord though, and it's actually the first time I've ever preferred a CVT to a traditional automatic. Certainly not by enough to trade the CR-V in already, but the Honda CVT reacts very quickly to throttle input. It won't show up much in a 0-60 test but in the real world where you might be doing 30-60 or 50-70 pulls, the CVT is a major improvement. quote:Snow/ice performance: The CR-V's AWD is actually particularly poo poo though. If you have a true zero-traction scenario on the front wheels, the rear half of the AWD system is so weak that the computer will just cut power instead. I honestly don't see it as any benefit over the FWD CR-V other than to check a box to make people feel better. Seems like the traction control with FWD is probably good enough for most conditions. Take this with a hunk of road salt because I've never driven mine in snow and probably never will. Since we're in Colorado, most cars seem come with all-weather tires on them, and most regular old car tires in shops around here seem to be all-weather, or at least models with a lot more siping than I got used to seeing in other parts of the country. If a target car doesn't have all-weathers, I'll try to get the dealership to put some on. quote:Fuel economy: drat near 30 highway if I keep it to 65. Realistically most tanks end up around 23-24 since I'd rather do 80. I kind of suspected this, but it's good to hear. Thanks for all the information, it's very useful. I'm going to try to drive a couple CR-Vs this weekend. HenryJLittlefinger fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
all weather tires = poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:all weather tires = poo poo Is there any more to that? Every vehicle I've put all-weather tires on as an upgrade from standard road tires has performed markedly better. I know all-weathers do not equal dedicated snow/winter tires, but snow tires are not a feasible option for me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
why not edit: I'll stop being annoying, I guess. You mention that you go up in the mountains a bunch. Snow tires have vastly better performance in cold weather in addition to on ice and show. You should be using snow tires in the winter and three season or one season tires in the summer. The car will perform better in both seasons. Unless this is absolutely not an option for some reason (you live in a tiny apartment, in your religion tires are haraam, etc) you should definitely be doing this. KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
There are 3 major categories of tires: winter, summer, and all season (or "normal"). Summers are awful in cold weather, winter tires self destruct at high temperatures, and all seasons are mediocre at everything. Any of these can suck if you get something that prioritizes being really cheap or low rolling resistance: your comparison between normal road tires and all seasons was almost certainly just one all season being better than another one in the same category. If you're going to insist on driving in lots of snow without snow tires, look carefully at reviews of whatever you're getting instead to make sure they work fairly well in snow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:I've always managed ok, but there's been some dicey moments and honking our way through a stop sign a couple times. jesus christ man buy the right tool for the job
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:jesus christ man buy the right tool for the job What the gently caress do you think I'm posting in this thread for? Please stop "contributing" to this discussion. heffray posted:There are 3 major categories of tires: winter, summer, and all season (or "normal"). Summers are awful in cold weather, winter tires self destruct at high temperatures, and all seasons are mediocre at everything. Any of these can suck if you get something that prioritizes being really cheap or low rolling resistance: your comparison between normal road tires and all seasons was almost certainly just one all season being better than another one in the same category. This is helpful, thank you. The last time I got new tires for the family car, I researched and purchased the all-weathers that had the best consumer and professional reviews and have been really happy with them. And I never cheap out on tires. I will not be driving on lots of snow and ice, but I will be driving on snow and ice predictably. I live in Fort Collins, CO. There are like 300 days of sun and maybe 15-20 days a year that the roads in town are actually snowy, not very many days below freezing, and the frequency of those last two seems to be decreasing, but they do happen every year. The aforementioned trips to play in the mountains in the winter usually involve driving on clear, dry roads until the last 10 miles, and maybe 20-50 mile stretches of snow/ice over passes. The once-annual trip across the plains in winter turns up maybe 4-6 hours of snow/ice driving. We've been doing it for years now and never had or caused a wreck, just a couple uncomfortable moments. My point here is that most of the time, this car will be driven on dry roads above freezing temperatures. Too much for dedicated snow tires to be getting chewed up. I also don't have the space to store a stack of tires all year. But snow/ice driving is predictable enough that I am buying a car that is more equipped to handle it. I'm a rational driver and don't expect that AWD is just going to allow me to drive the same in all conditions. For further background on my approach to this, I drove a 98 Ranger without 4wd or ABS in the same place and conditions for years and never had an incident. I was never really happy about it, so when my finances allowed, I bought a Tacoma with all-weathers that were ranked well for snow/ice and continued to be a careful driver. Still no incidents and I don't think 4wd is a magic switch that makes everything doable. I'm capable of not driving like a ding dong. HenryJLittlefinger fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 16:50
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:What the gently caress do you think I'm posting in this thread for? Please stop "contributing" to this discussion. They're 3-peaks mountain snowflake rated for winter driving, but can handle summers as well. I've got some on our Odyssey and they're very nice. Alternative: Get a cheap set of rims, mount the snow tires on them. When you're headed out for snowy weather, put them on. Or have a shop put them on for you for $20. If you're driving in significant snow, you need snow tires of some sort.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Something you might try: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Vredestein&tireModel=Quatrac+5 quote:If you're driving in significant snow, you need snow tires of some sort. I edited my above post for a more accurate depiction of the kind of winter driving I do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:Thank you, I appreciate that. I'll start compiling a short list of tires and see what the tire shops around here recommend. Vredensteins are only available in the US via internet sources like Tire Rack. You won't find them at a local dealer. Here is TR's testing of some 3PMSF-rated all-seasons. You may be able to find the Goodyears or Michelins locally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Vredensteins are only available in the US via internet sources like Tire Rack. You won't find them at a local dealer. Ha, I think those Goodyears are the ones we put on the Matrix. I like em way better than whatever we had on there before. Generally speaking, how receptive are dealers to swapping out tires as part of a sale?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
If the dealer is willing to swap tires for you at no cost, they hosed you on the deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:What the gently caress do you think I'm posting in this thread for? Please stop "contributing" to this discussion. I can't believe you wouldn't go for winter tires. Over the lifetime of the car it's like $60 a year and it's such an unbelievable performance upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:I can't believe you wouldn't go for winter tires. Over the lifetime of the car it's like $60 a year and it's such an unbelievable performance upgrade. I absolutely don't have space to store 4 tires all year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Shops often will store it for you and remind you when it’s time to swap winter tires on. Having lived in CO for ages, not having winter tires is a bad move.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
big crush on Chad OMG posted:Shops often will store it for you and remind you when it’s time to swap winter tires on. Having lived in CO for ages, not having winter tires is a bad move. I have this done in Michigan for like I think a hundred twenty bucks a year, and they do the changeover for me for free.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
CO tire op: everyone is telling you to get proper winter tires and you’re the goon at the bottom of the well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 21:15
|
|