|
So my girlfriend is graduating and starting a new job soon and she's pretty much dead-set on getting a Prius. Since we already know what model she's going to buy, the question is, which trim. I'm leaning towards the lowest trim (Prius Two), but I'm curious about the value of some of the features that the higher trims provide. Has anyone used the Toyota Entune stuff? How does it compare to the basic stereo that would come with the cheaper model? I'm inclined to think it's crap and the cheaper stereo will suffice, but I defer to you guys. She'd like heated seats but it's another $4k to jump up to the Prius Four model. Does anyone know if there's a way to either get heated seats added to the lowest model? Or, is the Four model worth the bump in other ways that I'm not seeing? Aside from those two things, the models look mostly the same... Is there anything I'm overlooking here?
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 19:22 |
|
|
You can get some killer deals on new Priuses, FYI. My fiance recently bought a 2014 Prius, 0% financing, $0 down, for $21,000. That's heavily dependent on your credit and your negotiating skills, of course, but it can be done. I know its out of your budget, but it's good to know for all the guys recommending Priuses ITT.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Listerine posted:I've moved the dealer from MSRP down to $22,633 for a 2015 Prius Two. I'm going to see if I can move that further, but does that sound like a terrible price? From what I've seen in some places that's below average for this car but I'm not sure if that's true. I bought one back in July for $21k flat before fees and taxes. This was in San Diego, not sure if that matters. I emailed like 10 dealers and played them off each other until I got that price.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
Listerine posted:Yeah I tried that route, I had one dealer all but tell me to go gently caress myself when I tried to get him lower than my current offer. He countered with 60 bucks less. I'm up in LA. I bought it at Mossy Toyota in SD, I wonder if I referred you to them they'd give you the same deal? I have the email of the guy who made the deal, along with the original email showing the $21k flat offer. I can try to hook you up with him. Also SD has lower sales tax than LA  PM me if you're interested in this, I'd be happy to help you out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The Equinox is probably fine, you could also look into a Nissan Rogue or Jeep Compass/Patriot. Or the new jeep renegade, though it is pricey
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Ok, so here comes some CA HOV-lane-ready chat. Any opinions on the options below would be helpful! I'm in the market for a car that can get me to work faster. I drive 32 miles roundtrip each day on the freeway and want to get a plug-in or electric car to cut down my commute time. So far, I've narrowed down a couple of options. I haven't driven any of these, but I plan to this weekend. Plug-in Options: These are gas/EV hybrids that qualify for the CA green HOV sticker. The green sticker program is running out soon (by my calculations, they'll run out of stickers in 3 months), so I'd have to buy very soon if I go with one of these. Unfortunately this rules out waiting for the 2016 Volt (due in Fall 2015), which is by far the most appealing car I've seen (50mi range on battery, plus gas engine).
EV Options: These are electric-only cars that qualify for the CA white HOV sticker. There is no limit to the number of white stickers that they can issue, so there is less urgency to purchasing one of these. They all have around 80 miles range, which is more than enough to do my commute, but would be an issue for anything outside of my regular routine.
I'm most likely going to lease this, since I'm sure in 3 years battery tech will be further along and I'd probably want to upgrade then. Given that, these are all within the same lease price range (between $250-300/month). Do you guys have any opinions on any of these cars? I've tried to do my homework on these, I just don't want to overlook anything obvious.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The key to newer Volvos is to avoid the AWD ones, because the AWD system is unreliable junk. The rest of the car isn't that bad, probably on par with Ford/GM/Hyundai. I realize this may have been a throw-away comment, but I am curious if the rest of the knowledgeable posters in this thread share this sentiment. I'm interested in Volvos primarily because of their safety, but I hadn't realized that they weren't above-average on quality and reliability. Are Volvos really not as reliable anymore? And while we're on the subject, I'm curious what you guys think about their supposed emphasis on safety. I've done some reading into this subject out of my own curiosity, though I'm probably 2 years away from needing to make a purchase decision. Looking at the XC90 IIHS safety page would certainly seem to sell the Volvo safety story. I have read articles that say that Volvo tests their cars more extensively than other manufacturers, and they also perform more tests internally that are not performed by the IIHS. While clearly this is Volvo PR spin, looking at other manufacturers safety tests, it would appear that other manufacturers seem to bomb "new" tests in the first couple years, then improve their designs as time goes on. One example of this is the Ford Explorer, which is now rated highly in most categories, but clearly does poorly when new tests are introduced. The XC90, on the other hand, has been acing the very challenging "small overlap" test since 2003, far before that test was commonplace (I don't think I saw a single other car doing that test back then, and even today many cars do not perform that test. Lookin' at you Silverado/Sierra) Objectively (and in context with cars from just a few years ago) a 2016 Ford Explorer is extremely safe and has nearly the same IIHS safety rating as the XC90, but to me the biggest question mark is: how will these cars perform when new tests are introduced? When I say new tests, I mean tests for types of crashes that have a high fatality rate and are not currently tested by the IIHS (for example, a dynamic rollover test, as shown in the Jalopnik article linked above, as opposed to the static "crush" test currently performed by the IIHS). I suspect the Volvo might do well in those tests because they already test those types of crashes, but who knows about the Ford. In 2008 you might have thought the Explorer and XC90 were comparable safety-wise since there were only 3 tests commonly used by the IIHS, but now looking back, the 2008 Explorer was clearly less safe because we now have more tests (that reflect more types of accidents). I wonder what will tests in 2020 reveal about 2016 cars? Volvo's PR angle is clearly trying to show that that they go the extra mile to make the car safer (including acing the IIHS tests and also hitting their own testing benchmarks). On the one hand, they clearly market this angle to consumers like myself who value safety. On the other hand, my armchair safety expert analysis of the IIHS tests seems to support what they're saying. Perhaps other car manufacturers "prepare for the test" rather than making their cars safer in general? Maybe it's too expensive for a volume auto maker to throw a bunch of cars in ditches like Volvo claims it does? What do you guys think? Am I drinking the cool-aid a little too much or is the Volvo safety myth real? Maybe a little bit of both?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
nm posted:Volvos were a lot safer than most for many years, but the competition has caught up. Based on IIHS results there's a good argument that subaru is the safest car maker these days and has been for almost a decade. Yeah, it is clear that certain competitors have caught up when it comes to the IIHS tests. Subaru's track record on the IIHS website is clearly impressive. I don't know much about them, I wonder if they do the same sort of testing that Volvo does with regards to crashes that aren't IIHS tested. I did some googling and this Subaru website claims they do. Glad to see other manufacturers going a little further in testing. I wonder if others do the same.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I don't agree at all with the other posters that "all cars are are safe nowadays". Yeah they don't make Pintos anymore but there's still clearly a difference between Volvo/Subaru and others. Ford's brand new Escape does Poorly in the small overlap test that Volvo has been acing since before the test was even a thing. It's kinda sad that an entry-level family car ranks poorly in *any* safety test. In fact, I think the only car that Ford sells that did "Good" in that test is the F150. Many of their cars rank "acceptable", including my brand new 2015 Fusion, while others are not even tested (I wonder why). Anything but "good" is not acceptable to me, tbh. It would appear that Ford simply does not care for the small overlap test, as a general rule. e: Kia's history is pretty horrific. Some of their cars are OK now, but holy poo poo the early 2000's Kias are death traps. Even the brand new 2015 Sportage ranks poorly in the small overlap. moon demon fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Oct 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I don't understand why anyone would want a higher ride height unless they are serious off-roaders or 90 years old and can't get into a lower car but thems the breaks. I hit curbs in my Fusion all the time and it bugs the poo poo out of me. Next vehicle is gonna be an F-250 for this reason.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
nm posted:You may wish to start paying attention to driving before upgrading your 3600lb killing machine to a 6000lb one. Maybe they shouldn't put curbs so high!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
I don't disagree with any of the advice, but regardless of driving skill or general parking awareness, in a crowded city like LA where I live, it would be nice if the car were a little more forgiving in the event I'm in a rush trying to park while 15 other cars are waiting for me to get out of their way. E: I was kidding about the f250, by the way. The air dam on the 2015 fusion is brutal, it scrapes the ground constantly, and I'm fairly good at going slow enough and at the correct angle, so it's not just my driving.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Michael Scott posted:Why are you embarrassed valeting the Focus? Why exactly do you want a new car? Your budget range is huge, I would narrow that down to what you really want, if you actually want another car. Sometimes people have to go to dinner with bigwigs who all drive fancy German cars. While I don't usually feel the need to measure dicks, it's a little embarrassing when your car gets valet'd first and 3 guys worth 10s of millions watch as you get into your 15yr old shitbox. I can empathize with the forums poster Raimondo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:Nobody cares if you valet a 15 year old shitbox. Just keep your car in good condition and you'll be fine. Your boss does, if it reflects on him/her or the company. Just sayin'. Some people have jobs where appearance matters, and unfortunately that can sometimes include your car.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
RE AudiChat: basically, I was just responding to this post:Michael Scott posted:Why are you embarrassed valeting the Focus? I'm not saying everyone should be embarrassed by valet-ing a 10yr old Focus, but sometimes this thread is an echo chamber of "if you don't buy a 2007 prius single-owner with immaculate maintenance records you are a moron". I was just trying to say that yes, sometimes people want to upgrade and there are perfectly rational reasons to do so. Not everyone has these situations, and like nm says, sometimes people in these situations DGAF. The CEO of my company drove a beater civic for years when he was worth hundreds of millions of dollars. But sometimes I go to dinners with him and people from outside the company, and sometimes people just have certain expectations of the kinds of people they fly thousands of miles to come visit (i.e. why'd I fly all the way out here if these guys aren't big shots, etc.). I realize my situation is probably an outlier, since apparently I'm the unicorn who is in these kinds of situations but don't really feel rich enough to properly keep up with the joneses, but I've been triggered so v  v
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Right but I really don't think any of your post applies to the man asking what you can get for five grand, or fifteen. Nope, like I said, I was responding to Michael Scott's response to OP, who triggered me about the tone of this thread sometimes wrt priuses (prii?) and other non-luxury cars. I totally own that I'm projecting my thoughts onto the original OP.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Higher maintenance requirements, more likelihood of expensive things breaking. By partially anecdotal/partially quality surveys/partially personal bias: if you want to buy German, get a Porsche. Speaking of German brands, anyone have any reliability opinions on the latest gen GTI? It's been out for a few years and I may be interested in either a new or CPO one. Curious if the general VW/German car concept of "don't own outside of warranty" holds true.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
New Fusions have poo poo loads of cash on the hood, so a new one is probably pretty close to the CPO price. New ones also have 0% financing, and I'm not sure if the CPO does. e: 20k miles on a 2017? Jesus, someone drove the hell outta that thing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Probably going to go pick up a 2017 GMC Sierra this weekend, taking advantage of their 0% financing deals going on right now. I'm getting roughly 20% off MSRP on one of the higher end models (SLT All Terrain, with the 6.2L engine). Is there any reason not to do this deal (aside from calling me crazy for spending almost $50k on a truck)? Any known issues with these trucks/engines? I was originally in the market for an F-150 but the deals on these GMCs are better and I'm not sure the F-150 is worth $5k+ more.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Picked up my 2017 Sierra today, Crimson Red with the 6.2L engine. This thing feels like I'm sitting on a sofa strapped to a rocket ship. Can't wait to check out some local trails I've always wanted to try. Thanks for the advice, thread.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
Anyway, back to the thread topic... I'm looking for an SUV that gets good gas mileage (30-40mpg ideally). My family consists of 2 adults and 2 65lb dogs, with potentially some kids in the near future. My budget is $25-35k. My priorities are cargo space, safety, gas mileage, and reliability. I would like to drive this next vehicle for 5-10yrs hopefully. So far I have only done internet shopping. I plan to go see these in person and test drive this weekend. Some options I have explored on the internet thus far: Ford Escape: How do they still sell a vehicle that completely fails the small overlap passenger side test in 2019? I would prefer my passengers to not die. Nissan Rogue: The Chrysler of Japan must be avoided. Toyota Rav4: Safe, good gas mileage. 2019 redesign looks sharp IMO. Pre-2019 is ugly IMO, so used option is off the table for this one. Toyota Rav4 Hybrid: Best gas mileage by far, but you pay for it. Used option off the table due to pre-2019 model being ugly. Honda CRV: Safe, good gas mileage (for a non-hybrid). Not a fan of the styling, but I will go sit in it and try it out. Mazda CX-5: Safe, slightly worse gas mileage than Rav4/CRV, but apparently more fun to drive? Looks good. Will test drive and try it out. Lexus NX 300h: Basically a Rav4 but fancy? Could be a good used option? Is there anything I am missing? Right now I am leaning towards a new Rav4 Hybrid or a used Lexus NX300h. These models get the best gas mileage, which I think will pay off in the long run (5-10yrs). Are there any other good hybrid options out there (new or used?) that have good safety ratings?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
You all make some good points! I have considered some of these points, so here's my thinking. Please tell me if this is stupid, as I've never needed this much vehicular room before so maybe you guys have lived this and know better than me! So my wife has a sedan on lease for another 1.5yrs, at which point we'll have another decision to make. The plan is for her to stay at home once the kids arrive, which means she won't have a commute (other than Doing Things around town). So, the question comes down to what 2 vehicles do we need: 1) Smaller-ish vehicle for me (which we would buy now). This would be for my 10mile work commute, trips where we don't need all 3 of kids/dogs/gear. Example use cases would be going to the dog park or beach (kids in the 2nd row, dogs in the trunk?? I know people do this with SUVs, but I don't know if they will fit?) 2) Larger vehicle for the wife (which we'll get in 1.5yrs when her lease is up). This vehicle would be able to fit kids+dogs+gear. I'm thinking a 3-row SUV like a Highlander would be good, or maybe larger? Use cases would be when the entire family needs to be in the vehicle. So I was thinking vehicle #1 could be the Rav4 Hybrid (or similar), and #2 could be like a Highlander (or larger if it turns out the Rav4 is waaaay too small?). Alternatively, we could go for a middle-ground option for vehicle #1 (the step up from the Rav4 is the Highlander I think, which we could get used in the $35k range), and if that turns out to be big enough as a family vehicle, we could get another high-mpg sedan in 1.5yrs. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
Uthor posted:Vehicle #2 is a minivan. Accept it. Not gonna argue this point! However that doesn’t really help me with the decision currently at hand.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Wagon wagon wagon wagon Interesting! I’ll see what the wife thinks about it. It’s cheaper than the other options, but no hybrid option it seems.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
Oh my god the e class wagon is amazing. Definitely going to search for one in my area. Really glad I asked you guys, you’re opening my options a ton, thank you!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2019 04:28
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Hold up there, Cowboy. I jerk off to fast wagons as much as the next guy, but I do want to point out one minor fly in the ointment of used luxury cars. Part of the depreciation is because nobody is lining up to buy a station wagon any more, but a big part of it is maintenance costs. Make sure you factor those into it. 10 cents per mile is probably a good estimate ($1,200/year if you drive a normal amount). This is probably on the high side - the majority of them will probably be far less than that. But there's always the chance of buying a piece of poo poo basket case and consumables (brakes, tires, fluid, etc.) are going to be more expensive than a regular car. How does the Volvo V60 stack up with reliability? It looks like the 2018s are super cheap because there was a redesign for 2019. I know they’re super safe, but I’m concerned about maintenance (just like the Mercedes). The RAV4 is currently my favorite but at $35k is a lot more than the $20k Volvo.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Han Nehi posted:No kids, just 3 adults. Cool, I’ll go test drive the RAV4 and CRV this weekend, and the forester if neither of those hits the spot. I bought a Rav4 a few months ago and I opted for the non-hybrid XLE trim. I'm in socal and while hybrids are in huge demand and basically sell for sticker price, the non-hybrid models have decent deals on them. The hybrid would have cost $4-5k more, which didn't seem worth it (it would have taken like 5yrs to breakeven on the extra cost). However, the hybrid does drive a bit better (higher HP, less engine noise), so if that matters feel free to test drive one. I also loved the CRV and the Forester. I just liked the Rav4's styling a little bit more.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 19:22 |
|
|
I'm guessing a 2011 Jetta probably doesn't have a turbo.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2023 23:18
|
|