|
Throatwarbler posted:What is it about these vehicles that attracts you? To me they are the epitome of trying too hard. They're not particularly fast or sporty, will be much less reliable and costly to service, and no one is going to think you are some high roller because you drive a GLK. I'd tend to agree, though I think the Q5 is definitely a very nice looking SUV. I've never liked the GLK as far as looks go. For my money, if I wanted a entry level luxury SUV, I'd look at the Infiniti FX37. It's going to be considerably more reliable than either of the other vehicles you're looking at and can be had for less money.
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2013 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
Faded Sloth posted:Why is there such a stigma against buying used? Everyone I've talked to about buying a used car have told me I'd be better off buying a new car after I graduate from college because apparently every used car is a POS or I'm gonna get ripped off. They say things like I'll be paying a poo poo ton for insurance and maintaining the car yet somehow buying new works out much cheaper. Doesn't insurance cost more for a brand new car, though? As noted above, most people know poo poo all about buying cars. That being said there is a big difference buying lightly used vs buying very used, which is what a $3k car would be. I personally am I big proponent in the buying lightly used. You can snag cars after they hit their depreciation for a sizeable amount off what it would be new for not that much time off of its useable lifespan. The trouble with buying a $3k car is that you're likely getting something toward the end of its lifepan and the probability for something expensive to go wrong goes way up. Some people get lucky and buy a cheap car and have it last several years with little work and some people have the transmission blow after a couple months. It's a gamble. Personally, I'd look at something reasonable that is lightly used. You can get a lot of car for around $15k nowadays if you shop around. As for insurance, insurance is way more relative to your driving record and the car itself than it is used vs new. Things like safety features and engine size play a much bigger role.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:It is entirely car specific. Yeah, it's highly model specific and most performance models are ones that break that trend like STi's, MS3's, etc. For some reason some of the cheaper economy cars are also falling into the trend as well. More generic sedans are still experiencing healthy drops though. It also depends on how lightly used it is. Because cars are lasting longer, cars under 10k miles might not have the drops they used to but a 30k mile car might be 30% less than a new one. I paid $24.5k for an EX35 with 35k on the clock a couple years ago and the sticker for it new was $38k.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The RDX gets terrible fuel economy, the rear seats only fold down like half way, it's kind of not "worth it" in general. The new one with the V6 engine is supposed to be much better, at least in terms of drivetrain/FE. Yeah, neither of them get great fuel economy. I've owned both an RDX and the slightly smaller EX35 and they both got maybe 21-22mpg combined. That being said, I liked my RDX a lot despite it. It's reasonably peppy given it's size and I thought the interior quality was pretty nice for the money, especially used. As for the FX35, the ones prior to 2008 look really dated interior-wise for me. I test drove one when I was looking for my RDX and liked the way it drove. I ended up getting an EX35 instead for my next vehicle because they were a lot cheaper on the used market and I didn't really need the extra cargo room. They're probably shorter than you'd want though. Definitely five the Honda a look. One of my co-workers has one and likes it a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Also, is navigation really even a feature? Do you have a cellphone from 2002 or something? Don't upsell yourself 2 thousand bucks on something your phone already does. And 120K ain't that low. I've had navigation in my last three cars and I've gotten so used to having it that I'd really miss it if I didn't. I've gotten it because it was part of the trim package I wanted each time though. More than actual navigation, it's nice being able to just have an overhead view of where I on a map right in my dash rather than having to get out my phone to do. That being said, it's a nav system from 2006, that I'm betting has never been updated so it's likely loaded with all sorts of roads that are incorrect or missing roads that are now upwards of seven years old.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
IRQ posted:http://www.amazon.com/GreatShield-L...mount+galaxy+s4 I agree. I tend to avoid mounts and things like that because they're basically like putting up a sign that says you might have steal-able electronics in the car. That one because it's a dash mount is ok, the ones that are windshield, you can see where someone had a mount up even if you take it down. I'm a little paranoid over that stuff because I had my car broken into a while back because of a cassette adapter and had my MP3 player stolen.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 00:52
|
|