Planning To Get A Used Car

Focus probably best compromise. In Europe would be a walk over, but I do not think that the US one is as good as ours; but is still a good car and as much "fun" as can be had from a FWD car.
 
Last edited:
The US Focus (MKI) isn't exactly known for it's reliability.
 
I have noticed signifcant improvements in gas milage on my A4 and I did the math and found that It really doesn't kill you to pay about 10 cents more a gallon. You actually come out on top when the car is ment to use the higher grade fuels. So if a car asks for it then don't think of how much more you are paying for it.
 
The day i drove a Alfa Romeo Spyder TS was the day i stopped caring about power output and realized how much more important feel and sound was. You sir are pathetic. Go eat some vegetables.

Ok. If I was getting a sports car, "feel and sound" would be important, But I'm not; I'm getting a compact econobox. I care about fuel economy, reliability and overall cheap transportation. I don't care if the Civic handles a bit better. It's down on power and 115 hp and 110 lb-ft of torque is simply not enough. I know the newer one is more powerful, but I still can't find one for a good price.
 
Or perhaps I already have and am making an informed argument

Perhaps but it would be beneficial if you had said so before hand :) It also depends on the car you drove, an RWD S series is much less fun than your car. However an S2000 or an MX-5 would be more fun. Same goes for AWD, no one will call an RS4 or an STi/Evo boring but an Escalade....
 
Ok. I did some more research and found that some Chrysler products are pretty good value.

I found 2004 Intrepids for around $7000. I read that the 2.7L engine is pretty shitty while the 3.5 is alright, but that's a lot of car for a small price.

Also, I found some 2002 Sebrings for $6000 and some 2002 Neons for $4000. All have between 100000 and 150000 kms.

I'm more attracted to the Intrepids and Neons than the Sebrings. I heard that they're pretty reliable (well, better than GM and Ford).

Should I even consider these cars, or should I stick to my plan and pay a premium (around $12000) for a 2005 Corolla?
 
Ok. I did some more research and found that some Chrysler products are pretty good value.

I found 2004 Intrepids for around $7000. I read that the 2.7L engine is pretty shitty while the 3.5 is alright, but that's a lot of car for a small price.

Also, I found some 2002 Sebrings for $6000 and some 2002 Neons for $4000. All have between 100000 and 150000 kms.

I'm more attracted to the Intrepids and Neons than the Sebrings. I heard that they're pretty reliable (well, better than GM and Ford).

Should I even consider these cars, or should I stick to my plan and pay a premium (around $12000) for a 2005 Corolla?

I think a premium for a Corolla would be worth it. It's just a better car all around, it will also be 300x more economical :)
 
The Chrysler is cheap, but not exactly good value. They're cheaper for a reason too. Buy the Chrysler and be prepared to have engine sludge problems (on the 2.7 V6 at least). Your probably better off with a Corolla or Civic. THe Corollas with the 1.8 engines are especially thrifty and quite reliable too.
 
Last edited:
Sorry to bump this thread again.

I did some more research and I am now considering a Honda Accord. More specifically, a 2002 or a 2004 (with the 4-cyl). I can get a 2002 Accord with less than 100000 km for around $9500, and a 2004 with less than 100000 km for around $12000.

I heard the 7th gen Accord (2003-2007) isn't as reliable as previous generations. The 2004 will be faster, more powerful, and better on gas, while the 2002 will have more interior space, and might be more reliable.

I can't split them on looks because they both look ok, not great, but alright.

2002:
75938.1.z.jpg

75938.2.z.jpg

75938.3.z.jpg

75938.4.z.jpg


2004:
100819.1.z.jpg

100819.3.z.jpg

128947.5.z.jpg
 
I had one of those - well a UK spec 2.0 Liter LS (it was a T reg is that a 2000 or 1999?) any how mine was an auto. Great daily drive - dealer parts and mechanics a bit costly but excellent service to make up for it, you can't go far wrong with one of those IMHO. Yours seem a bit pricey though, mine looked a bit like your top one but it was built here in Swindon I beleive. You chaps had the 2.4 litre vtec I think?
 
I had one of those - well a UK spec 2.0 Liter LS (it was a T reg is that a 2000 or 1999?) any how mine was an auto. Great daily drive - dealer parts and mechanics a bit costly but excellent service to make up for it, you can't go far wrong with one of those IMHO. Yours seem a bit pricey though, mine looked a bit like your top one but it was built here in Swindon I beleive. You chaps had the 2.4 litre vtec I think?

Don't forget that the UK/Europe Accord is smaller than the US one; our Acura TSX is your Accord. That said, even the bigger US Accord is surprisingly fun to drive on US roads. Its handling limits are lower than, say, an actual sports car, but it's well matched to what actual driving is like, so you don't feel egged on by the car to push it hard. It's good at what it does, and knows its place. That said, the interior is a bit of a letdown. My dad has an '02 4-cyl Accord, and the steering wheel covering is starting to flake off. The CD player is also dead; everyone I know with a Honda has had to replace the factory stereo due to some sort of component failure. Reliability is spot-on. Recommended if you want practical daily transportation that won't completely bore the pants off you. The later-generation Accord just looks corpulent.
 
We had a US accord as a hire car in the states a few years ago. Big car and pretty comfortable but not the most economical (by european standards) and the auto was horrible, never seemed to decide on a gear on more demanding roads.
 
Yeah, if you want one of those look for an EX model with a stick. The automatics tend to be the problem area on the later Accords.
 
Top