 | |
Re: Fusion vs Camry and Accord - the Ford Challenge
Honda/Acura Vehicles Discussion group for Honda/Acura vehicles. (alt.autos.honda)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Fusion vs Camry and Accord - the Ford Challenge -
05-07-2007
, 12:01 PM
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:gtadnbJJwOxGR6DbnZ2dnUVZ_sSmnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... When one buys a used car they have no idea how that car was used or abused, or whether it was properly maintained, or not. It make no difference what brand name is on the hood, On that we differ - not about the brand, but the inability to determine how the car has been maintained or treated. I avoid buying used cars under 80K miles because at 50K miles it *is* hard to tell how it has lived, but at 100K it is hard to hide. If there are no known "killer" issues with that m/m/y and it passes five minutes of examination the chances of getting at least 100K miles more service out of a 100K mile car are better than getting 100K miles more out of a 50K car - at least, that's my experience. The only 100K+ car I've ever bought that didn't make it another 100K in good style was a Nissan 300ZX that I lusted after so much I ignored the warning of traces of rust in the radiator, which is a deal-breaker. The make, model and year (and power train or other options within that model and year) are huge factors in what a buyer can expect out of a car. Realistically, make is no more important than model or year in that formula. Mike |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
The Fusion was a redesigned Mazda 6, and it was less safe than the Mazda 6 in crash tests. I'm staying away from Fords until they improve for sure. |
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
On May 5, 2:02 pm, "Wade" <nugr*... (AT) excite (DOT) com> wrote: Whatever. I'm going by personal experience. We've owned lots of other cars. The only foreign car that we had a major problem with was an old Audi Fox. 4 Acura's Only 1 problem with the Legend after a major accident. Insurance company insisted on using aftermarket parts for the repair. 1 Mercedes airbag problem which Mercedes fixed for free even though the car was out of warranty. 2 Mazda's no problems 3 Volvos no problems 6 Hondas no problems 1 Isuzu no problems 1 Mitsubishi no problems 1 Nissan no problems The only reason any of theses cars were traded in was because we wanted to. All, except for the 2 Volvos had more miles than any of the American cars we had. "Jeff" <n... (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:5n3%h.2237$Q96.481 (AT) trnddc04 (DOT) .. "Wade" <nugr*... (AT) excite (DOT) com> wrote in message news:YIqdnaG7s-5JIqHbnZ2dnUVZ_oKnnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... Let's see if I can remember them all Jeep Cherokee - The worst. My uncle had a Jeep Cherokee that went over 200,000 mi without problems or even replacing the brake pads. It was kind of cold in the winter though. Needed a new thermostat. This thing was in the shop ever few months. brake, transmission and axel problems. She went over some train tracks once, not hard mind you and the steering wheel became off center. The steering wheel always look like she was turning left even when she was driving straight. This happened twice. Ford Escape - great for the first 35K, then got noisy and the transmission started slipping. Dodge Grand Caravan - was okay Ford Windstar knobs and parts started falling off within the first few thousand miles. We only had this car for about 20K, she then changed jobs. Pontiac Grand Prix was okay, then developed a a clicking in the steering wheel. The steering wasn't smooth, you could feel while turning. Chevrolet Equinox- only had this one for 8K, job change again. Was fairly nice vehicle. Ride was way too soft though, felt like we were floating. Likewise, you're going to find people who have had excellent service from these vehicles and others who didn't. Likewise for the Toyotas and Hondas. Jeff "Jeff" <n... (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:T%1%h.176$HR1.174 (AT) trnddc01 (DOT) .. "Wade" <nugr*... (AT) excite (DOT) com> wrote in message news:bvadnezc3JJZBaHbnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... My problem with American cars is not with design. Some of them look quite nice. It's the long term quality of the car. My wife gets a new company car every couple of years. The are usually great for the 30K miles or so. Around 35 to 40K they start have little issues, they seem to get louder and the ride is a noticeably rougher. On a couple of the vehicles you could feel the transmission start to slip. By the time she turns it in at around 60K miles, we can't wait to get rid of it. I have a '97 Contour with over 140k mi on it. It still runs and handles great. Great long-term quality. I have heard similar things about other Fords, Toyotas, Chevys, Hondas, etc. They all make good cars that last a long time. Just what models did your wife get? Jeff- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I have had 2 Accords; one `86 with 250,000 k on it and a `92 that had 315,000 k on it when it was totaled . the `86 was poor on brakes .But it was a GOOD car, travelled Montana when they had a prima facie speed limit 110 MPH all the way across. No problems at all and it was a 1990 CC x4 if I remember correctly. The `92 was just regular maintenance .A good solid reliable car I have owned many cars in my life including Studebaker and Nash, Ford ,GM and Chrysler .and I will have to say the two Hondas were the most trouble free Japanese manufactured cars I have EVER owned.(made in Japan) Both cars were bought used Ed |
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
You are kidding, right? I'll bet you were never in the used car business, if that is what you believe. Go to a use car lot or dealership and look at some of the cars, as they are traded, then go back a week or so later and look at the same car when it is for sale on the used car lot. When one is looking at the high mileage cars you seem to prefer, what differance can it make? Any average annual mileage car in ten years is going to have at least 150K to 175K, on the clock. Any car that will last the best part of a year is worth the selling price of any car ten years old with over 150K on the clock. If one is deciding which 150K car to buy the one with the set of new tires would likely be the best choice. Why would anybody repair a vehicle with 150K or more on the clock when the cost of the repair will pay half the cost of another 150K vehicle?. LOL mike |
repairs when you buy it or soon thereafter.
Quote:
| "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull (AT) cybertrails (DOT) com> wrote in message news:0-SdnWO8L4Qnf6DbnZ2dnUVZ_syunZ2d (AT) sedona (DOT) net... "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:gtadnbJJwOxGR6DbnZ2dnUVZ_sSmnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... When one buys a used car they have no idea how that car was used or abused, or whether it was properly maintained, or not. It make no difference what brand name is on the hood, On that we differ - not about the brand, but the inability to determine how the car has been maintained or treated. I avoid buying used cars under 80K miles because at 50K miles it *is* hard to tell how it has lived, but at 100K it is hard to hide. If there are no known "killer" issues with that m/m/y and it passes five minutes of examination the chances of getting at least 100K miles more service out of a 100K mile car are better than getting 100K miles more out of a 50K car - at least, that's my experience. The only 100K+ car I've ever bought that didn't make it another 100K in good style was a Nissan 300ZX that I lusted after so much I ignored the warning of traces of rust in the radiator, which is a deal-breaker. The make, model and year (and power train or other options within that model and year) are huge factors in what a buyer can expect out of a car. Realistically, make is no more important than model or year in that formula. Mike |
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
You are kidding, right? I'll bet you were never in the used car business, if that is what you believe. Go to a use car lot or dealership and look at some of the cars, as they are traded, then go back a week or so later and look at the same car when it is for sale on the used car lot. When one is looking at the high mileage cars you seem to prefer, what differance can it make? Any average annual mileage car in ten years is going to have at least 150K to 175K, on the clock. Any car that will last the best part of a year is worth the selling price of any car ten years old with over 150K on the clock. If one is deciding which 150K car to buy the one with the set of new tires would likely be the best choice. Why would anybody repair a vehicle with 150K or more on the clock when the cost of the repair will pay half the cost of another 150K vehicle?. LOL mike |
mileage cars. If you are facing repairs that cost half the value of the car
you chose the car poorly indeed!
A badly treated car, or even a well treated car that has serious problems,
is easy to root out by the time it has 100K on the clock. The asking price
for a winner and for a loser is usually about the same, while the actual
value as a personal vehicle can be thousands of dollars difference. (And
never ever buy from a used car lot; they always want more than any car they
have is worth.) I do my own maintenance and repairs, so older cars are a big
bargain for me. That's why I would repair a good 150K vehicle for a tiny
fraction of the price of another 150K mile vehicle; it still has at least
100K miles left in it. When I am spending more than about $500 per year for
maintenance and repair on a regular basis it's time to move on. By that time
I usually have more than ten years in the car, I have spent less than I
would have on a new car, lost less in depreciation and paid less for
insurance and license fees.
A new car is always a gamble - nobody on Earth has reliability data on a
2007 anything, and there is no way to tell if you are getting a lemon - it
just happens. The first owner takes the biggest risks. Buy what you wish, as
long as I can buy pre-proven cars. I don't care how badly naive purchasers
have done. It has worked *very* well for me.
Mike
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
A new car is always a gamble - nobody on Earth has reliability data on a 2007 anything, and there is no way to tell if you are getting a lemon - it just happens. The first owner takes the biggest risks. Buy what you wish, as long as I can buy pre-proven cars. I don't care how badly naive purchasers have done. It has worked *very* well for me. |
may be new brakes in the cars near future and the bearings might be bared
soon.
Everything is a gamble, even old cars.
Jeff
Quote:
|
Mike |
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull (AT) cybertrails (DOT) com> wrote in message news:vZSdnernWaN4IaLbnZ2dnUVZ_silnZ2d (AT) sedona (DOT) net... ... A new car is always a gamble - nobody on Earth has reliability data on a 2007 anything, and there is no way to tell if you are getting a lemon - it just happens. The first owner takes the biggest risks. Buy what you wish, as long as I can buy pre-proven cars. I don't care how badly naive purchasers have done. It has worked *very* well for me. An old car is a gamble, too. The transmission might be about to break, there may be new brakes in the cars near future and the bearings might be bared soon. Everything is a gamble, even old cars. That isn't a problem if you do your homework and look the car over right. If |
unit over carefully and reduce the offer by enough it isn't a problem. I
will already have checked on the price and availability of a guaranteed
tranny from my favorite wrecking yard and figured that into the offering
price dependent on the likelihood of failure. For bulletproof transmissions
like the AW-70 I only need to look for leaks and clean fluid. If there is
going to be a common showstopper problem the car isn't on my list to start
with.
Brakes? Except cars with such pervasive ABS problems that wrecking yards
aren't likely to have good replacement parts (homework, remember?) I can
afford to put $100 into brakes. New cars will need brakes sometime, too. A
peek at the front disks tells most of the story and takes a few seconds; if
they are very worn my offer goes down by $100. Usually the seller is happy
to get off so cheap for repairs the car needs one way or another. I'm
already under there to look at the CV joint boots and the undercarriage
anyway.
For every seller there is a buyer. For good cars I can be a buyer, for junk
cars there are naive or desperate buyers and wrecking yards.
Mike
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:j4P%h.1861$py5.23 (AT) trnddc06 (DOT) .. "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull (AT) cybertrails (DOT) com> wrote in message news:vZSdnernWaN4IaLbnZ2dnUVZ_silnZ2d (AT) sedona (DOT) net... ... A new car is always a gamble - nobody on Earth has reliability data on a 2007 anything, and there is no way to tell if you are getting a lemon - it just happens. The first owner takes the biggest risks. Buy what you wish, as long as I can buy pre-proven cars. I don't care how badly naive purchasers have done. It has worked *very* well for me. An old car is a gamble, too. The transmission might be about to break, there may be new brakes in the cars near future and the bearings might be bared soon. Everything is a gamble, even old cars. That isn't a problem if you do your homework and look the car over right. If transmission problems are fairly common, like they are in Hondas, look the unit over carefully and reduce the offer by enough it isn't a problem. I will already have checked on the price and availability of a guaranteed tranny from my favorite wrecking yard and figured that into the offering price dependent on the likelihood of failure. For bulletproof transmissions like the AW-70 I only need to look for leaks and clean fluid. If there is going to be a common showstopper problem the car isn't on my list to start with. Brakes? Except cars with such pervasive ABS problems that wrecking yards aren't likely to have good replacement parts (homework, remember?) I can afford to put $100 into brakes. New cars will need brakes sometime, too. A peek at the front disks tells most of the story and takes a few seconds; if they are very worn my offer goes down by $100. Usually the seller is happy to get off so cheap for repairs the car needs one way or another. I'm already under there to look at the CV joint boots and the undercarriage anyway. For every seller there is a buyer. For good cars I can be a buyer, for junk cars there are naive or desperate buyers and wrecking yards. |
If you buy a brand new car, you still have a warranty. And you cam buy a
certified used car which comes with a warranty, too, for a huge price. (In
the NY Times yesterday, there was a certified used car that was bought by a
buyer who later noticed that the paint on the front half and back half of
the car didn't match. The mechanic the buyer took the car to noticed the
welds in the frame - the car's halves started out in different cars. The
halves even had different VINs. The cars they started out on crashed. The
good halves were welded together.)
No matter what, you're taking a gamble. You might get the one bad AX80
transmission or an engine that is about to blow up.
With knowledge, you put the odds on your side. But they are still odds.
Jeff
Quote:
|
Mike |
#19
| |||
| |||
|
| With knowledge, you put the odds on your side. But they are still odds. Jeff |
always reduces the odds. With warranty, whether you pay above the table or
it is rolled into the car's price, you lose every time. Warranties only
redistribute your loss. If you don't use it, the money is simply gone. If
you do use it, you've suffered the loss you were hedging against.
Personally, I despise warranties. I have learned there are few mechanics who
can troubleshoot as well as I can, and under warranty the choice of mechanic
is pot luck. The dealer drives the bus and the customer has to ride. I've
gone through that with my new F350 SD work truck and it really bites.
Mike
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mon, 7 May 2007 13:01:49 -0400, "Mike Hunter" mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote: You are kidding, right? I'll bet you were never in the used car business, if that is what you believe. Go to a use car lot or dealership and look at some of the cars, as they are traded, then go back a week or so later and look at the same car when it is for sale on the used car lot. When one is looking at the high mileage cars you seem to prefer, what differance can it make? Any average annual mileage car in ten years is going to have at least 150K to 175K, on the clock. Any car that will last the best part of a year is worth the selling price of any car ten years old with over 150K on the clock. If one is deciding which 150K car to buy the one with the set of new tires would likely be the best choice. Why would anybody repair a vehicle with 150K or more on the clock when the cost of the repair will pay half the cost of another 150K vehicle?. LOL mike Because the "new" 150K vehicle is likely to need just as much in repairs when you buy it or soon thereafter. "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull (AT) cybertrails (DOT) com> wrote in message news:0-SdnWO8L4Qnf6DbnZ2dnUVZ_syunZ2d (AT) sedona (DOT) net... "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:gtadnbJJwOxGR6DbnZ2dnUVZ_sSmnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... When one buys a used car they have no idea how that car was used or abused, or whether it was properly maintained, or not. It make no difference what brand name is on the hood, On that we differ - not about the brand, but the inability to determine how the car has been maintained or treated. I avoid buying used cars under 80K miles because at 50K miles it *is* hard to tell how it has lived, but at 100K it is hard to hide. If there are no known "killer" issues with that m/m/y and it passes five minutes of examination the chances of getting at least 100K miles more service out of a 100K mile car are better than getting 100K miles more out of a 50K car - at least, that's my experience. The only 100K+ car I've ever bought that didn't make it another 100K in good style was a Nissan 300ZX that I lusted after so much I ignored the warning of traces of rust in the radiator, which is a deal-breaker. The make, model and year (and power train or other options within that model and year) are huge factors in what a buyer can expect out of a car. Realistically, make is no more important than model or year in that formula. Mike |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.