Diary of a car-buying decision process

[TheJANG]

Alright, this has been going on for about a month now and I've shuffled my "best choices" list countless times. It has become comical how frequently I change my thinking, though, so I thought I'd start sharing. Here's my list as it stands right now, sorted by likelihood of making a purchase if I had the money and the cars were all right in front of me, waiting to be bought (but I could only buy one) :

1) 1990/91 Toyota Supra Turbo.

Pro's: Inexpensive ($4-6.5k range). Fast. Comfortable. Fold-down rear seats for decent cargo capacity. Looks good. Lots of upgrade parts/kits available. Overbuilt - engine block can handle 2x stock horsepower reliably with retorqued head bolts. Common. Easy to get parts for. Easy to get worked on at nearly any shop. I've already owned a non-Turbo version and loved it.

Con's: Approx. 13-year-old car, mechanical issues start creeping up. I'd probably have major, MAJOR service done as soon as I got one of these, replacing most engine accessories, vacuum lines, hoses, etc., to dramatically extend the no-hassle driving period. Rear seating space is not incredibly generous. Trunk space good for a sports car, but not hard to beat.

2) 1994-97 Volvo 850 Turbo/T5.

Pro's: Good value ($7-10k in great shape). Had one & loved it to death. Luxurious interior, incredibly spacious. Carrying capacity of a small truck. Very fast for its size & form. Incredibly safe. Mechanically familiar to me.

Con's: Not all shops will service Volvos. Some repairs/service items require specialized tools.

3) 2003-04 Honda Accord EX V6 Coupe

Pro's: 240hp NA engine, 6-speed manual, 0-60 in 6.2sec, stock. Very comfortable, almost luxury-class interior. Huge trunk for a coupe. Available "winter" fitted rubber floor mat & cargo guard package. Smooth-running. Serviceable anywhere. 100,000-mile major service interval. New, so major mechanical issues very unlikely for many years.

Con's: $28k++++++. It's a Honda, and I'll make fun of myself for owning a Honda, even though it will smoke most cars on the road and is, in all fairness, a very high-quality car.

4) 1998/99 Volvo V70 T5/R

Pro's: The form & engine of the 850 Turbo's, but available with a rare 5-spd manual tranny :toocool: Newer than the 850's, so easier to find with lower mileage.

Con's: Must have been designed after Ford bought Volvo. Interior much cheaper-feeling. Costs up to 70% more than the 850's. Still needs to be serviced at Volvo-specialized shops.

5) 1993.5+ Toyota Supra Turbo

Pro's: Need I say? I mean, come on...

Con's: Price of a Volvo wagon, but really only seats 2 and has very little trunk space.

6) Subaru WRX

Pro's: Same as 5). Also tremendous aftermarket support.

Con's: They're "in" and I don't like to follow the crowd. $17k+++

[stalker2150]

I know how you feel. I can't stand Hondas.... Especially "import tuner" Civics, along with Toyota Supras for some reason both get tuned out and Fast and Furious-ified.... Accords are 'aight. Toyota Camry.. heck no.. not in my lifetime (too many fellow Paki's and Indians own those on Devon Ave back in Chicago)

But the WRX is cool. I'd get one since I don't see too many of those... unlike the Civics and Acuras *puke*

How about a late model Camero? or late model Firebird....their hoods look too cool.

Dunno about the Volvo.. too much of a "i'm filthy rich so I got one" vibe when I see one.....even though you're talking about used ones. :) But that's just me.

[mclarenf3387]

I have the same problem right now as I look for cars. I don't know how much you like BMW's but if you want to be different and still have power and the ability to haul stuff, get one of these http://www.bmwe34.net/ASP/DURegistry/RegDetail.asp?id=378et
or less money but similar http://www.bmwe34.net/ASP/DURegistry/RegDetail.asp?id=100
Or if you want a sedan http://www.kindel.com/bmw/
I'm a bit partial to BMW's but I think the handling is awsome, plus a 6-speed with a V8, who can resist. Good luck in your car buying decision.

[speedycheater]

Hands down go for the Honda. We have a 2003 Honda Accord 2-door coupe (basically the same, but not V-6. Their top 4 cylinder model, leather heated seats, etc. Also a 5spd manual, not 6 spd) and a Ford Windstar (99 I think. Piece of Crap). The accord is awsome, although I like the Civic SIR better. The quality on Honda's is amazing, and they have a super-high resale value.

[TheJANG]

Stalker: But have you driven a Supra? :evil: I definitely agree that the body kits go way off into the realm of wack. Stock is not bad on the MKIV:

http://www.mkiv.com/mkiv_gallery/mkiv_gallery/stock/large/supra23b.jpg

Or the MKIII that's my 1st choice as of this writing:

http://www.lbseggenburg.at/images/toyo2.JPG

I also understand what you mean about the Volvos! But, I really, really liked mine, regardless:

http://www.nepthys.com/volvo/

:evil:

As for F-bodies, not trying to be unpatriotic or anything, American cars are generally not my thing. American cars I do like are the Holden Monaro, er, I mean, '04 Pontiac GTO, and the higher-end Corvettes (completely impractical and out of my price universe).

mclaren: BMW makes some impressive cars, no doubt, but in the region where I live & work, they are THE thing amongst the got-rich-overnight "dot commers" :lol: I did once drive an M3 convertible though and wow, talk about sure-footed handling!

speedycheater: Definitely a very good car, no doubt, especially since they got rid of the flaky 5-spd tranny and went with the better-built 6spd. But that price... ow....

[speedycheater]

TheJANG said:

speedycheater: Definitely a very good car, no doubt, especially since they got rid of the flaky 5-spd tranny and went with the better-built 6spd. But that price... ow....

I didn't think they got rid of the 5-speeds. There was a 6-speed available when we got ours, but only on the V-6, and the V-6 uses too much gas, so we went with the 4 cylinder 5 speed. I know what your saying about the price though... That's a pretty big chunk of change.

[TheJANG]

speedycheater said:
the V-6 uses too much gas

Still 30mpg EPA rating on the freeway, and with a driver concerned about fuel economy, I'm sure the real-world city average would be in the 22mpg range. The 4-cyl with the 5-spd auto is 24/33. Not that big of a diff, except for 80hp :evil:

[rc10gt2003]

I think I would get the Subaru WRX because they arent like civics these days . You dont see that many WRX's , but the civics you see everywhere .

[madforceracer]

hondas have great mpg, and are cheap, and last very long. Go with the accord, its gonna be maintenance free for a long time (depending on how you drive it). My dad owns 03, and we already have 50k miles, and is very reliable.

[XxDRIVERxX]

1993+ Supra.. I mean comon.. whats not to like.

-Shawn

[stalker2150]

I'll be honest about my bias about all the "tuners" I see....
and so the day I do drive a Supra.....*shivers*... I'll give it a second thought. I always appreciate a beefy engine.

About the Volvo.. I know how you feel. Once you own a car, I guess you develope a liking to it..... even if it makes you look "I am filthy rich so I got one, sucka'..ahem.. I mean chap." hahaha :lol: (note to self: never buy a Civic...)

BTW about the gas mileage thing. Man I think the rating is waaay offfff. I own a 00' Dodge Neon ES. Yeah the econo car with something like a 26/32 (?) city/hwy. Guess how many miles I actually get from the 12.5 gal tank? BARELY more 200. And that's mostly highway/few stop lights. Don't even ask about city, ~180 miles back in Chicago (40% stop lights, 60% suburban roads going 40+mph) That's closer to 20m/gal of 87oct fuel than the advertised 26, BOTH for city and highway. :(

But yes the V6 would be slightly worse, but not much since we're not talking about an SUV.... My '01 Nissan XTERRA _V6_ is another story. Highway and all, it's avergaing 250 on 15 gallons regular unleaded

[Bow_3022]

i say get the subaru wrx,drop the ride hight just a bit and find some white rims.(iono if they have any).Why?so it could look like the same car in the rally casting video,so my body would be famous!(the subaru one)After i sold my rs4 i still kept the body.Still in tact and in perfect condition when jang sent it.I drove it on my car one,only once and man of mn was it nice seeing it run.I hope you'll make the real subaru jangmobile.

[OvalEvader]

Look at the newer s60's and s80's. My mom is driving one right now, and its pretty fast. It has bortastic pickup, but if your willing to go with a Accord, i think you could deal with that. Its also REEEAALLY comfortable. My moms is a standard edition, and it has features I really like (zone temp control, you can control everything from the steering wheel, optional gps, cool radio, really good stock sound system). I'm not really sure how much they cost, my moms is a company car, so it shouldn't be that expensive ;)

[ND4SPDR]

My votes are WRX and a Volvo of some sort. The WRX is the third most awesome affordable car on the street, following the Lancer Evo VIII and King STi.

As for Volvo's, I'm now quite a bit biased by brand loyalty and the sleeper image they get. Plus, I'm beginning to grow fond of the simplistic styling.

[TheJANG]

Here's a quick reply to all in 30 seconds or less. WRX's in my area are all over the place, interestingly. It's all of that Silicon Valley money trickling through the economy. Lowering the WRX not a good idea unless you change upper control arms or their mounts; otherwise you upset the roll centers & camber and actually lose performance. Accord V6 is faster than the Volvo T5's. S60 and V70 T5-R's are AWEsome oh my.

[Southern_Pride]

Ok. Hondas requires lots of maintnence. And the accord looks kinda goofy. I'd get a supra and even tho it is not on your list id look at the 2004 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. The aftermarket is building quickly for them with stroker kits already available. Just don't get a Honda.

[OvalEvader]

Southern_Pride said:
Ok. Hondas requires lots of maintnence. And the accord looks kinda goofy. I'd get a supra and even tho it is not on your list id look at the 2004 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. The aftermarket is building quickly for them with stroker kits already available. Just don't get a Honda. Mitsu had a pretty good thing going with the evo's, but they pretty much ruined it with the 'newer' ones. Plus, I heard people all over the place are getting thier warranties revoked from mitsu's spies (hiding at tracks and such). They look fun, but they have eclipes drivelines, which aren't exactly the best in terms on reliability.

[James the Great]

Get the Accord. My dad and I test drove the 4 door V6. To make the story short, he thought it was faster than his old '79 Camaro Z-28. We didnt get the Accord though. He liked the looks of the Mazda6 better, and they are pretty close in price and power.

[madrusty289]

Jang, it appears we have very similar tastes in cars. As you already know, I also want a '94-'97 850, but I also test drove a 2004 Honda Accord (V-4 automatic). It was great to drive, and has amazing features for the price. But I have to vote for the Volvo.

[TheJANG]

New order today:

1) 1990/91 Toyota Supra Turbo.
2) 1993.5+ Toyota Supra Turbo
3) 2003-04 Honda Accord EX V6 Coupe
4) 1994-97 Volvo 850 Turbo/T5.
5) Subaru WRX
6) 1998/99 Volvo V70 T5/R

No longer foreseeing any need to haul masses of R/C equipment, and seeing the following image, I've moved the latemodel Supra up, behind only its slightly older incarnation on account of price.

http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/fazalsafi/detail?.dir=/1998+Supra&.dnm=P1010005.jpg

The Volvo 850 has moved down due to the lack of need for space to haul masses of R/C equipment. The V70 has been moved to the bottom after seeing still more pictures of its Ford-like interior, allowing the WRX to move up a well-earned spot. The Accord holds steady.