Question Why to buy a new car?

[Urwumpe]

Speaking of new cars I'm trying to figure out which car I should buy. Really I'm looking for 3 things. Decent mileage, enough room to move my stuff when I change apartments and comfortable enough for 10 hour drives.

For this reason I was thinking an El Camino. Any other suggestions?

If you are looking for decent mileage, why do you plan to buy such a fossil? Even the smallest engine has already 3.0l, and has never heard about such technological advances like downsizing. 123 kW for the typical Camino would even be a high consumption of petrol, if you would have a modern European car engine.

I'd look for a Kangoo or similar, these are more than enough unless you have more stuff to transport as a 6 people LARP gang on route to a week long convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Kangoo

The last time I was inside one, it was pretty comfortable, though the high CoG makes driving a bit unusual.

My family owns a Caddy Life for that task, but you can't buy it in the USA.

 

[GregBurch]

Speaking of new cars I'm trying to figure out which car I should buy. Really I'm looking for 3 things. Decent mileage, enough room to move my stuff when I change apartments and comfortable enough for 10 hour drives.

For this reason I was thinking an El Camino. Any other suggestions?

Despite grave misgivings about it, I've been very pleased with the Chrysler PT Cruiser my wife picked out for herself. It gets decent (but not great) gas mileage, is very comfortable, and serves as our people- and stuff-hauler (since my car only has 2 seats). The execution of the way the back seat can be reconfigured and/or removed to increase hauling space is really impressive. I've carted around a LOT of big stuff in the Cruiser. It did daily hardware store duty in the aftermath of the hurricane here in Houston in September and I never ceased to be impressed by how well it served as basically a very good truck for us that can also seat five adults in comfort.

The Cruiser also has the benefit of being common as Mustangs these days, which makes it easy and inexpensive to service. If you're inclined to do a little hot-rodding, there are also many, many interesting options, since it's based on the Neon, which is a favorite of kids for hopping up these days.

 

[simonpro]

Oh my goodness ... I'm away from the forum for a while and slip by for a quick check and see this ... tsk, tsk, tsk. There are quite a few 911s I would own had we been racing for pink slips, and me with my iron (and fiberglass) junk heap ... At least my car has the motor in the right place ...

You car is comparible in terms of speed and lap time to all 2001 Porsche 911's that are in the same price range.

 

[GregBurch]

You car is comparible in terms of speed and lap time to all 2001 Porsche 911's that are in the same price range.

Well, comparing the base price I find with a quick search of base models, I get $46,805 for the 'vette and $66,500 for the Carrera. Stock, the base 911 was hauling 9.7 pounds per horsepower, while the Vette beat that at 9.2. In terms of grunt, the difference is even greater, with the 911 having 258 lb/ft of torque, while the Vette had 375. I haven't dyno'ed my car, but I would say conservatively that it's got an additional 25 ponies than it did when it was stock, which would push it down to 8.6 lbs/hp. The Vette, despite having a much bigger motor (5.7 liters vs. 3.4) also gets slightly better gas mileage.

Of course, none of this matters, since we know that any car made by Germans is better than any car made by Americans.

(Simon, I know you've got some respect for my ride, so that last bit of snark is not intended for you.)

 

[Andy44]

Unfortunately, Greg, I think the PT Cruiser falls squarely into the "chick car" category. ;-)

It's like a Miata or a late-model Ford T-Bird, which is a cool car but mainly for your girlfriend...

 

[Eagle]

I wouldn't mind a station wagon or what the new term for it is. PT Cruiser might be a little too rich for my blood and I'm not sure the Kangaroo isn't really my style.

I've been looking at those new Rabbits, they look alright. Still though, El Camino, its a muscle car and a light truck...

The other option is a light truck and a cheap motorcycle.

 

[Ghostrider]

You car is comparible in terms of speed and lap time to all 2001 Porsche 911's that are in the same price range.

My Ferrari F40 can easily outperform them, as long as the batteries are fresh and there's only one hamster riding.

Of course, none of this matters, since we know that any car made by Germans is better than any car made by Americans.

Especially the Trabant line...

 

[GregBurch]

Unfortunately, Greg, I think the PT Cruiser falls squarely into the "chick car" category. ;-)

It's like a Miata or a late-model Ford T-Bird, which is a cool car but mainly for your girlfriend...

I agree wholeheartedly -- the Cruiser has a very high chickitude quotient.

Some people have worked pretty hard to try to change this:

http://members.tripod.com/pappyspt/id5.htm
http://www.californiacruisers.com/street_stages.htm
http://custompt.com/shop1/

 

[Andy44]

I saw a Trabant in the Spy Museum in Washington, DC not too long ago. Interesting little car. Very communist-looking in a backwards technology sense, but it looks like if you could slip an air-cooled VW engine into it it would be a neat little comuter car.

Just don't tangle with anything big in an acident.


-----Post Added-----

I agree wholeheartedly -- the Cruiser has a very high chickitude quotient.

Some people have worked pretty hard to try to change this:

http://members.tripod.com/pappyspt/id5.htm
http://www.californiacruisers.com/street_stages.htm
http://custompt.com/shop1/

Those are neat, but the only one that looks cool to me is the one in the third link with the roof chopped off. It's that sloping roof that makes the PT a chick car; it makes the car look like it has a big fat butt. The front end is cool retro-looking. If you chop the top and leave the roof on so it's lower and the back end is level or lower than the front, then you have something like the old school hot rods made from 1930s cars, which have a good roof profile.

 

[Urwumpe]

Greg: I still try to find out what you had been comparing. The torque of the Porsche is lower (no wonder looking at the differences between the engines), but the official MPG values are identical (Which is not bad regarding the fact that the Corvette weights 150 kg more).

There are only two things which make the Porsche twice as expensive:
- The Porsche has a racing style suspension system, the Corvette C5 leaf springs, which is enough if you don't need to drive fast around corners.
- The Porsche logo on it (Effect of supply and demand).

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera/featuresandspecs/?gtabindex=5

I think the subjective(Yeah, stone me) Top Gear power laps quite highlight the problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Laps#Power_Laps

The Ford GT is the best US car in the list, followed by the Corvette Z06.... at positions 21&24. The successor of your likely car, the C6, was even defeated by the Porsche Cayman S... which has 60 hp less (again a good example how you can't put the performance of a car, CPU or spacecraft on a single number.)

I saw a Trabant in the Spy Museum in Washington, DC not too long ago. Interesting little car. Very communist-looking in a backwards technology sense, but it looks like if you could slip an air-cooled VW engine into it it would be a neat little comuter car.

Just don't tangle with anything big in an acident.

Well, the GDR is a good example of what can happen if you don't upgrade your car designs once in 40 years... The Trabant was a great car when it was designed (1950s, around the same period of the BMW Isetta), but when the customers finally got it, after waiting for ten years, it was badly obsolete.

There are still many of them around in Germany - they are fairly cheap, easily repaired and even upgraded with modern engines... though purists will hate you for that.

 

[Zachstar]

Eagle

Get the Yaris

The liftback version. (One that looks like a crossover)

http://www.kbb.com/kbb/ReviewsAndRatings/Toyota_Yaris.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Yaris

http://www.toyota.com/yaris/

12 Thousand at 29/36 MPG new? Well kinda hard to beat that in my view.

Especially next year when they will look at get the cars out of the expensive to store ports.

 

[GregBurch]

Greg: I still try to find out what you had been comparing. The torque of the Porsche is lower (no wonder looking at the differences between the engines), but the official MPG values are identical (Which is not bad regarding the fact that the Corvette weights 150 kg more).

There are only two things which make the Porsche twice as expensive:
- The Porsche has a racing style suspension system, the Corvette C5 leaf springs, which is enough if you don't need to drive fast around corners.
- The Porsche logo on it (Effect of supply and demand).

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera/featuresandspecs/?gtabindex=5

I think the subjective(Yeah, stone me) Top Gear power laps quite highlight the problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Laps#Power_Laps

The Ford GT is the best US car in the list, followed by the Corvette Z06.... at positions 21&24. The successor of your likely car, the C6, was even defeated by the Porsche Cayman S... which has 60 hp less (again a good example how you can't put the performance of a car, CPU or spacecraft on a single number.)

I'm comparing specs for the 2001 base models of the 911 and vette here:

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2001-porsche-911-3.htm
http://www.nctd.com/review-final.cfm?Vehicle=2001_Chevrolet_Corvette&ReviewID=3190

As for the suspension matter, well, I shall have to beg to differ with you. The leaf spring on the vette is only in the rear and it's not as if that is the only element of the suspension.

For what it's worth, both the 911 and the vette have certain elements of tradition that are considered part of their personality. For the 911, it's putting the engine in the wrong part of the car, for the vette, it's the transverse, composite leaf spring for the rear suspension.

As for handling, this is something exceedingly hard to quantify in comparable terms. I tend to look at skidpad numbers. Here one finds 0.93 reported for a 2001 base vette:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/112_9704_corvette_battle/skidpad_testing.html

The closest I've come to a comparable number is for a 2003 911, a report of 0.90:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...03_porsche_911_carrera_4s_long_term_road_test

Note the latter report is by Car and Driver, notoriously Teutonophiles and abject worshippers of the 911 for four decades.

 

[Urwumpe]

I tend to look at skidpad numbers. Here one finds 0.93 reported for a 2001 base vette:

The closest I've come to a comparable number is for a 2003 911, a report of 0.90

I think, just from looking at the concept, skidpad tests are not realistic to have any clue about the handling. A car without any dampers would be perfect on such a track. No load shifts, no bumps.

Also, the centrifugal force value depends a lot on the tires used for the test. Softer tires improve the value a lot, but do not work long in the normal world.

My personal favorite metric is sending the car for a few laps through the Green Hell, ideally with different drivers.

Note the latter report is by Car and Driver, notoriously Teutonophiles and abject worshippers of the 911 for four decades.

:werd:

 

[Andy44]

If I were going to buy a new American car that was just for fun driving right now I would get a Dodge Challenger. Those are the coolest-looking and they are pretty quick. Real old-school muscle car look.

But if I had that kind of money to spend on cars, I would be tempted to get an older genuine muscle car, and hot rod it. Cars from the 60s and early 70s are grandfathered out of many modern safety and emission rules and they are easier to mod.

 

[movieman]

If you are looking for decent mileage, why do you plan to buy such a fossil? Even the smallest engine has already 3.0l, and has never heard about such technological advances like downsizing.

My girlfriend's Buick has a 3.1 liter engine and doesn't seem to be any worse than my 1.8 liter Escort was on fuel consumption.

I would imagine that an old car like the Camino would be worse than that, but it's much cooler than a Renault and probably much cheaper to maintain; do Renault even sell cars in America anymore?

BTW, I believe the fastest Corvette was faster than the fastest 911, at least so long as you didn't have to go around any corners . I was reading an article about the fastest production cars ever made a few days ago.

 

[Andy44]

I haven't seen a Renault on the road in the US for at least 10 years, nor have I seen or heard of any dealers or advertisements.

 

[Urwumpe]

I haven't seen a Renault on the road in the US for at least 10 years, nor have I seen or heard of any dealers or advertisements.

I had seen a few in US TV productions, but I suspect that phenomena is hollywood-physics.

 

[SiberianTiger]

For me, the question is: why to buy a car at all if you can use a public transportation? If you buy one, it becomes a huge drain of your money: that's insanely costly petrol, other consumables, parts that are optional (like the alarm system), parts that break, winter tyres, the insurance, paying for parking place (where you still have to go by bus or something to get to your car - or you can just add one more to the herd of cars slowly rotting in weather near your home), paying for repair, paying for washing... In addition to that, what's the point? To spend some extra times in traffic jams twice a day? To be constantly afraid of an accident that may happen, even if you drive very accurately? Nah, that's a poor idea.

 

[Ghostrider]

Depends on your necessities. Public transportation is fine when you only have to move within the city (provided the city you live in has a good PT network) and you only need to travel during the normal service times. Moreover, in case you need to commute, the schedules might arranged in such a way you might take the better part of a day to do something which would have taken you half an hour. And if you're not, like me, working 9 to 5 but have to adjust your own schedules to fit the job, it might be next to impossible.
And I'm not even mentioning buying supplies and having to carry them on the bus...

 

[Omhra]

In Salt Lake City it takes you 2 hours to get downtown in the bus from only 15 minutes drive away... Good reason to have a car...
New? nah..
...semi new....