| Author |
Message |
Greg Dunn
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:13 am Post subject:
Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 3:14 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
What you will get in reply is personal opinions of the brand the
responder personally owns or the one he once owned not facts.
I'm in the business for nearly fifty years. I can tell you in
reference to new vehicles corporate fleet buyers look at that
same type of information. They buy more Ford brand vehicles than
any other brand because years of record prove them to be the most
overall cost effect in terms of the cost of acquisition,
insurance, maintenance, parts, repair and replacement costs.
Having said that I would point out from what we see in our
business every manufacture is building good vehicle today, the
only real difference is style and price.
JD Powers bear that out as well. Their report titled "Problems
reported per 100 new vehicles" ranges from the best one at 1.1
problem per 100 vehicles to 1.5 for the worst vehicle. The
average for the industry is 1.2 problem per 100 new vehicles
sold.
I would suggest forget what other tell you and go drive and get a
total 'drive home' price for all of those that meet you needs and
buy the one that best suits your budget.
mike hunt
Greg Dunn wrote:
| Quote: |
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C. Reeves
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:12 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:pJ-dnd55l8jbEF3cRVn-jw@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
|
www.edmunds.com does a total cost of ownership calculation. I don't know
how accurate it is though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 5:41 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:13:17 -0800, "Greg Dunn"
<discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
|
The less expensive cars to run/own are the smaller one's (use less gas
and cost less to insure), and among those, the toyota corolla & honda
civic are among the most reliable around.
As far as roll-overs, they are minimized by both these models by
simply being built low to the ground (having a low center of gravity
compared to SUV's or trucks).
Small cars don't do really well if smashed into bigger cars, so the
simple answer is to be sure you get a car with air bags, and, more
importantly, the driver have good driving habits, always.
* Wear the seat belt *, and NEVER drive impaired or distracted by cell
phone calls, reading maps, beautiful members of the opposite sex,
etc..
It's always far better to avoid the accident, than to plan on
something like airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, etc., to save your
life.
Dave
Go Metric! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob G.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:36 pm Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:13:17 -0800, "Greg Dunn"
<discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
==================================
|
Honestly.... Most new vehicles are going to be virtually trouble
free IF you have the regular maintenance done ...
And if you drive normally roll over really should not be of any
concern...
One of the biggest Cost of ownership IMHO is depreciation...which can
be decreased in a few ways....(Buying used...is a sure fire way to
cut down on depreciation) another way is to keep the damn car a lot
longer then 5 years...
Gasoline, insurance, State Plate & registration fees & saftey or
emission inspection fees all have to be factored in... along with
replacement costs of tires which are going to be needed every so often
no matter what...
Sorry I can not offer any specific suggestions ...
Bob |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greg Dunn
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:13 am Post subject:
Edmund's TCO |
|
|
Thanks, James - that's handy!
Greg
"James C. Reeves" <jcnospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:qZWdnUAlWbm-WF3cRVn-3Q@comcast.com...
| Quote: |
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:pJ-dnd55l8jbEF3cRVn-jw@comcast.com...
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership
over, let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
www.edmunds.com does a total cost of ownership calculation. I don't know
how accurate it is though.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greg Dunn
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:18 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
Thanks, Mike.
I can the Edmund's Total Cost of Ownership suggested by James Reeves. The
Fords did come in lower than Toyotas and Hondas. I'm just reluctant to buy
anything other than a Honda or Toyota because of decades of bad experience
with everything else. Right now I have a 2001 Honda Odyssey and a 1998
Honda PC800 motorcycle, and neither of them ever do anything except run
perfectly. I know the American makes have gotten a lot better, but I'm
still gunshy.
Greg
<MajorDomo@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:41C0B74C.EC323913@mailcity.com...
| Quote: | What you will get in reply is personal opinions of the brand the
responder personally owns or the one he once owned not facts.
I'm in the business for nearly fifty years. I can tell you in
reference to new vehicles corporate fleet buyers look at that
same type of information. They buy more Ford brand vehicles than
any other brand because years of record prove them to be the most
overall cost effect in terms of the cost of acquisition,
insurance, maintenance, parts, repair and replacement costs.
Having said that I would point out from what we see in our
business every manufacture is building good vehicle today, the
only real difference is style and price.
JD Powers bear that out as well. Their report titled "Problems
reported per 100 new vehicles" ranges from the best one at 1.1
problem per 100 vehicles to 1.5 for the worst vehicle. The
average for the industry is 1.2 problem per 100 new vehicles
sold.
I would suggest forget what other tell you and go drive and get a
total 'drive home' price for all of those that meet you needs and
buy the one that best suits your budget.
mike hunt
Greg Dunn wrote:
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership
over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rick Brandt
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:27 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:yeudnaj-w439u1_cRVn-3Q@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Thanks, Mike.
I can the Edmund's Total Cost of Ownership suggested by James Reeves. The
Fords did come in lower than Toyotas and Hondas. I'm just reluctant to buy
anything other than a Honda or Toyota because of decades of bad experience
with everything else. Right now I have a 2001 Honda Odyssey and a 1998 Honda
PC800 motorcycle, and neither of them ever do anything except run perfectly.
I know the American makes have gotten a lot better, but I'm still gunshy.
Greg
|
Well then it seems you already have your answer. :-)
You either go with TCO from a source that has the ability to adequately research
it or you go with your gut. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C. Reeves
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: Edmund's TCO |
|
|
You're welcome....
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:ce2dnZniA_uXuF_cRVn-sA@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Thanks, James - that's handy!
Greg
"James C. Reeves" <jcnospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:qZWdnUAlWbm-WF3cRVn-3Q@comcast.com...
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:pJ-dnd55l8jbEF3cRVn-jw@comcast.com...
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular
required maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership
over, let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
www.edmunds.com does a total cost of ownership calculation. I don't know
how accurate it is though.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:03 pm Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
I have not had a bad experience with nay of my vehicles in many
years, not matter who built them.
I owned a dozen or more Honda bikes, from small up to Gold Wings,
till I switched to Harleys. None of those ever did anything
except run perfectly, but the Harleys appreciated in the two
years that I keep my bikes, the Hondas on the other hand lost
fifty percent of their value in two years. ;)
mike hunt
Greg Dunn wrote:
| Quote: |
Thanks, Mike.
I can the Edmund's Total Cost of Ownership suggested by James Reeves. The
Fords did come in lower than Toyotas and Hondas. I'm just reluctant to buy
anything other than a Honda or Toyota because of decades of bad experience
with everything else. Right now I have a 2001 Honda Odyssey and a 1998
Honda PC800 motorcycle, and neither of them ever do anything except run
perfectly. I know the American makes have gotten a lot better, but I'm
still gunshy.
Greg
MajorDomo@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:41C0B74C.EC323913@mailcity.com...
What you will get in reply is personal opinions of the brand the
responder personally owns or the one he once owned not facts.
I'm in the business for nearly fifty years. I can tell you in
reference to new vehicles corporate fleet buyers look at that
same type of information. They buy more Ford brand vehicles than
any other brand because years of record prove them to be the most
overall cost effect in terms of the cost of acquisition,
insurance, maintenance, parts, repair and replacement costs.
Having said that I would point out from what we see in our
business every manufacture is building good vehicle today, the
only real difference is style and price.
JD Powers bear that out as well. Their report titled "Problems
reported per 100 new vehicles" ranges from the best one at 1.1
problem per 100 vehicles to 1.5 for the worst vehicle. The
average for the industry is 1.2 problem per 100 new vehicles
sold.
I would suggest forget what other tell you and go drive and get a
total 'drive home' price for all of those that meet you needs and
buy the one that best suits your budget.
mike hunt
Greg Dunn wrote:
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership
over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hugo Drax
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 18, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
"Greg Dunn" <discussion@gregdunn.com> wrote in message
news:pJ-dnd55l8jbEF3cRVn-jw@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs
or other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
|
Any Japanese brand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hugo Drax
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
<MajorDomo@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:41C0B74C.EC323913@mailcity.com...
| Quote: | What you will get in reply is personal opinions of the brand the
responder personally owns or the one he once owned not facts.
I'm in the business for nearly fifty years. I can tell you in
reference to new vehicles corporate fleet buyers look at that
same type of information. They buy more Ford brand vehicles than
any other brand because years of record prove them to be the most
overall cost effect in terms of the cost of acquisition,
insurance, maintenance, parts, repair and replacement costs.
Having said that I would point out from what we see in our
business every manufacture is building good vehicle today, the
only real difference is style and price.
|
Really I have experienced FORD and GM fleets. Lots of problems and quickly.
Check engine lights, AC not working etc.. Maybe the pickups are better but
the minivans are atrocious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tallgrass
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Feb 03, 2005 7:49 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
Greg Dunn wrote:
| Quote: | Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular required
maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to roll-overs or
other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of ownership over,
let's say, a horizon of the next five years.
What vehicle would you recommend?
|
Kia Sorento |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:08 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
The Ford Crown Victoria, or the Mercury Grand Marquis. There is
nothing on the market today that even comes close to them in
reliability, durability and safety at anywhere near what it costs
of drive one home brand new, nothing period.
Room for six and their luggage, modern fuel efficient high
powered SEMFI OHC V8 that uses regular fuel, with TC and LS axle
that will go anywhere you want it to go, low insurance rates,
available at any level of equipment you could want, a lot of it
standard equipment. All that for as much as $10,000 less than
many competitors smaller FWD V6 cars that get around the same
fuel mileage and may use premium.
Drive one and get a drive home price before you decide to buy any
other vehicle, including other Ford models, WBMA.
If you are interested in one that is fully loaded, pay particular
attention to the Mercury Grand Marquis GS. It can actually be
driven home for less than a Crown Vic similarly equipped.
mike hunt
Greg Dunn wrote:
Suppose a person's criteria for selecting a car to buy were only
these:
1. Must be reliable, requiring minimal repair so long as regular
required maintenance is performed
2. Must be presentable (but need not impress)
3. Must be reasonably safe (good crash-proofing, not given to
roll-overs or other untoward behavior).
Beyond those requirements, the goal is to minimize cost of
ownership over, let's say, a horizon of the next five years. What
vehicle would you recommend? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C. Reeves
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 7:48 am Post subject:
Re: Best Bang for Buck Buy? |
|
|
I have to agree with you. I know several people with Crown Vics and Marquis
with 200K+ miles on them. Hard to beat that!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in