Changed Again, Now Trying for a Saturn VUE (Sorry Kia & Ford)

[brewer12345]

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider

The Forester, a nice car, was more than I wanted to Pay. I am in the 20 - 25k range loaded with what I want. I priced one out at aboy $26k a little too much for a Wagon. We wanted an SUV.

Hmmm, when I plug the base Forrester into carsdirect.com, I get a price of $20,750. You could add a LOT of optional equipment for another $4k. I think you can get the "LL Bean" edition (way tarted up) for inside of $25k, too. And AFAIK, the Forrester is an SUV, not a wagon.

On the safety end of things, I agree with you about not wanting to be nannied to death, but I'd also rather not die in an accident. Give me a 3500+ pound car with airbags aplenty, ABS, stability control, good crash test records, and very low bodily injury IIHS track record. I'll skip the onstar and all that other junk.

[Sheryl]

Brewer, I'm in the same market as SWR and looked at the Forester. Let's just say the line between wagons and SUVs is getting very blurry, and it's closer than I wanted to go.

[brewer12345]

Originally Posted by Sheryl

Brewer, I'm in the same market as SWR and looked at the Forester.* * Let's just say the line between wagons and SUVs is getting very blurry, and it's closer than I wanted to go.* *

Fair enough. I'm happy with wagons, so its not much of a big deal to me.

[lets-retire]

SWR--AMEN brother.

[ShokWaveRider]

Originally Posted by JPatrick

SWR, you mentioned driving the Torrent---How was it? I've been thinking about one of those.

It drove OK, I did not like the rear cargo area, there was a lot of clutter from the oversized wheel arches.

SWR

[Texas Proud]

SWR....

The problem with your thinking is that PEOPLE DIE... you sound like the old folks who did not want to wear safety belts because it will wrinkle their clothes... who said it would be better to be thrown from a car instead of being inside... the new safety features do save lives and one day it might be YOURS..

My boss was just in a head on collision and walked away with bruises... this was with both cars going about 35 to 40. Years ago, he would have been in the hospital or dead.... so, I for one would rather have the airbags and live then the stupid 'I am a HE MAN and can take anything thrown at me' mentality.

And all it takes is ONCE (since I am sure you will say that I have X number of years with great driving etc.... well, I have more years than that but still know there is some idiot that can run a light and me not see them)...

[Andre1969]

I noticed that about the Torrent, and its Equinox clone as well. The rear wheel arches, plus the struts or whatever else there is of the suspension back there, just cuts too much into the cargo area. Oddly, the VUE is on the same platform, but is shorter overall, yet it seems to have MORE cargo area!

A buddy of mine is going to be in the market for a new vehicle in a few months, and had it narrowed down to an Equinox and an Xterra. They're almost polar opposites in their interpretation of the SUV, but those two were the finalists.

The Equinox takes a lot of flak for its antiquated pushrod Chevy 3.4, which is supposed to be coarse, crude, and underpowered. I rode with my buddy on the test drive though, and it didn't seem bad to me. One thing that bothers me though, is that the 3.4, and the older 3.1/2.8 versions, have a habit of cracking the plastic intake manifold. And supposedly it's an expensive fix. And you HAVE to get it done, otherwise you get antifreeze in the oil, a resulting medley of sludge, and a shot engine. And supposedly GM will fight you, tooth and nail on it when it comes time to pony up, trying to blame it on neglect/abuse instead of a design flaw.

At least with Nissan, when their products screw up, they tend to back them a bit better. My Mom's '99 Altima crapped its tranny at 35K miles, and was replaced, under warranty, with no fuss.

Now the VUE, while being the same design, uses different engines. In base form it uses an Ecotech 4-cyl. 2.2 I believe. Good little engine, but it might be a bit overmatched for something the size of a VUE. The V-6 is a 3.5 sourced from Honda, and is supposed to be excellent.

[brewer12345]

Originally Posted by Andre1969

Now the VUE, while being the same design, uses different engines.* In base form it uses an Ecotech 4-cyl.* 2.2 I believe.* Good little engine, but it might be a bit overmatched for something the size of a VUE.* The V-6 is a 3.5 sourced from Honda, and is supposed to be excellent.

I have the 3.5 V6 in the honda minivan and it is smooth and powerful. In a smaller/lighter car than the mammoth 4500 pound van we have, it must be quite the ride.

[ShokWaveRider]

Originally Posted by Andre1969

Now the VUE, while being the same design, uses different engines. In base form it uses an Ecotech 4-cyl. 2.2 I believe. Good little engine, but it might be a bit overmatched for something the size of a VUE. The V-6 is a 3.5 sourced from Honda, and is supposed to be excellent.

That was my thinking exactly. But when I drove it there was plenty of power in 1, 2 and 3 and 25mpg to boot. EVERY other manual I drove was grossly underpowered with the 4 cyl.

SWR

[Andre1969]

Hmmm, I just pulled up some specs on the VUE, and it's not as heavy as I thought it was. With the 4 cyl/stick combo, it looks like it starts around 3300 lb. In contrast, I think the Equinox/Torrent is around 3700-3800 lb.

GM had a test drive event nearby a few years ago, and I drove an Equinox, VUE, and Jeep Liberty (they had competing cars there to you could compare them), and I really liked the way the VUE handled on the test course. Didn't really care for the Equinox, which I thought handled like a big 70's car with bad shocks and low tire pressure, and the Liberty almost seemed like a sportscar in comparison!

I'm really having trouble warming up the the VUE's front-end styling, but I like it otherwise.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Originally Posted by Texas Proud

SWR....

The problem with your thinking is that PEOPLE DIE... you sound like the old folks who did not want to wear safety belts because it will wrinkle their clothes... who said it would be better to be thrown from a car instead of being inside... the new safety features do save lives and one day it might be YOURS..

My boss was just in a head on collision and walked away with bruises... this was with both cars going about 35 to 40. Years ago, he would have been in the hospital or dead.... so, I for one would rather have the airbags and live then the stupid 'I am a HE MAN and can take anything thrown at me' mentality.

And all it takes is ONCE (since I am sure you will say that I have X number of years with great driving etc.... well, I have more years than that but still know there is some idiot that can run a light and me not see them)...

Its okay. He probably has health insurance.

[Andre1969]

I think as long as your car has a collapsible steering column (which every car made since like 1967 has) and shoulder belts (which everything except convertibles since around 1968 has had) then for the most part you shouldn't be too bad off. Now sure, a well-built newer car with air bags, crumple zones, etc, is still going to be safer, but for the most part, older cars aren't necessarily the death traps people make them out to be. Unless you're talking Pintos! Or those little sub-2000 lb Japanese cars that used to rust away and would drop body parts if you looked at them cross-eyed.

[Texas Proud]

Yes, car as safer than a decade ago, which are safer than a decade before that etc. etc...

Today, you can run into a brick wall doing 40 to 45 MPH and might be able to walk away from it... and in most cars would survive even if you were hurt... 20 years ago you probably would be dead.

The air bags have worked so well, they found out that they had to do more work on the feet area. Seems that the car would crumple and crush or amputate the feet. Before air bags, since the person was already dead it did not matter...

[sgeeeee]

SWR,

I bought a 4 cylander VUE about 2.5 years ago. *I researched all the small wagons & SUVs at the time. *I test drove just about everything anyone here has talked about. *I didn't test the Honda CRV. *I tried, but they were in such scarce supply at the time that the Arizona dealers wanted you to put down $400 for the right to test drive the next one that came in the show room. *I could see where that deal was going. *

I've put about 65,000 miles on VUE and am happy so far. *Nothing but routine maintenance. *I get 27 mpg on the highway. *It varies from a low of about 23 (up mountains into a head wind) to about 30 (down the mountains with wind at my back). *But when I've made long trips AZ-to-IL-to-AZ, I end up averaging 27. *I don't try to keep track of my city mileage. *DW drives it more than I do around town and she tends to forget to record gas purchases and mileage. *I like the back cargo space. *I wish I could have a real spare tire. *When I bought the car I was thinking I could replace the toy spare with a real one, but there's no room. *I've learned that I prefer a tailgate to the hatch. *But there are advantages to both. *

I tend not to trust anyone else's opinion about cars (or investing). *Like unclemick often points out, there's too much testosterone involved in those things. *It seems like an awful lot of people know what car is best, that all others are worthless scrap metal, and that anyone who disagrees with them is a fool. *The trouble is, they all disagree with each other. *

Good luck. *

[ShokWaveRider]

Originally Posted by ((^+^)) SG

SWR,

I bought a 4 cylander VUE about 2.5 years ago. I researched all the small wagons & SUVs at the time. I test drove just about everything anyone here has talked about. I didn't test the Honda CRV. I tried, but they were in such scarce supply at the time that the Arizona dealers wanted you to put down $400 for the right to test drive the next one that came in the show room. I could see where that deal was going.

I've put about 65,000 miles on VUE and am happy so far. Nothing but routine maintenance. I get 27 mpg on the highway. It varies from a low of about 23 (up mountains into a head wind) to about 30 (down the mountains with wind at my back). But when I've made long trips AZ-to-IL-to-AZ, I end up averaging 27. I don't try to keep track of my city mileage. DW drives it more than I do around town and she tends to forget to record gas purchases and mileage. I like the back cargo space. I wish I could have a real spare tire. When I bought the car I was thinking I could replace the toy spare with a real one, but there's no room. I've learned that I prefer a tailgate to the hatch. But there are advantages to both.

I tend not to trust anyone else's opinion about cars (or investing). Like unclemick often points out, there's too much testosterone involved in those things. It seems like an awful lot of people know what car is best, that all others are worthless scrap metal, and that anyone who disagrees with them is a fool. The trouble is, they all disagree with each other.

Good luck.

No better opinion than that of a happy owner?

SWR

[brewer12345]

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider

No better opinion than that of a happy owner?

SWR

SWR, think that all this back and forth probably boils down to not much. Most of the vehicles you test drove would probably suit your needs, run more-or-less reliably for 200+k miles, and get at least OK mileage. Ultimately, and car is just a way to get you and your stuff from point A to Point B.

[ShokWaveRider]

Originally Posted by brewer12345

SWR, think that all this back and forth probably boils down to not much. Most of the vehicles you test drove would probably suit your needs, run more-or-less reliably for 200+k miles, and get at least OK mileage. Ultimately, and car is just a way to get you and your stuff from point A to Point B.

I am going to drive a Subaru Forester tomorrow though. While I am waiting for Saturn to find me a car that is spec'd out the way I want it.

SWR

[brewer12345]

I'm just curious: what exactly did you want on these cars that is so hard for the dealers to find?