Smaller cars.

[Sf2]

well, I'll agree to disagree with you 

Whether its top of the line F20C's (found in the s2000) or your standard K20 - they're all tough.  I had a 98 Prelude in my early car ownership years that I absolutely sh*tkicked for 98,000 kms, and I never had a problem.

I race my s2000 on the track, so its seen its fairshare of abuse, at above 6000 rpms all day long, and it still runs very, very strong with no indications of wear.  Those blow up civic you see are from kids putting 150 shot nitrous kits with no internal work, or doing burn outs in the middle of the night.  Spirited acceleration isn't going to blow an engine.

But whatever, he's gonna buy what he likes bottom line.  How he treats it is his business.

 

[condor888000]

Yeah it is just the SI now. That is one awesome car, however, I'm sticking to sedans instead of coupes. Coupes cost too much to insure, a sedan is bad enough..... As well, the one company I kinda know something about is Honda, and the one I drive now has no ill effects from me stomping on the pedal. Which happens a lot I admit.

I was only about 10 when we had the problems with that darn GM, so I can't remember what ended up happening completly with the car other than it ended up in a junkyard. It might have gone to court, I honestly can't remember.

 

[c_canuk]

they are tough cars, don't get me wrong, I just think that the engine design has flaws that limit's it's life and repairability, case in point is my 92 CX that burns a liter of oil every tank of gas. I've looked into rebuilding it which would be easy with most other engines, but because the cylinder walls are too thin, the block will not take a rebore and honing, meaning that the only thing I can do it replace the piston rings and hope that the cylinder walls are not too bad.

though on the other hand, a used engine for a CX is only about 500 bucks for a good one, so it's not too bad... however for an engine that is less than 5 years old... eeep my nuts retract just thinking about it. This car was owned by an old lady until I picked it up 2 years ago with asperations of building a hybrid or full on electric... then I wanted just a reliable small car as gas prices shot up and the 5.4L Triton in my f150 stated looking less attractive =)

as for reving to 6000 on a regular basis, Honda engines are designed for lots of top end, you aren't really hurting a honda engine till 7500 rpms, so perhaps with that in mind it's easier to keep your foot within the engine's safe operating range. *shrug*

I love Honda's reliability and quality, but I find while you do get what you pay for, in the long run because of my ability to work on my own cars I find it more financially benificial to steer away from Honda as I find their products while good, limit my ability to repair as cheaply as other brands, though I may have to repair other brands more frequently...

it's all personal pref, and Condor if you want a honda, buy one. I fully believe there is no way to justify the extra money you pay for a brand new car vs one that is 3-4 years old, but the satisfaction you get from driving a car that no one else has, who can put a price on that 

I gotta say if I had the moola right now to buy a new car cash I'd definitly go for an SI sedan with the 5 speed or an accord with a 5 speed, I hate 2 door hatchback automatics. that or a Hyundia Tiburon Tuscani *drools*

 

[Sf2]

I think the Si only comes in a coupe - and a 6 speed

 

[c_canuk]

that sucks!

I test drove a 97 SI-R sedan 5 speed back in 2001, didn't realize they stopped making it in that body style... I guess if a wack of money falls out of the sky on me I'll have to go for the Accord =)

or maybe a Hyundia Tiburon Tuscani

 

[Sf2]

My car might be up for sale in the spring ;D

 

[condor888000]

Nice car. Think it'd be a bit much for me though!!

 

[PViddy]

might be good for off roading ? 

cheers

PV

 

[boots]

Used cars... the reason that your 170 000km car ended up in the junk yard is because thats where a car with 170 000 km on it belongs... at 150 000 km with a gas engine expect the car to need a new engine and tranny unless it was babied the entire time, which is not cost effective on a small car.

I drive a 1989 Plymouth Sundance with 279,000 km on it, and it runs quite well, thank you
Original engine, original transmission. And when my sister owned it (four years and 90,000km ago), she used to drive it around with only like half a litre of oil in it. That leaking seal has since been replaced.

My parents had a 1994 Acclaim that got up to 394,821 km before the head gasket went and they decided to just get a new car.

Your mileage may vary

 

[Lost_Warrior]

Used cars... the reason that your 170 000km car ended up in the junk yard is because thats where a car with 170 000 km on it belongs... at 150 000 km with a gas engine expect the car to need a new engine and tranny

Not necessairly.  I have a 97 Mazda Protege with 193,000km's on it.  The engine is fine. 

Also, if you're looking into a small new car, check out the Toyota Matrix.  A friend of mine has one.  It's a really well made car for it's price.

 

[brin11]

Not necessairly.  I have a 97 Mazda Protege with 193,000km's on it.  The engine is fine.   

I have a '99 with 230,000 km on it.  I've never had a better car than this Mazda.  I'm pissed they stopped making the Protege though, what were they thinking??

 

[Scarf Face]

They didn't stop, they just renamed it to Mazda 3.

 

[The Anti-Royal]

I'm on my second Corolla.  Despite my abysmal record at taking them in for scheduled maintenance, they are extremely reliable, economical to operate and a pleasure to drive.  I'll second the general comment that "you can't go wrong with a Corolla".

 

[q_1966]

The car I drive is a Burgandy 81' ford mustang with the inline 6, so its got power, fuel economy, and
alot of people wanted me to put a wing on the back, The wing that is so very popular with 5.0L mustangs, but it wasnt me, i thought it was ugly, and I didnt want it.

because I like Muscle Cars (72' and prior) and Hot Rods (32' Ford Highboy etc.) but I didnt have the money so I wanted to drive something that at least had the spirit, I could easily stuff a 302  5.0L into my car so it has more then "spirit" but it would also cost me ooodles in gas, and I dont want to wrap it around a telephone pole (especially with a V8 under the hood), because thats alot of power that somebody with an N shouldnt have
so for me its at least got the spirit. and I can handle a 200cu Inline Six. that doesnt spin the tires  (except on gravel etc.)

To me Civics and Neons do not hold that spirit, for me anyway
As the car you drive represents some of your personality, or none depending on your pre disposition and id rather it be some.

So you have to decide which car appeals to you the most, balancing out fuel efficiency, Power, Versatility, reliability, and whether or not you want to drive what everyone else is driving

for me, if I was in your situation id get a Mini, as it would turn alot more heads then just another kid in a Civic, and for other obvious reasons of fuel economy as well

 

[condor888000]

WRT the Mini. Sexy car. More expensive car. SMALL car. I work as a hockey ref, so its gotta be able to take me and 2 other guys with all equpiment to the rink, I ski, so it has to fit me with ski's, and hopefully 3 friends with snowboards. A mini can't do that. Surprisingly, a Civic SI coupe can. I've done it in the past. A Corolla can, once more, personal experience. A Mazda 3 should be able to based on the interior dimensions.

The Mini's a really nice car, my mum's boss has one, but its not the right car for me at this time. Hence why I named the cars I did, those are ones that would fit my lifestyle. And they're the ones that are all pretty much tied up in my mind. And they all cost about the same, and they all are pretty much the same on insurance. As a matter of fact, the only big difference is Toyota maintence is cheaper than the others. But it also has the smallest engine.....

 

[q_1966]

Go with the Corrola with the V6 engine and you cant go wrong

 

[Scarf Face]

Corollas don't have V6s, you're thinking of Camry, hehe. Another good choice, though a jump up in the price (and size) ladder.

 

[ChopperHead]

I dont personally like the compact cars as I find them really dull boring and lacking on performance.

well this would be a somewhat hard decision to make. Really it's personal prefrence. I would personally by the Mazda 3 as it has a bit more get up and go and I think it's the best looking out of the bunch. While I find Corollas to be the most dull and dime a dozen car out there. if you dont really care about that corollas are very reliable. My Great aunt had an 89 corolla which she drove everyday untill she died last summer. and it still runs fine. my grandmother has a 95 corolla and it still runs fine and she makes long trips in it. So Corollas are reliable. I wouldnt recomend the SRT or whatever it's called. I have heard lots of bad storys about them and plus do you really want a neon with a bigger engine and a fin on the back? cause thats all it is. 

Im not entirly sure what your main goal is here. are you looking for the most reliable? the most fuel eficent? the cheapest? like what is the main thing you want?

 

[q_1966]

do you really want a neon with a bigger engine and a fin on the back? cause thats all it is. 

I'll take the bigger engine and the fin on the back, but you can keep the neon.

 

[Unknown C/S]

If it is not too late purchase a copy of Lemon Aid by Phil Edmunston. It will give you a fairly objective look at the auto's you are comparing.
Far too many people use gut feeling or Urban myths to base a large purchase like the one you are contemplating. Remember,

Japanese cars are generally more dependable, better on gas and command a higher resale/ trade in value

N American cars are less expensive, parts are easy to come by (good thing) but depreciate quickly.

These facts should speak volumes...................

To the individual who stated that Mazda's were built on a ford platform, recheck your facts. Ford does have majority ownership of Mazda ( as well as Volvo and others) and uses the "Japanese and European" technology in Ford domestic products. For example; the Ranger is a Mazda B series (not Vice versa) Mazda components do find there way into ford products, strangely some F150 trucks have Mazda transmissions, I don't think Mazda uses Ford Parts. It all comes down to R&D cost cutting, hence the reason for the acquisitions.

Something to keep in mind: Automotive magazines that review and test cars generally are paid by the automotive companies. They also buy advertising space and give the journalist test cars. needless to say these reviews and test are generally biased. (more than once major magazines have been blacklisted for giving an unfavourable review. this translates into not being given autos for testing by the companies) Not what you might call "objective" Keep an open mind when using these publications for comparison. Remember.........The Edsel (late 50's) was the journalists car of the year as was the Chevrolet Vega ( mid 70's)  Both dismal failures......

Pick up "Lemon Aid" (new cars) and you won't be disappointed. He has been publishing this book annually for over 25 years.

Good Luck!