60 new of 63 responses total.
I've got two of them. '83 Nissan pick-up truck. 156,000 miles. I paid $600 for it almost two years ago, and put 15,000 miles on it before I bought another car. It's still running ok, and I keep it around because it's occasionally useful to be able to move big stuff, but after I started commuting from Ann Arbor to Livonia every day I had some time consuming problems with it and it was making me a little nervous. Also, it's not air conditioned. Still, at 156,000 miles and almost 15 years old, I'm amazed that it's doing anywhere near as well as it is. Pro: Cheap. Big. Lots of cargo space. I never have to worry about it getting stolen. Con: No air conditioning No power steering No back seat Really noisy at high speeds A bit too old at this point for me to feel comfortable depending on it. I've also got a '94 Saturn SC2, that I bought at the end of April. I've already driven it almost 10,000 miles, and have been quite happy about it. My only real complaint is an occasional squeaking noise that it will only do when the mechanic isn't around, but I'm assuming that's something specific to my car (and fixable if I can get it to do it for the mechanic). Pro: Comfortable even on long drives Handles quite well. Good gas milage (about 30 mpg for my usual driving, 40 mpg for pure highway trips). Fairly quiet at freeway speeds Quite reliable so far. Good accelleration. Con: Back seat is tiny (but apparrently bigger on newer models). Cup holders only in back seat (I'm assuming because of the former owners' weird choice of option packages). I keep finding myself in places where I only have the car, and wanting to carry something that would fit in the truck but won't in the car.
'90 Mazda 323SE (big little hatchback, been out of production for years). I bought new; currently about 129K miles on it (mostly highway). Very good indeed for a bottom-of-the-line budget set of wheels. Isn't and doesn't feel like a tiny car (Festiva/Metro/Civic/etc.), but was priced about like one and can do 40 MPG in summer mostly-highway commuting (about 30 still in city-only driving). Only a few parts are cheapo break-o-matic quality. Japanese-import level of quality, but much more acceptable in redneck areas (Mazda's Michigan plant is UAW and Ford owns much of Mazda). Best (most comfortable) front seats for long drives I've ever sat in. Awesome ability to handle any winter road condition short of it's ground clearance. Factory AC hasn't worked for years, original tires were garbage, dealer (not A^2 area) was slimy, rear seats fold down poorly when carrying cargo (bad engineering, still carries quite a bit). Oil filter designed to be changed by a contortionist. I'd seriously consider buying another if they existed. (The more-expensive sedan version (Protege) does, & CU rates it well, but I've a lot more use for the money & flexibility than 4 doors & a trunk.)
A 1993 Honda Civic with a hatchback. It's a five speed manual that drives like a truck but I like it just fine and I can slip a cello into the back no sweat.
This response has been erased.
Are you sure about the consumer guide/reports? Consumer Reports is put out by an independant testing agency that does not accept advertising, and does not allow its results to be used in advertising. Consumer's Guide is a for profit group that does not follow these guidelines.
This response has been erased.
Whenever Consumer Reports has reviewed anything I've known anything about, it's been very obvious that they haven't known what they were talking about. That makes me very reluctant to trust them on anything I don't know much about. In general, I've found that commercial magazines are a lot more likely to have people who know what they're talking about, especially if it's a specialty magazine devoted to that field. Consumer Reports' claims of being so superior due to their lack of advertizing really don't appear to hold up.
I may look at Consumers report when making a purchase, however, I rely more on advice form friends, etc.
This response has been erased.
I'm with Steve on this one. When I worked at Best Buy I'd have customers regularly come in with Consumer Reports in hand. They would say that a given item was reccomended when I knew for a fact that the same item was much more likely to be returned by dis-satisfied customers than other items. I'm not sure the sneaker walker would be able to tell me which sneakers held up best to real walking. I don't just want to know how it walks straight. Often I take off my sneakers without bothering to unlace them first. Does the sneaker walker tell me how something will survive that?
Also, how well did the sneaker walker simulate real walking? When I walk my feet tend to twist a bit, which is what puts most of the wear on my shoes. I'm guessing their mechanical device probably wouldn't have done that. Lots of what I've seen from Consumer Reports has been not just wrong, but really irresponsable journalism. If they're just recommending the wrong product, that's ok. The sheep who follow them will suffer the consequences and those who know better will ignore it. Instead, they do things such as riding a bike, leaning as far over the front of the bike as they can, and jamming on the front brake. Then, when the rear wheel of the bike lifts off the ground, they devote an entire page in a magazine that many people trust to an article about how dangerous the bike is and how irresponsable the manufacturer is for not recalling the bike. Then they go on about how the federal government should force the manufacturer to do a recall. But, that a bike will flip when they put the front brake on hard while shifting their weight as far forward as they can is just simple physics. If that won't cause the rear wheel to lift off the ground at least somewhat, then the brake probably sin't strong enough to stop the bike quickly when the bike is being ridden corectly. If bike manufacturers were to start caring about how their bikes would be perceived by Consumer Reports, they would start churning out much more dangerous products. I'm not objecting to a magazine doing product testing. Many magazines do wonderful jobs of that sort of thing. Most of those are more specialized, but there must be a market for a magazine that tests a broader range of things and actually does some research before they start writing articles with the potential to put a company out of business. Hopefully, one of these days somebody will have a big enough lawsuit against Consumer Reports that they will have to wake up.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
I always buy the items that Consumer Reports gives the highest ratings - if they are available. I have never been dissatisfied. My only problem with them is that they can't keep up with the model changes. Their tests might not be exactly what I would design, but you know what they are, and can judge what they mean to you. I buy my Cars with CR in hand too.
My comments on CR are posted in the CR item. I'm with Rane and valerie, not scg and kaplan on this. My car is 1990 Subaru Legacy Station Wagon. I was looking for a sports-utility vehicle when I bought it. I could find one that had decent ride. So I gave up the high drive position I was looking for to get this car. This car works like a truck, has a small parking footprint, has a smooth and quiet ride, a peppy 2.2liter 4cylinder engine (cylinders opposed), and a very effective all-wheel drive system. I have never gotten it stuck. I wish it had ABS brakes, but they came out the following year. I don't put much mileage on it. It just hit 82K after 7.5 years. It could get better gas mileage (30 hiway, 19 city), but that's my main complaint. It doesn't bug me much because my mileage is so low annually. I love the roof rack, and towing capacity of 2000 lbs. I have used both extensively. With the kids gone, I leave the back seats folded most of the time. In another 7 years, I may need to replace it. I may buy another. I expect that they will still be making them.
I have a 1986 Subaru GT wagon and am thinking of replacing it with a Subaru Legacy L. I have some use for my cars off main roads on woodland "two tracks", so like better clearance than most US cars. Unfortunately, they dropped the Legacy L about 1.6 inches from the old GT. And there are no gutters for securing a good roof rack (I carry canoes and stuff, and the issued rack is the wrong shape and too short).......but it still seems the best short of the terrible SUVs. My *real* quandry is whether to put some money into the 1986 GT and keep it as a "winter" or "mud" car. A CV joint, the 4WD drive shaft, rear wiper, windshield, clutch, and maybe cooling system seals need to be replaced, and there is some significant rust.....but I really like that car. And I could keep the Legacy out of the salt....
Look at the Legacy Outback. That has the clearance you are looking for. How much would it cost to fix your GT? How many more miles / years could you get out of the GT if you fixed it? Is it worth it? Last year I did $1,400 *worth* of repairs for $400. I took some shortcuts like soaking a stiff steering U-joint with oil instead of replacing it or not turning the brake rotors when I replaced the pads. Stuff that doesn't compromise safety but allows you to get a few more years out of something instead of 10+ more. I also did my own labor.
There a multiple reasons I don't like the Outback (and neither does Consumer Reports): it's ugly (IMHO!); you can't get it without the roof rack and that and the roof "bump" makes mounting a *real* roof rack rack difficult; it tends to fishtail (CR); and $2000 is too much for just one inch more clearance. "Is it worth it" (fixing my old Subaru) is the $1,000 (+?) question. I am no longer into do-it-myself auto repair (my project list has more interesting items) - and I don't have a 3 car garage.......... I looked at the Volvo on www.volvocars.com. Too bad the AWD only comes with an autotransmission - and that it costs $14.5K more than the Legacy.
I wonder if they make a "lift kit" for a regular Legacy. I think the handling gets worse as the ground clearance goes up... Adding a lift kit would make an L as bad as the Outback or worse. I didn't like the roof rack that comes on any of the Subarus. When we bought ours in '95 I had to special order it because I didn't want the crappy, optional, roof rack. I wound up going to the Yakama DIY gutters and mounted a Yakama rack to that. Forget their "Q" clips. The rack I installed is the envy of a couple Subaru owning friends and can probably carry 1,000+ lbs. without doing any damage. Just the other day I transported a 300 pound trailer on it. (I'm cheap. The license had expired ;-) I had to remove the headliner and drill several holes in the roof, reinforce the DIY gutters with epoxy saturated fiberglass, etc. but I don't worry about it not holding under load. It also looks good and it is easy to take on and off.
Yakima racks can be mounted without having gutters. I used to do that on my parents' Honda Civic and it worked pretty well.
That's the "Q" Yakima rack Klaus mentioned - the towers sit on plastic pads against the roof, and are held down by clips that go under the roof trip. I don't like this style because it bends the roof metal in a bit, and can even bounce loose (on a big bump). I don't think I could stand drilling holes in the roof of a new car, myself. By gutters, do you mean the Yakima *tracks* for the "railrider? Tracks are what came on my 1986 GL (not GT), and did use them with a Subaru ski rack (until we became paranoid about edges rusting). It would be nice if the Subaru factory would install tracks (for Yakima racks.... :)). We test drove the Legacy L today, and the family liked it (our daughter has grown up and was getting squeezed in the back seat of the GL). But that front is sure low - I would imagine it would hit every curb one parked against. Plenty of power, though (compared to the GL).
There is no good rack for the Subaru Legacy that I was able to find. The roof is simply not designed to support a decent rack. Yakama makes a little bent piece of ~1/8" black painted stainless the measures about 6" X 3" with two holes in it for 1/4" of 5/16" stainless carriage bolts. You use standard Yakama gutter-mount towers with these and you need to *bolt* them to your roof. They have another version of these mounts that get attached with self tapping screws, but I don't trust them. Reinforcement between the cars roll cage and the places where the Yakama pads mount also ads a lot of stiffness to the rack. I have the 48" long bars on or rack and you can grab hold of those, bounce the car up and down with all your might and you won't see the sheet metal on my roof budge. The Subarus are pretty low to the ground. It gets a lot worse when you add a trailer hitch. However, they are very stable cars! A good friend of ours was rear-ended by a Camaro doing 75 while he was doing 55. Not only that, but he was towing a full-sized Coleman pop-up camper behind his '95 Subaru! The trailer was totaled, the hitch was totaled and he needed a new bumper and tailgate(?) after all was said and done. The crash sent the whole "train" careening down the freeway sideways but the Subaru stayed upright and its human contence intact. He said his old Jimmy would have flipped for sure.
I bought the roofrack from Subaru in 1990 when the car was new. I didn't like it as much as the one I had had on the car it replaced, but it has been adequate for *my* needs. I wouldn't put more than about 200 pounds up there. I think the outback is ugly too. They also make a new, smaller, higher-clearance car, the Forester. I haven't driven one. It is *not* a SUV - it's much lower. But it has good clearance and a manual and all-wheel drive. All are pluses from my POV. Same engine as the Legacy, I believe. It has a different body shape. I think it is better looking than the outback. You'll have to decide for yourself, though. The engineering is generally excellent on all Fuji Heavy Industries' cars.
The Forester (175.2") is quite a bit shorter than the Legacy (184.5"), and the difference comes out of rear legroom and cargo depth. Roof racks are also not optional on the Forester. Subaru does call the Forester "The Sport-Utility Designed for the Real World" (?!). The Yakima brackets for a gutter rack would be OK (except for having to drill into the roof - something I'd prefer a dealer did, like I preferred a doctor to have removed by gall bladder.. :> ), except they fixes the front-back span. I shift gutter towers for different loads that I carry. Everyone's information is very helpful toward my decision(s) - thanks!
My understanding from CU is that Subaru based the Forester on the Legacy every which way they could.
I saw a Forester today, and it sure looked like a sport utility vehicle to me. It may be that just shortening the legacy gave it that shape, and without other sport utility vehicles around to compare it to, a big size difference wasn't obvious, or something.
I heard that the forester was based on the Impreza, not the Legacy..?
The Impreza is Subaru's smallest car & the Legacy their "bigger" car. The Foresters that i've seen certainly looked Legacy-size. In #28, i didn't mean that the Forester & Legacy share a common shape (though we're not talking square & round here), but that the Forester is mostly a SUV-ified Legacy. It's certainly no (monster-size) Suburban or (not designed to drive on paved roads) traditional Jeep, but it's a real SUV.
Anyone happen to know what the wheelbase is on the Impreza?
I would say that the Forester is only a partly SUV-ized Legacy. One feature common to SUV's, and highly prized by most SUV owners is the height of the driver over the road. In the Forester this is only minimally greater than the Outback, which is in turn only minimally greater than the Legacy. True SUVs are much higher than the Forester (compare with Nissan Pathfinder, Ford Explorer, even the small Toyota Rav). It is shorter than the Legacy, as Rane noted. SUVs are not known for their length, except in certain extremely large models.
I've decided that I don't want a 'truck'. I want a wagon with 'good' clearance, a clean roof for fixing a rack, gas mileage at least 20 mpg or better, manual shift, a 'bed' at least 6 feet long behind the front seats, and 4WD (maybe, AWD) - and for less than ca. $25. The last car like that is what I have - the Subaru GL wagon. I guess I will have to sink money into the old rustbucket to keep it alive until people come to their senses.
Perhaps you should look into the used car marked down south where they don't spread salt on the roads every winter. You will have far less luck waiting for people to come to their senses. I wonder if Linseed oil would make a good rust preventitive? I read about someone using it inside bicycle frames to keep them from rusting from the inside out. I've been spraying motor oil inside door panels and such in attempt to keep the rust at bay. Subaru Model Length Width Wheelbase Forester 175.2" 68.3" 99.4" Impreza 172.2" 67.1" 99.2" Legacy wagon 180.1" 67.5 103.5 The wheelbase on the Impreza and Forester are pretty darn close.
Subaru GL 173.6 65.4 97.0 A fault of the GL is the too tight rear legroom. They did add more in the Legacy. Yes...sigh...trucks won't fall out of favor unless the mileage requirements get applied to them as well as "cars" - or unless fuel prices go much higher. It has occurred to me to look "down south" for a GL in better condition than mine - but that is such a gamble, buying a used car from far away (unless one has a 'connection' with someone scrupulously honest... know anyone?).
Re: 35, dunno about linseed oil, but I spilled a quart of motor oil in my truck's engine compartment about ten years back and that spill is now the least rusty part. I imagine grease would be even better as long as it wasn't tying up any moving parts. But any oil is apt to be better than nothing...
I've been wondering what might be good to spray on the rust. It is tricky, as moisture can get under many coatings, and then rust really accelerates. If oil - motor or linseed - were really good, I would think there would be spray-on preparations for sale to put on rust spots to slow them down. (The lower panels below a rear tire rusted out on my Subaru and a *lot* of dust got into the car on dirt (dry) roads - until I just filled the space with polyurethane foam. It occurred to me to fill *all* the spaces with foam, so when the metal rusted away, I would have a foam car....)
Heh, I hear you...think mebbe I'll try that foam car... Actually, since my oil spill was in the engine compartment, it's still relatively protected from the elements. But compared to similar areas of the engine compartment, the spill area held up the best. I don't know what salt and road grime would do to an oil-coated part--probably wear off the oil eventually. But inside doors, where there isn't constant abrasion and contact with corrosive chemicals, maybe oil or grease would hang in there (the problem there is in the application). I know not all rust-proofing materials are created equal (cf. my 83 Subaru GL wagon, which had rust-proofing but still suffered significant rust damage) so not even paint or rubberized coatings last. Probably the main problem is that once the "seal" or "bond" is broken between the rust inhibitor (be it oil, grease, paint, whatever) and the metal, then water leaks in and oxidation starts. Fiberglas...that's the ticket...yeah...
I have used oil inside doors and other isolated spaces for several decades. It works very well. I have never had a door rust out along the bottom even though I would see the same model / year on the road with the doors rusted out. Some areas are difficult to protect, however. The floor pan is one of those areas. When it rusts out, I use scraps of aluminum, old rags soaked in roofing tar and more roofing tar to patch it all up. Rags soaked in roofing tar make fantastic patches! The patch can even be painted once the tar has set up after a week or so. It won't be as pretty as a good Bondo or fiberglass job, but it will outlast it! I also paint the insides of my wheel wells with roofing tar to keep the metal there protected so it doesn't start to rust. Our Chevy Nova, now almost 12 years old with 115K on the clock, still looks very good. I never had it rust-proofed. I find that rust proofing really doesn't work very well. If it gets a little hole in it and rust starts, the rust blister will swell the area and allow more water / salt to get in and more rust, etc. It is also difficult for this area to dry out so you get rusting than too. For rust to take place you need three things: 1) metal 2)moisture 3)oxygen. Eliminate any of the three and you will not get rust. I like oil because it displaces water and will flow where water flows, like into the metal seams along the bottom of a door trunk-lid, rocker panel, etc. It never gets hard so it doesn't form a harbor for rust to hide in like hard rust proofing does. I built an atomizer with a long snoot on it this year. I used it on the Nova this year. It created quite the oil-fog however! Perhaps it would be better to squirt than fog the oil? I use 90 weight motor oil and cut it with kerosene before fogging.
Newer cars are apparently better designed to resist rust. I haven't done anything to my Jetta, but it does look like a little oil has leaked out the door-bottom drains as if Klaus was in there with his oil-fogger. The problem with using oil on rusty spots is that the soap at the car wash will remove it...
I never use soap. Never have unless there was a stuborn spot. I've always looked at cars a few years older than mine, of the same model, to see where the potential rust problems are.
I think the Subarus got better wrt rust when they introduced the Legacy, too. Based on your requirements in resp:34, Rane, I think the Legacy Wagon would do the job for you. My 8-year old Legacy is still doing OK rustwise, except for the rear door. I'm inclined to believe I would replace it with another if nothing better comes along in the next 5-7 years. 15 years is my extimated lifetime for it.
Our '95 Legacy claims to have 75% of the body panels galvanized. It also came coated with a really gooey rust proofing from the factory. This stuff is inside the body panels as well as underneath. I have noticed oxidation in only a couple of places: The optional, aluminum, air deflector screwed on just above the rear window and the metal framework that supports the trunk latch and license plate lights. The air deflector problem seems to be galvanic since it is aluminum screwed to metal. I have also noticed that the more recent deflectors are now made of plastic. Our Legacy is the bottom of the line Brighton. It is a very nice car. My only complaint is the ground clearance. I have noticed that the all the Legacy's come with 14" wheels, except the Out Back which comes with 15" wheels. The tires on our wagon will need to be replaced soon and I would like to go to a taller tire to help improve ground clearance. Does anyone know where I can go to find out how large a tire I can use on the Legacy? Will camber and toe-in need to be readjusted? I know that the speed-o will read lower but we can compensate for that. Same for the odometer. BTW, the ground clearance issue only became an issue after we added a trailer hitch.
That (low clearance) is a major problem for me with the Legacy, because I use my cars on unimproved roads. The GL has been fine, but anything lower will be a problem. The Legacy GL has larger tires - and a bigger engine than the plain legacy - but also a sunroof, which I don't want.
What is the difference in ground clearance between the Legacy and the GL? Or has that already been posted here somewhere?
Are there any after-market products you can get to improve the ground clearance?
I haven't yet found the clearance for the Legacy GL (or, is that GT?). It also has power windows - bummer - can't open and close windows when car is not running.
Power windows are mildly annoying, but we got used to them very quickly. They come with the power door locks, and you'd be surprised how handy it is to be able to lock up a 5-doored car with one touch as you're exiting. I don't know about clearance. I never evaluated that. It has enough clearance for me, so I am happy with it, even on Michigan dirt roads, but it sounds like you have more stringent requirements.
I sleep in the back of my wagon and like to be able to open or close the windows if it gets too hot, or starts raining, etc.
I also have a friend who slept in the back of his Subaru when he went on cross country ski trips. He is about 6' 2". He even use to own one of those U.S. Ski Team Subarus. For some reason he never had a problem parking at ski race events, even when he arrived only minutes before the start. That's another reason I purchased the Brighton: No electric windows or locks. I do wish I had gotten the optional lighter though... For plugging in the CB, etc.
This response has been erased.
I imagine you might have better luck going through the ads in the Ann Arbor News. I'd be very nervous buying a car that new (and therefore expensive) from an individual I didn't know. When I bought mine from the Saturn dealer it came pretty thoroughly refurbished, having had a pretty thorough inspection and having gotten soem stuff replaced, and it had a reasonably long warranty, such that when a few things did go wrong it was easy to get them fixed for free. People I've known who have bought used cars from people they didn't know have often ended up with lots of problems reasonably quickly, and nobody to turn to get the repairs paid for.
Then again, I've had generally OK luck on used cars (that 1983 Nissan was bought from somebody I didn't know, Steve...)
The trick is to take the car you want to buy to a trusted mechanic and have them go over it with a fine-toothed comb and report any problems back to you.
This response has been erased.
I've seen cars for sale at the K-Mart on Washtenaw. Sometimes at Arborland near the gas station as well.
Across the street from Arborland use to have a lot of them.
also, if you go to Palmer Ford in Chelsea, and ask for Mike Kushmaul. In general, Palmer Ford is a great small-town car place, and I always take my cars for service there, whether or not I bought them there. Their description of the condition of the used car you buy is most likely very accurate. They are trying to build repeat customers, and don't mess you around.
This response has been erased.
There's a small commuter-type lot on Ann Arbor-Saline Rd (on the way to Meijer/Target/Oak Valley) on the west side of the road that usually has 6 to a dozen cars lined up with for sale signs. This is just after you go over I-94, heading south on AA-Saline, I think.
On the way to Plymouth Nursery, along Plymouth Road, after Dixboro, I noticed one little white car for sale in a driveway on the right side of Plymouth Road. Its a nice drive if you have nothing to do to take a look. It is only one car though.
Re 61: that's actually *before* you go *over* I-94. You might whiz by the lot before you know it's there; it's kinda small. Drove by there this weekend and there were several cars with for sale signs.
You have several choices: