Another Danoff Car Purchase Thread - FX35 Purchased

[Keef]

I dont see a volkswagen iguana on your list.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Owned a ford SUV a while back. Had nothing but problems. Not inclined to go back to that well.

Friends of the family had a Navigator that was nothing but problems; they eventually ditched it via lemon law and went to a newer Expedition (with the newer trans, 3v 5.4, etc) and have had no issues with it.

What Ford was is not what they are.

 

[YSSMAN]

The Venza is amazing for people who know it exists, but for people who don't it doesn't get a mention.

Seriously. If you can get over the front end and the HAL-like need to kill the pilot, its a lovely way to travel.

Just wanted to highlight that I have different reasons for eliminating different American companies.

Lame. Better cross that Ford CX9 off the list too. Is this where I mention the GM gearboxes in the BMWs?


As with Keef, I find the lack of Tiger Iguana most concerning as well. Its probably the best small SUV out there, no matter how much C/D loves the "don't stop 'till I keeel you" RAV4.

 

[niky]

Better cross that Ford CX9 off the list too. Is this where I mention the GM gearboxes in the BMWs?

Or put the Mazda Flex back on it, since they're built on the same platform and share engines from the same family.

-

 

[Danoff]

X5 >>> X3. Again, cross off the X3, please... probably the best handling vehicle on your list. Drives like a go-kart. Rides like a go-kart. Has similar seating capacity.

Which one is the go-kart? X3 or X5?

I dont see a volkswagen iguana on your list.

It's on the list. It got killed due to styling. Don't ask me, I like it. She hates it. But if it were up to me the FX would be at the top of the list. I'll try to bring her around by showing her one in person (again) before we buy.

Friends of the family had a Navigator that was nothing but problems; they eventually ditched it via lemon law and went to a newer Expedition (with the newer trans, 3v 5.4, etc) and have had no issues with it.

What Ford was is not what they are.

It's gonna take time and a lot of proof for me to go back after the terrible experience I had. Fool me once...

Lame. Better cross that Ford CX9 off the list too. Is this where I mention the GM gearboxes in the BMWs?

Or put the Mazda Flex back on it, since they're built on the same platform and share engines from the same family.

Don't mind Mazda. Or Aston Martin, or Land Rover. I don't expect these vehicles to share the same reliability issues as experienced with the Ford brand despite being all under the same roof.

 

[Tornado]

Which one is the go-kart? X3 or X5?

X3. In my experiences the X5 rides pretty nicely.

Don't mind Mazda. Or Aston Martin, or Land Rover. I don't expect these vehicles to share the same reliability issues as experienced with the Ford brand despite being all under the same roof.

Yeah, Land Rover is considerably worse.

 

[Danoff]

X3. In my experiences the X5 rides pretty nicely.


Yeah, Land Rover is considerably worse.

Heh, yea I hadn't heard anything about Land Rover. I just listed it as an example of another arm of Ford. Luckily, Land Rover didn't make the list.

 

[///M-Spec]

Yeah, niky is talking about the X3 riding like a go-cart, especially the sport package ones. I've driven an early X3 and I tend to agree.

However, the facelift version ('07+) received a retuned suspension that was supposed to improve the ride while retaining handling. I haven't tried one of those, but the magazine reviews have been favorable.

Personally, I think the current X3 is overpriced for what you get. But once BMW moves production out of Austria and to the US, the model next will be much more competitive.


M

 

[Duke]

Gas mileage is not a consideration, convenience/utility is a low consideration, performance is a medium consideration, handling is high, looks are above all (that last one you can't really help with, so pretend I didn't say it).

On the test-drive list for upcoming weekends:
- 350Z
- BMW 330i ZHP (she doesn't want to try it, but I'm making her)
- Audi A4
- Miata MX5 (power retractable hardtop)
- Civic del Sol (I know, it breaks the rules)
- Civic
- G35 Coupe
- G35 Sedan
- Audi TT
- Acura TSX
- C230 Sedan.

So, starting with this list, when and where did we drink the "Crossover/Sportless Useless Vehicle" Kool-Aid?

 

[Danoff]

So, starting with this list, when and where did we drink the "Crossover/Sportless Useless Vehicle" Kool-Aid?

When the wife decided she didn't need a sports car and left that to me.

Basically her car needs to do everything. And my car needs to do nothing. So her car needs to be the plywood hauling, dog hauling, furniture buying, ski-trip taking, law-firm client transporting vehicle.

...and mine can just concentrate on being fast.

I can't think of anything we need a full size suv for - but there are several reasons that a hatch back and foldable seats are useful. Given the wife's predisposition against wagons and minivans (and that picking up the president of a company in a minivan is pretty weak), that leaves us with small SUVs. Am I missing something?

 

[Duke]

Given the wife's predisposition against wagons

...you're missing that she's wrong with this predisposition.

 

[///M-Spec]

Oh, and skip the A4. Compared to a 330i/325i it is weaksauce. Unless you're talking about a brand new B8, but they are mostly out of your price range.

An early B7 S4 is in your price range. Call me biased if you want, but that is a much better proposition.

A B7 S4 Avant suits your needs perfectly. AWD? Check. Back compartment with standard divider screen for the dogs? Check. Luxury? Check. Good handling? Check. Enough power to satisfy most people? Check. Haul anything the SUVs on your list will haul? Check. Not looking weak when you pick up a company president for lunch? Check.

Srsly. She should just get over her aversion to wagons.


M

 

[Bones Brigade]

Don't mind Mazda. Or Aston Martin, or Land Rover. I don't expect these vehicles to share the same reliability issues as experienced with the Ford brand despite being all under the same roof.

There is slightly more in common between the CX-9 and Edge than between a Vantage and a Mustang. Just slightly more.

 

[Danoff]

...you're missing that she's wrong with this predisposition.

Srsly. She should just get over her aversion to wagons.

Hey guys, what do you want me to do? She doesn't like them. I know the two of you have plenty of cars that look great on paper but that you wouldn't buy because you don't like the styling. Yea, wagons make more sense for us, but how am I supposed to get her to change her tastes? I'd rather that she had a car she enjoyed owning than one that made more sense.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Get her to drive a properly good wagon.

 

[Danoff]

...and that will make it look different?

 

[///M-Spec]

Hey guys, what do you want me to do? She doesn't like them. I know the two of you have plenty of cars that look great on paper but that you wouldn't buy because you don't like the styling. Yea, wagons make more sense for us, but how am I supposed to get her to change her tastes? I'd rather that she had a car she enjoyed owning than one that made more sense.

A vehicle purchase is a combination of rational and emotional factors. A sports car I can see being a highly emotional purchase.

The vehicle you want to purchase is largely a thing of utility. Generally not an emotional purchase.

I don't like the way pickup trucks look and I have no desire to own one. But if I decided that a pickup truck is what I needed to buy for whatever reason, I would buy one.

A CUV is just a jacked up wagon. They offer almost no advantages over a similarly sized wagon but have a long list of disadvantages. High center of gravity. Greater unsprung weight. Aerodynamic drag. Higher fuel consumption... just to name a few.

If you just explain to the Mrs. that in order to get the "look" she wants, she's going to have to give up a lot of good solid choices, maybe it will change her outlook. You're one of the most rational people here, so I presume you married a pretty sensible girl Maybe she just doesn't know the facts. An X5 and a 5-series Touring isn't simply a matter of "one looks cool and trendy and the other looks like a 60 year old grandma's car". The X5 weighs more, sucks down more gas, rides worse, handles worse, is noisier, slower and you don't really get any more space inside. All you get is to sit higher up and couple more inches of ground clearance that you're never going to use.

Like I said earlier, we had a Murano. The Mrs. wanted it. After a few years she got over the tall ride height and trendy styling thing and decided a wagon made more sense. There's nothing the Murano did that her Audi doesn't do. And the allroad does things the Murano couldn't dream of doing. The Murano isn't a bad vehicle. I would still recommend it. But the wagon is just so much better at pretty much everything.

It's not a big deal. Get whatever makes you happy. But just take a moment and think about whether or not you really need to sit a few inches higher off the ground.

And btw, I generally don't let styling alone influence what car to buy. It helps, but it's not a deal breaker nor deal maker. Hell, I want a GT-R, and I think it looks hideous.


EDIT: Just thought of another option. Infiniti EX35. An '08 should be right in your price range.


M

 

[Danoff]

I don't like the way pickup trucks look and I have no desire to own one. But if I decided that a pickup truck is what I needed to buy for whatever reason, I would buy one.

But why wouldn't you get one of these?

Lower center of gravity, likely handles better, has SEATS in the back (in case you want to use them), probably better gas mileage, less drag, ugly as hell. Personally I'd take the pickup truck, even though it might make less sense. Likewise I'd take this:

over this

Even though the latter is probably cheaper, more practical, handles better, and I'd never use the ride height.

 

[homeforsummer]

A vehicle purchase is a combination of rational and emotional factors.

You're right, but it's also important that even with a largely rational purchase there's still an emotional motive too, especially if the car is Mrs Danoff's only vehicle. A wagon may well do everything she could ask of it, but at the end of the day if she walks out the house each morning and sighs because it's not what she really wants then it'll be the wrong vehicle.

Much better to have a list of vehicles that she really wants, and then narrow it down to the best of that selection. Hence I suspect why the list is now populated with crossovers and the like. Not as competent as a good wagon? Of course. More desirable to Mrs Danoff? Definitely.

 

[///M-Spec]

But why wouldn't you get one of these?

I don't recall saying I wouldn't. Is that not a pickup truck anyway?


M

 

[Danoff]

I don't recall saying I wouldn't. Is that not a pickup truck anyway?

Not really a truck per-se. But it does what a pickup truck does.

It's so beautifully parallel. A hatchback truck or a hatchback car. Well, who needs the ground clearance? It just looks better. An open bed truck or an open bed car. Well, who needs the ground clearance? It just looks better.

SUV is to Wagon

as

Pickup Truck is to Subaru Brat-Thing/El Camino

Only different seems to be that more people tolerate the Wagon than the BRAT. Good I hate those BRAT things. So glad I don't see them anymore.

 

[///M-Spec]

I'm confused. Are you trying to imply that I would advocate a wagon, but not a Brat?

Or are you just trying to explain why the Mrs. doesn't like wagons?


M

 

[Danoff]

I'm confused. Are you trying to imply that I would advocate a wagon, but not a Brat?

I'm trying to suggest that Wagon vs. SUV is similar to El Camino vs. Pickup. Don't know whether you'd recommend a c'truck over an actual truck. If you do, it's consistent, but I think the analogy best explains the Mrs. stance on the subject.

 

[YSSMAN]

Don't mind Mazda. Or Aston Martin, or Land Rover. I don't expect these vehicles to share the same reliability issues as experienced with the Ford brand despite being all under the same roof.

Although not totally related to your Crossover/SUV/Whatever banter currently, I'd like to point out that neither Aston nor Land Rover are currently owned/operated by Ford Motor Company. Of all the brands Ford currently operates, Mazda is the only that borrows most-heavily from the Blue Oval parts bin. Guess which one was deemed more reliable last year?

I understand that I'm beating a dead horse, and I'm fine with you/your wife not wanting a Ford product. However, information like this is important (at least to me) when there is still an American car company to be proud of.

...Carry on...

 

[Mrs. Famine]

Can you get the Fiat 500 over there? If not, consider importing one

Ooh, scratch that. I somehow managed to miss the whole of page 2

 

[YSSMAN]

Just to answer your first question Milford, we're getting it at the end of the year. At our local Chrysler dealer (ewwww).

 

[///M-Spec]

I'm trying to suggest that Wagon vs. SUV is similar to El Camino vs. Pickup. Don't know whether you'd recommend a c'truck over an actual truck. If you do, it's consistent, but I think the analogy best explains the Mrs. stance on the subject.

A truck is a vehicle built for utility. It is a tool. You should pick the best tool for the job. If the job requires a set of qualities a car/pick up hybrid like an El Camino doesn't satisfy, when I couldn't recommend it. If it does, then I would. What a tool looks like isn't really high on my list of priorities. I care if it works. Looking good is just a nice bonus.

The compromises that make a truck not work well as a car are precisely the compromises that makes a car not work well as a truck. Ladder frames are stronger than unit bodies. Leaf springs and generous suspension travel are good with heavy loads. But you don't want either of those features on a car, because they compromise other qualities that people typically value in a car. Truck guys don't take unit body wannabes like the Honda Ridgeline seriously. That's all I'm saying.

I'm saying this because I took your question of "what do you want me to do?" as a literal one. I'm explaining it so it hopefully makes sense. What you do with it is up to you. Buy whatever makes you guys happy ; you don't have to impress me. But you asked for opinions and I gave you one.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand: how about a good compromise?

Infiniti EX35. Looks close enough to a CUV that she might like it. Functionally close enough to a wagon that it makes good sense. AWD is optional. Really nice inside. I read that it drives very nicely. Should be in your price range.

M

 

[YSSMAN]

I can count the number of those I've seen in person on both of my hands. Have they really sold all that well? Or do they just do such a good job of blending in that no one notices they're there?

 

[Danoff]

I'm saying this because I took your question of "what do you want me to do?" as a literal one.

It was asked in earnest. Not out of a sense of obligation to satisfy you - which I'm quite confident you know I don't have - but out of a sense of curiosity. And I'm happy to have this conversation because I think it's important to understand the motives that go into a large purchase like this.

A truck is a vehicle built for utility. It is a tool. You should pick the best tool for the job.... Looking good is just a nice bonus.

Let's face it, the job is to get back and forth to work, everything else is a nice bonus, and honestly the best too for the job is a motorcycle. Cheap, fuel efficient, parks anywhere, and in California they can even split traffic.

We don't buy the best tool for the job. We buy a good tool for the job that has a bunch of other less tangible bonuses and try not to compromise too much along the way. We buy extra seats because we might need them on occasion. We buy hatchbacks, all-wheel-drive, airbags, navigation systems, etc. because they might come in handy... rarely. But primarily the car does a very simple task - it gets you down a well known road to the same destination every day. The ultimate purchase is based on where you rank all of those features.

Some people want to have a car that has satellite navigation built-in. I personally wouldn't sacrifice anything for that, as I think it's totally useless and completely replaceable by better, cheaper, more useful units (in your phone). I wouldn't sacrifice one iota of handling or acceleration (let alone $1500) for the sake of a built-in satellite navigation system. Others think styling is completely unimportant. They wouldn't sacrifice one iota of handling or acceleration, let alone money for the sake of styling.

So when I discuss these options with my wife, I'm well aware that her parameters for this purchase are fundamentally no different than mine would be. It's just that her objectives are slightly different.

The EX is interesting. I'll check it out. They look hard to find, but there are some around. Maybe we can get a test drive. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Famine]

I've just realised a car you haven't tried or listed, but which is an SUV (and it works both on and off road, rarely) and is available in the US. And we spoke about them in Vegas...

Our Las Vegan friend loves his, and they also come in silver, blue, yellow, burgundy, green and white. It's small (as specified), good off-road, doesn't sacrifice on-road capability for that, as tough as they come (you get the feeling you could balance an officeblock on top of one) and you will never, ever lose it in the car park with all the similar ones round it. Has rear seats - three of them - but they're very much occasional ones, and behind suicide doors The boss should like it - the whole car has a sense of theatre/theater around it.

Should be able to get good discounts on them too - they've not been selling well anyway, plus Toyotas have got a bit of a stigma right now. Not that the FJ is expensive to start with - starting at $24k new.