"Justbob30" <NoThank@you.com> wrote in message
news:x9ednUSRfMuLOrTVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@comcast.com. ..

> CVT's have been in common production since 1989, Subaru Justy & Honda
> Civic HCH how long do they need to be around before you can trust them?
>

I was not aware that they were in common production for those cars. Are you
quite certain? Most of the Civics I'm aware of had automatics or standards.

In any event, not all manufacturers have a lot of experience with them. If
you want to jump on board with a manufacturer's early ventures into a
technology, be my guest. Experience has shown that to be less than
advisable.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

On May 12, 1:16 pm, RPS <r...@null.void> wrote:
> Our old Camry is showing its age (~12 years) and we have decided to
> look for a new car but budget down to "Corolla level". I said "level"
> as I am open to competing models from Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, etc.
>
> I would appreciate your help in choosing the model, as well as the
> "sub-model" (CE, LE, DX etc.).
>
> Most of our driving is city or regional: round trips to places 10-50
> miles away. A few times a year we drive 300-500 miles trips.
>
> I would like basic safety features (line anti-lock brakes) and comforts
> (4-door, AC). Very high priority running cost (mpg, reliability). I can
> live with manual or automatic. I would consider new, or low-mileage
> dealer demos etc, but not "really used". (Like everyone else, I thought
> about Prius but it looks too expensive.)
>
> A few questions:
>
> 1. Which make/model would be the best fit?
>
> 2. What is the best site for reading up on these and well as comparison
> reviews? (Bought my last car 12 years ago and online resources must
> have come along since then.)
>
> 3. Would you go to a local dealer or Carmax, Carsdirect etc?
>
> 4. At this point would you buy a 2009, or 2008?
>
> 5. When is the best time of the year to get good deals on last years
> models, dealer demos, loaners and like? (These I'd imagine are only
> available from dealers.)
>
> Thanks for all help.

lots of discussion here, my additions:
at this point, it's clear that side airbags are a significant addition
to safety, i'd tend to make them a must.
diseases of japanese cars, toyota and honda included, tend to be more
age related than mileage related. as such, "easiest" way to own them
might be to buy new or maybe one year old, then sell around the time
of the "big service" where you have to change the timing belt. repeat
as necessary. as pointed out, the depreciation on toyota or honda is
pretty low, so a good deal on a new one is as cheap as a bad deal on a
one year old. either way, it'll depreciate less while you own it than
other makes, so a little more expense up front ends up saving you over
the long run.
if you are more into keep it until it rusts away, as with the 12 year
old Camry, that's obviously less of an issue. in which case, you might
want to consider a hyundai along with focus, mazda, nissan, because
the cost of entry is less for them. hyundai quality has come a long
way lately.

 

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> It's a little larger, though it's misleading because the cargo capacity is
> higher only if you pile things up so you can't see out the back! It's
> still closer to the Corolla in size than the Camry.
>
> Corolla
> -------
> 92.0 cubic feet: passenger compartment
> 12.3 cubic feet: cargo
>
> Prius
> -----
> 96.2 cubic feet: passenger compartment
> 16.1 cubic feet: cargo
>
> Camry
> -----
> 101.4 cubic feet: passenger compartment
> 16.7 cubic feet: cargo
>

But is bigger better? That extra 4 cubic feet of passenger space does
little if it is not in the hip room when you want it. Of if the trunk space
is more in volume but the trunk lid is too small to fit a decent sized
carton through it. .

 

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>> It's a little larger, though it's misleading because the cargo capacity is
>> higher only if you pile things up so you can't see out the back! It's
>> still closer to the Corolla in size than the Camry.
>>
>> Corolla
>> -------
>> 92.0 cubic feet: passenger compartment
>> 12.3 cubic feet: cargo
>>
>> Prius
>> -----
>> 96.2 cubic feet: passenger compartment
>> 16.1 cubic feet: cargo
>>
>> Camry
>> -----
>> 101.4 cubic feet: passenger compartment
>> 16.7 cubic feet: cargo
>>
>
> But is bigger better? That extra 4 cubic feet of passenger space does
> little if it is not in the hip room when you want it. Of if the trunk space
> is more in volume but the trunk lid is too small to fit a decent sized
> carton through it. .

That's a good point. I find the Corolla to have much more usable room.
It's a lot more cramped than a Corolla. You can carry five people in a
Corolla and not be too uncomfortable, but not in a Prius which is really
good for only two adults and two children. Still, if you're using the
Prius as a commute vehicle, and have a larger family vehicle for trips
with more people, it's fine.

 

In article
<b6d4fe63-1d53-47fc-bf05-33e7ff6c0a36@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
z <gzuckier@snail-mail.net> wrote:

> at this point, it's clear that side airbags are a significant addition
> to safety, i'd tend to make them a must.

Well, that gives the nod to Honda--with its Safety for Everyone
campaign, where every car gets every safety feature that was available
at the time the car was introduced. Where the manufacturer does not put
more safety features into the higher end cars and fewer into the lower
end cars.

(There's a big discussion about run-flat tires on the Odyssey, though;
for years, many argued them as a safety feature, but since Honda has
since made them optional and not mandatory, I think that shows the lie
that people told themselves about it being a safety feature.)

 

"Josh S" <Josh@clean.spam> wrote in message
news:Josh-F893D4.10224613052008@news.telus.net...
> In article <0sqdnQEWsIx1YLXVnZ2dnUVZ_rfinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Justbob30" <NoThank@you.com> wrote:
>
>> Before you say you cant afford a hybrid, lets take a look at the web
>> site,
>> base Prius $21,100, base Corolla auto (apples to apples) $17,110,
>> difference
>> $2,715, City epa for Prius is 48, Corolla 26 Presuming that is the best
>> you
>> could do in either car (not likely) the Prius would use 250 gallons of
>> gas a
>> year, the Corolla 461 presuming your 12,000 per year driven....@ lets say
>> $4.50 a gallon you would save $949 per year/ 2715=2.8 years for break
>> even,
>> then you would save oh I don't know $1000 a year in gas, not to mention
>> be
>> driving a MUCH cleaner car and doing your own little part to reduce the
>> use
>> of fossil fuel.
>
> A good analysis, but real world consumption figures show the Prius lower
> than the EPA rating, much lower in cold winter weather.
> On the up side for the Prius here in Canada there are Gov. rebates for
> low consumption vehicles, which drop the price of the Prius
> significantly, the Camry hybrid quite a bit and even the Corolla
> slightly.

My real world consumption figures for my Prius in NJ is a reliable 50+ MPG
in the winter and 52-55 nowadays. Blocking the front grille slats in the
winter keeping the engine warmer goes a long way. So my real world
consumption figures for my Prius in NJ is higher than the EPA rating.
Tomes

 

"Josh S" <Josh@clean.spam> wrote in message
news:Josh-F017ED.23290712052008@news.telus.net...
> In article <elmop-E3E563.16050812052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com>,
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>> Don't forget the size. The Prius is larger than the Corolla; if you
>> think you'd want something larger that also gets good gas mileage,
>> that's the Prius. If you think you're stuck with a Corolla-sized car,
>> you're not. Not necessarily.
>
> IMO they've similar in interior space.
> A few months ago we drove to the airport in a Corolla and returned in a
> Prius. The Prius did have the advantage of being able to pile our
> luggage up to the back window, so you couldn't see out the window even
> the tiny bit that is normal.
>
> I would never pile the luggage that high for safety reasons and would
> wrap a cargo net around the Prius luggage to avoid it coming forward in
> a quick stop.
>
> I have read that the Prius mileage in cold winter weather is similar to
> the Corolla's.

Grille blocking enhances the Prius' mileage significantly.
Tomes

 

In article <2klWj.1939$hJ5.813@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>,
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> LOL, it actually was Elmo one talking about outliers, claiming that 125K
> miles to be the norm for an automatic transmission. Maybe it's the norm
> for Ford or Chevy (actually I don't believe that either), but definitely
> for Toyota and Honda.
>
> A Canadian study on longevity (11-20 year old cars) showed the following
> as the five non-luxury vehicle brands with the highest percentage of
> vehicles (based on number originally sold):
>
> Saturn
> Toyota
> Honda
> Mazda
> Volkswagen
>
> Of course you don't know how much was spent to keep these going that
> long, how much oil the engines consumed, or how much was spent on
> repairs in years 1-10, but there's no reason to believe that these
> owners were willing to spend more on repairs than owners of more poorly
> ranked vehicles.

For reference here are my facts:
My '95 Concorde now has 140k kms on it.
The engine runs perfectly, gets the original fuel mileage, goes 8k on a
liter of oil and the auto shifts as new.
The only repairs on the engine were a set of plugs at 95k, and
replacement of the rubber parts on the engine external , associated with
the fuel and PVC system, in '06.
Engine service is oil changes at 5 to 8 k, always twice per year, plus a
few air filters.
The only transmission service has been oil changes every 50k plus a
flush at 120k.
A friend of mine has a '94 of the same car going strong at 210k.
I've read the design was for 200k miles (300k kms)

This is not unusual, but typical of this engine transmission.
Transmission failures from '94 on are usually due to lack of adequate
service.

Oh I should mention that although I often drive on severe winter roads
to the ski hills, the body is rust free and stil shines lovely. The body
has had no special treatment, just washed with Turtle wash and wax.

 

In article <elmop-D0442C.22025813052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com>,
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

> (There's a big discussion about run-flat tires on the Odyssey, though;
> for years, many argued them as a safety feature, but since Honda has
> since made them optional and not mandatory, I think that shows the lie
> that people told themselves about it being a safety feature.)

On a Goodyear test in the UK for 5,000 miles on run flats, they changed
those tires every 50 miles.
Kind of useless for highway drives in parts of NA I'd say.

 

"Tomes" <ask.me@here.net> wrote in message
>>
>> I have read that the Prius mileage in cold winter weather is similar to
>> the Corolla's.
>
> Grille blocking enhances the Prius' mileage significantly.
> Tomes

I'd think that Toyota would know that and have a thermostatic louver rather
than risk having people block it when too warm.

 

Elle wrote:
> "Newbie" <newbie@no.spam> wrote
>> TWO, I am not sure if "apples to apples" is as fair a
>> comparison as you
>> make it sound. Corolla is available in cheaper versions,
>> Prius is not.
>> A manual CE would not only cost less but also have better
>> mpg.
>
> Most of the reason a manual Toyota Corolla still gets better
> mpg than an automatic Toyota Corolla is that the manual has
> a 5-speed tranny while the auto has a 4-speed one.
>
> For other makes and models, and in the last five years or
> so, changes in auto tranny design have resulted in it often
> surpassing manual trannies when it comes to mpg, when
> comparing the same models whose only difference is the
> tranny.
>
>

Actually, this mileage is related to less transmission slippage, not
gear selection.
I have seen some automatics that were close in mileage, but I would like
for you to point out one that surpasses the manual.

Clay

--
Warning: keyboard may cause involuntary vowel movement - Clay Ferriola

 

In article <482ab78d$0$20197$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Crabman <C@dud.net> wrote:

> I have seen some automatics that were close in mileage, but I would like
> for you to point out one that surpasses the manual.

Current generation Honda Civic.

 

You're lucky because I have yet to see one that doesn't have any rust in my
area.

"Josh S" <Josh@clean.spam> wrote
> In article <2klWj.1939$hJ5.813@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> LOL, it actually was Elmo one talking about outliers, claiming that 125K
>> miles to be the norm for an automatic transmission. Maybe it's the norm
>> for Ford or Chevy (actually I don't believe that either), but definitely
>> for Toyota and Honda.
>>
>> A Canadian study on longevity (11-20 year old cars) showed the following
>> as the five non-luxury vehicle brands with the highest percentage of
>> vehicles (based on number originally sold):
>>
>> Saturn
>> Toyota
>> Honda
>> Mazda
>> Volkswagen
>>
>> Of course you don't know how much was spent to keep these going that
>> long, how much oil the engines consumed, or how much was spent on
>> repairs in years 1-10, but there's no reason to believe that these
>> owners were willing to spend more on repairs than owners of more poorly
>> ranked vehicles.
>
> For reference here are my facts:
> My '95 Concorde now has 140k kms on it.
> The engine runs perfectly, gets the original fuel mileage, goes 8k on a
> liter of oil and the auto shifts as new.
> The only repairs on the engine were a set of plugs at 95k, and
> replacement of the rubber parts on the engine external , associated with
> the fuel and PVC system, in '06.
> Engine service is oil changes at 5 to 8 k, always twice per year, plus a
> few air filters.
> The only transmission service has been oil changes every 50k plus a
> flush at 120k.
> A friend of mine has a '94 of the same car going strong at 210k.
> I've read the design was for 200k miles (300k kms)
>
> This is not unusual, but typical of this engine transmission.
> Transmission failures from '94 on are usually due to lack of adequate
> service.
>
> Oh I should mention that although I often drive on severe winter roads
> to the ski hills, the body is rust free and stil shines lovely. The body
> has had no special treatment, just washed with Turtle wash and wax.

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <482ab78d$0$20197$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> Crabman <C@dud.net> wrote:
>
>> I have seen some automatics that were close in mileage, but I would like
>> for you to point out one that surpasses the manual.
>
> Current generation Honda Civic.
>
The only one I see that get better mileage is the CNG version.

Clay

 

In article <482ae912$0$7721$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
frijoli <crabman@dud.net> wrote:

> >> I have seen some automatics that were close in mileage, but I would like
> >> for you to point out one that surpasses the manual.
> >
> > Current generation Honda Civic.
> >
> The only one I see that get better mileage is the CNG version.

Nope. Look again.