In reply to Trackmouse:
21k gets you into a Veloster Turbo. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, thought.
In reply to Trackmouse:
21k gets you into a Veloster Turbo. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, thought.
pinchvalve wrote: Kia Forte coupe will do 6.9, but the turbo motor puts you $300 north of 20K.
This is actually one I was thinking about, didn't realize they were that quick!
Looking for something in that range that beats our 2011 fit. It's slow and living in the land of highways filled with slack jawed hippies that go a CONSISTENT 10mph under whatever speed limit is posted means there are lots of passing opportunities.
Burrito wrote: In reply to Trackmouse: 21k gets you into a Veloster Turbo. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, thought.
Reviews haven't been good for that car, as much as I want it.
Trackmouse wrote: Looking for something in that range that beats our 2011 fit. It's slow and living in the land of highways filled with slack jawed hippies that go a CONSISTENT 10mph under whatever speed limit is posted means there are lots of passing opportunities.
I suppose then the other half of that question is "why brand new?" A two year old Altima 3.5 would be a rocket-ship compared with a new econobox and a quick check says I can get a 2014 for $12,999.
Depreciation can be your friend my friend.
Sounds like a great job for the FiST. Currently a $1000 rebate on it so with no negotiating skills at all you are out the door for $20ish K
In reply to KyAllroad:
I agree. But it's for swmbo. So needs to be care free and not getting stranded due to negligence from the PO (which I can assume every idiot with a license doesn't take care of theirs).
When my 9-5 was totalled in May I came very close to getting a Forte5 with the turbo. I had the dealer talked into 21,300 down from 26K for a fully loaded sx, you can find ones without leather seats under 20K.
Trackmouse wrote: In reply to KyAllroad: I agree. But it's for swmbo. So needs to be care free and not getting stranded due to negligence from the PO (which I can assume every idiot with a license doesn't take care of theirs).
Buy a year or two old Camry V6? Its going to be a solid second faster to 60 than any new car mentioned thus far. And probably more reliable in the long run than many of them.
I know "Camry" is a bad word on this forum, but its not a bad tool for the job.
Trackmouse wrote: Really want to keep it sub compact here. For the mileage.
Thought you said it was highway driving? Most sub-compacts won't get any better mileage there than a mid size, especially fast ones.
New civic is quicker than mentioned earlier: 0-60 6.8s for the CVT.
http://forums.motortrend.com/70/9741680/the-general-forum/2016-civic-first-tests-15t-cvt-goes-0-60-in-68-sec/index.html
ProDarwin wrote:Trackmouse wrote: In reply to KyAllroad: I agree. But it's for swmbo. So needs to be care free and not getting stranded due to negligence from the PO (which I can assume every idiot with a license doesn't take care of theirs).Buy a year or two old Camry V6? Its going to be a solid second faster to 60 than any new car mentioned thus far. And probably more reliable in the long run than many of them. I know "Camry" is a bad word on this forum, but its not a bad tool for the job.
wouldn't you rather have an accord v6
fireball123 wrote: wouldn't you rather have an accord v6
I'm not sure I'd care. They are both roughly the same speed. Both are auto-only in the 4 door. Accord no longer has fancypants double wishbones. Which is cheaper?
Same goes for the Altima.
Did this turn into a what car thread? Also, wife informed me she wants auto. Been looking into those velosters, pretty tempting.
In reply to Andy Neuman:
I've been seeing base v6 mustangs (base model) for under $20k. Strong contender for my next car.
You'll need to log in to post.