You MAY be able to find a 2004-2005 TSX with about 150,000 miles for $6,000. Kinda like this one: http://columbus.craigslist.org/cto/4286309629.html. I've seen them go many more miles than this. It has a 5-spd autostick transmission that has received great reviews...even from GRM members. I'm pulling for ya to get better!
I dd a 2006 Mazda 6 2.3 hatchback. It's decently powered, has plenty of room for hauling junk and handles well for a fwd appliance car. The 5-speed auto is decently fun to drive. I saw a few people recommend a 3, but I'd say try a 6 as well. The 3 I had (05 2.3 SP hatch)was a great car, except for the ac compressor, but driving it felt like you were sitting on a milk crate. The interior of the six feels more like a sports car and the seat sits lower. Also, I get a little better mpg on the 6
yesterday's doctor's appointment gave a glimmer of hope. I'll keep everyone up to date. If all goes well (fingers crossed) we're hoping in 2 weeks to be able to scale back antibotics and possibly start PT back up.
2006 Scion xB, most reliable car I've ever owned. And I just happen to know where to get one for the GRM price of $5k. 
captdownshift wrote: yesterday's doctor's appointment gave a glimmer of hope. I'll keep everyone up to date. If all goes well (fingers crossed) we're hoping in 2 weeks to be able to scale back antibotics and possibly start PT back up.
Great! Be your own advocate, and fight like the dickens to keep that arm.
Man, I'm sorry to hear about your situation. Unless you're looking for a capital-letters Sports Car, I also second the recommendation for the TSX:
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?atCarId=15861321&Log=0&listingId=361108257
It's an extremely pleasant daily driver and the autobox works very nicely. The K24 makes enough sauce that you are not gasping when you punch it to make that hole in traffic.
In reply to Jerry: my current daily is an 06 xb with manual. outside of the charcoal filter it's been pretty solid, it's nimble but certainly not sporting
Consider a 1990-1992 Mercedes-Benz (C124) 300CE coupe, known as the 300CE-24 in other markets. These had the 217 hp M104 engine (DOHC, variable valve timing) and larger 4-piston front, 2-piston rear brakes.
Just make sure it's a '90 to '92 model: post-1992 were plagued by reliability issues; pre-1990 had the old 12-valve M103 engine. Handling is mushy in stock form, but a number of suspension options are available from Bilstein, Koni, Eibach, KYB, KW, H&R, and Ground Control. There are also several "factory" upgrades using the R129 500SL parts bin, including Brembo brakes and stronger strut mounts.
It's a smooth, sleek, pillar-less coupe. Good power. Sophisticated suspension. Front engine, RWD, with LSD. And you can find a good example for $3500-$5000 all day long.
In reply to carbon:
IS300, Bingo!
http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/open-classifieds/fsft-1988-volvo-740-turbo-sedean-auto-clean-texas-car-3kbo-wi/77452/page1/
This car
carbon wrote: IS300
This
Not sure how clean an example you could find in your price range though. Has shifter buttons on steering wheel for when you feel sporty.
I dd a 2006 Mazda 6 2.3 hatchback. It's decently powered, has plenty of room for hauling junk and handles well for a fwd appliance car. The 5-speed auto is decently fun to drive. I saw a few people recommend a 3, but I'd say try a 6 as well. The 3 I had (05 2.3 SP hatch)was a great car, except for the ac compressor, but driving it felt like you were sitting on a milk crate. The interior of the six feels more like a sports car and the seat sits lower. Also, I get a little better mpg on the 6
Ive owned a mazda3 and just helped a friend purchase a 2.3L Mazda6. It's got a strong sporting bent for a 4cylinder fwd family car. The 4cyl/auto combo feels decent in it. Having driven the 3.0/5spd version i'm not even sure i'd go out of my way for it vs the 4 cyl. It's harder to work on but isnt as fast as you might think. Depends on how much you care about HP. Between the 3 and the 6 the big deciding factors as i see it are room and mpg. The 6 is roomier, the 3 gets way better gas mileage if you get a 2.0. Our 2.0 never averaged less than 29, or got less than 35 on the highway. WIth the a/c off i saw anywhere from 37-42 on the highway with it. The 2.3 gets E36 M3 mileage in the 3. Bad enough that it sort of ruins the whole idea of a 3 Hatch for me.
LanEvo wrote: Consider a 1990-1992 Mercedes-Benz (C124) 300CE coupe, known as the 300CE-24 in other markets. These had the 217 hp M104 engine (DOHC, variable valve timing) and larger 4-piston front, 2-piston rear brakes. Just make sure it's a '90 to '92 model: post-1992 were plagued by reliability issues; pre-1990 had the old 12-valve M103 engine. Handling is mushy in stock form, but a number of suspension options are available from Bilstein, Koni, Eibach, KYB, KW, H&R, and Ground Control. There are also several "factory" upgrades using the R129 500SL parts bin, including Brembo brakes and stronger strut mounts. It's a smooth, sleek, pillar-less coupe. Good power. Sophisticated suspension. Front engine, RWD, with LSD. And you can find a good example for $3500-$5000 all day long.
I want that.
I would go with a C4 Vette. My Dad and I tracked one for a few years. He was in his early 70s and just put it in gear and drove it hard. I would actually manualy downshift and it put up with that abuse. Definetly go for a 92-96 due to the LT1 motor. Don't be afraid of mileage on that engine. Be more concerned with overall condition. They can be had in that price range in nice shape. Search the Corvete forums for better prices believe it or not. I can give you more info on these cars if needed. Hope all turns out well for you though.
Mike
beans wrote: I want that.
I bought one recently. One-owner, dealer-serviced since new, garaged, rust- and accident-free, etc. Very clean. Needed new dampers and tires. Runs and drives like a brand-new car. Paid under $5k.
Lanevo- nothing to worry about on the later coupes reliabity-wise. It is very easy to spot an original wiring harness. The 90-92 coupes do have better rear end ratios than the 93-95 cars.
LS1 F-body. Without the T56 tax they dip down near your price range. Tons of low end torque and power to over 6000 rpms, SLA front suspension and a nice 3 link rear. If there aren't any in that price range in your area, a well kept LT1 car with low miles should fit the bill, though it'll have the dreaded optispark and a bit less power. I've seen both LS and LT engines go near a quarter of a million miles, parts are cheap, and everything's pretty straightforward so labor won't be bad.
2v 4.6 Mustangs seem really reliable too and have plenty of torque and make awesome noise, though they have even less power yet, modified McPherson struts and the bind-o-matic 4 link. A coworker of mine has one with 140k on it with an auto and beats on it every time he drives it and a friend of mine has done countless burnouts on the rev limiter in his... Neither has broken anything.
Honorable mention: v8 Taurus SHO, LT1 Impala SS, SC300/400
At any rate, hope everything turns out well for you and you have a speedy recovery.
You'll need to log in to post.
