WTB: Best long a$$ commute car

Clearly, the Kia Rondo is the absolute best car made in the last 25 years. But seriously, I struggle to get 17mpg around town and maybe 23 on the highway at best. That kinda sucks if you ask me. I have a very short commute, but if I was at 45 min each way, I'd want a TDi wagon or a 4-cyl Accord or Camry.

92dxman wrote: In reply to Bobzilla: That is a great price.

I thought so too.

I'm surprised at all the comments for accord, camry, etc to be honest. If I have to drive that much, and I do, I want something that I enjoy driving/riding and has at least a little bit of personality.

I'm another +1 for the Jetta TDI. They don't break a lot and get excellent mpg. You could go with a Passat TDI if you needed more interior room.

A 1st gen Mazda 3 wouldn't be a bad choice.

Underneath, they aren't a whole lot different than my 2012 besides a slightly smaller engine, a cartridge style oil filter instead of a spin-on, one less gear in the transmission, and a different body/interior. Brakes, chassis, and other parts are pretty much all the same stuff. The hatches come in pretty much two trims: Touring and Grand Touring. The latter has all sorts of goodies like a sunroof, leather,rain-sensing wipers, better stereo (although there have been complaints about it) and really nice HID's. Hatchback cars also benefit from bigger brakes.

I average 27mpg in mixed driving on my 80-mile round trip commute with the 2.5L, but have gotten as high as 33mpg in the rare occasion that I do all highway driving and don't hit traffic for a week. For an "econobox" it handles really, really well, stops great, and is comfortable (and I am a big guy). The older models are all of those things as well.

Maintenance is super easy, and cheap! No timing belts to worry about, long oil change intervals, and VERY easy to work on. My car may be the easiest car I've ever worked on. Consumables can be purchased just about anywhere and are cheap. I get most of my stuff from RockAuto and Advance. My car has never been back to the dealer since it left one when I bought it. The only common failure-prone parts I have heard of are motor mounts, but they can be replaced cheaply. Upgraded mounts with poly bushings are out there, but I don't recommend them unless you want the whole car to rattle all the time. I put a rear poly 80-durometer mount in my car to firm up shift feel, but I regret it every time I get stuck in traffic.

My only knocks against it is that the fuel tank could be a little larger, and there is not much room in the back seat. I have to fill up every 4 days. 2.0L cars have an even smaller tank.

icaneat50eggs wrote: This is not the typical grass roots suggestion but I'd look at full size gm products with the 3.8. I do 130 miles a day in a 2000 lesabre. I get 30 mpg and it's silky smooth. My commute is also flat and straight

I'll second this. My wife had a 2000 LeSabre and got 13 years and 185K miles out of it before she decided she wanted a new car. And except for the power window mechanisms it was bullet proof, even the battery lasted 9 years. She bought it new and it did get all the regular scheduled maintenance .

I used to do a 80mile each way commute. Needed to keep the kids in the good schools!!

I drove a Corolla good mileage but noisey.

Dodge Neon base model gets good mileage and are cheap.

Yaris also a good runner.

Look into dodge Calibers not popular but reliable and decent mileage.

I second the Astra.

Finally an Hyundai accent

I drive 50-60 miles round trip in v6 Camry. It does a pretty good job, but I have learned that the car you want is the one with the most comfortable seats for you (lack of lumbar support kills me). My pick right now would be mazda 6/fusion/milan. Buy one work what ever you like to be comfortable and drive the wheels off of it. You can also find diet cheap newer impalas and ford 500/taurus for cheap. Taurus X for a wagon.

I'm going to focus on the "nice place to be" element at the expense of other requirements and suggest an S430 from 2001-2003.

I just went through the same process. From working at home with a company car to 100 mile per day commute plus whatever additional miles for inspections.

It was hard to find cars much under $10k with under 100k miles. I ended up narrowing it down to a cruze or an elantra. Both dealers came in just over $16,000 and both cars have 100k power train warranties.

I ended up with a cruze. I liked the interior and how it drove a little better. Plus turbo fun if I get bored later. First two tanks netted me 36 and 32 respectively. The first included me getting used to it and letting everyone drive it. The second had quite a bit more city driving plus an hour or so idling charging my trucks battery. It has a 550 mile range.

Aussiesmg can vouch for the elantra.

Woody wrote: Accord V6.

Do you know anyone selling one?

Greg Voth wrote: I ended up with a cruze. I liked the interior and how it drove a little better. Plus turbo fun if I get bored later. First two tanks netted me 36 and 32 respectively. The first included me getting used to it and letting everyone drive it. The second had quite a bit more city driving plus an hour or so idling charging my trucks battery. It has a 550 mile range.

I actually just returned my rental, a 2013 Cruze. I had it for 12 days and put almost 1200 miles on it. It returned an average of 32.4mpg. It wasn't a bad car, it'd eat up miles fine. But I don't want to spend the $$ on one.

jstand wrote: Not the GRM approach... Depending on how much you value your free time and if a payment would fit into the budget, you may want to look at new. Something Korean and budget friendly would give a long warranty with a good balance of cost and features. Speaking from experience (I used to do 65 miles each way), the last thing you want to do after spend that much time in the car each week, is spend your free time working on your commuting appliance. The family wants to see you, you want to do fun things, and fixing a car on the weekend so you can get to work Monday is not fun. Yes, there is the depreciation hit, but as long as you maintain it you should have it long enough to offset that with several years of only changing the oil and filters.

I'm not even going to bother to read the rest of the thread. This guy has hit the nail ON THE HEAD.

And you seriously do not know what you are missing out with new cars until you test drive one. I've been driven in and have driven many "new" vehicles over my past 12 years of driving. I recently took a test drive in a lowly Sonic (of all things) and my brain asploded. It was honestly that good. The salesman looked at me like I was retarded as I felt all the decently high class materials used on the interior.

Point is, you can get base model stripper cars (which means power windows, power locks, and A/C) for under $15k in the US. With 0% financing, it is a no-brainer. Any used car will require deferred maintenance as people are shiny happy people who don't maintain their cars. A new car, if maintained to the letter, will easily run you 200k+ trouble free miles.

Sounds like a wise investment to me. And as an added bonus, cars are way more efficient nowadays. It's hard to go wrong. GM has 100,000 mile powertrain warranty, the koreans do to.

Edit- Now that I have read the rest of the thread, Greg Voth also nails it. But I see you just had a rental Cruze. To each their own! Once I get my finances a bit more sorted in the next couple months, daily driver = brand new for me from now on.

HiTempguy wrote:

jstand wrote: Not the GRM approach... Depending on how much you value your free time and if a payment would fit into the budget, you may want to look at new. Something Korean and budget friendly would give a long warranty with a good balance of cost and features. Speaking from experience (I used to do 65 miles each way), the last thing you want to do after spend that much time in the car each week, is spend your free time working on your commuting appliance. The family wants to see you, you want to do fun things, and fixing a car on the weekend so you can get to work Monday is not fun. Yes, there is the depreciation hit, but as long as you maintain it you should have it long enough to offset that with several years of only changing the oil and filters.

I'm not even going to bother to read the rest of the thread. This guy has hit the nail ON THE HEAD. And you seriously do not know what you are missing out with new cars until you test drive one. I've been driven in and have driven many "new" vehicles over my past 12 years of driving. I recently took a test drive in a lowly Sonic (of all things) and my brain asploded. It was honestly that good. The salesman looked at me like I was retarded as I felt all the decently high class materials used on the interior. Point is, you can get base model stripper cars (which means power windows, power locks, and A/C) for under $15k in the US. With 0% financing, it is a no-brainer. Any used car will require deferred maintenance as people are shiny happy people who don't maintain their cars. A new car, if maintained to the letter, will easily run you 200k+ trouble free miles. Sounds like a wise investment to me. And as an added bonus, cars are way more efficient nowadays. It's hard to go wrong. GM has 100,000 mile powertrain warranty, the koreans do to.

I don't get this, coming from GRM. All of us on this board are well aware that you can buy old cars for extremely little $ (compared to new) that require very little maintenance, still "nice" places to spend time, and relatively efficient, etc. I work on my car every 6 months or so, and my wife's car every 9 months, and do some basic maintenance. Both are very cheap cars that cost way way way less to operate than anything you can buy new. Even if I paid someone do periodically do maintenance to them (i.e. not consuming my free time), I'd still be way ahead of buying a new car.

In reply to ProDarwin: I do understand the appeal of the new car and the reasoning behind it. It was a big reason I leased my Leaf last summer. The Leaf was a really nice car, a great place to spend time. When I combined that with the zero maintenance and zero fuel, it was too good to pass up. It was a very refreshing change from the old cars I always used to drive. But with my new commute, the Leaf won't work so I won't get another one...the insurance company is coming to pick up the golf ball remains of mine today.

However, with cars like the one Bobzilla pointed out I can't justify a brand new car. A car with 60k miles or less likely won't have a lot of deferred maintenance, and the price point is right. As much as I enjoyed having a new car, I can't justify spending an extra $10k for it.

I'd agree. If I could have found something like that elantra gt he linked I would have jumped on it.

Missed out on a $5500 soul with 80k and a $3500 element with 100k. Both sold within hours of listing. Part of my decision was the two week time frame and my need for the car to be presentable.

Otherwise I would drive the 5.0 Volvo or RX3 or one of the RX7s until the right car fell in my lap. However I don't think my employer would want me rolling up to inspections in those.

One like Bobzilla linked to makes a lot more sense than something in the $6,000 range with 100k.

I think the thing people forget when comparing new to used is that the longer you keep the car the smaller the difference becomes.

If you buy a used car that is 10 years old with 100k on the odometer you will have to replace it sooner than the new car. So of you replace cars at 200k, you'll buy 2 used cars rather than 1 new. Replacing at 300k reduces that, but you still replace the car significantly sooner.

Add to that that repairs beyond normal maintenance typically increases with age and mileage. Parts wear out due to use, and corrosion is more prevalent the older a car gets.

Everyone's situation is different, but if you plan to keep the car until the wheels fall off, then make sure you consider the long term costs including the earlier replacement.

Many manufacturers have also improved quality/design which has reduced some of the PM item. For example some have moved to timing chains rather than belts, so the maintenance cost on a new/newer car may be significantly lower over a long period of ownership.

Either approach can work, the key is to understand all the variable so you pick the one that is best for your situation.

This -> http://www.ebay.com/itm/BMW-3-Series-318i-4-1991-bmw-318-i-5-speed-it-s-the-poor-mans-m-3-one-owner-low-69-k-miles-no-rust-/231251298615?forcerrptr=true&hash=item35d7a6c937&item=231251298615&pt=US_Cars_Trucks

Checks all the boxes: cheap, fun, reliable and good gas mileage

If you lower the mileage requirement a bit to increase the fun quotient a bit, you can pick up some great FWD sedans.
The Altima SE-R was a great long-distance ride. Not sure if they have dropped under $6k, but perhaps. I had a Dodge Intrepid R/T for my long long commute.
It wasn't as cool as this one, but it was an amazing GT car. I could do 8 hour stretches with no discomfort, and it had good power for passing and merging and on-ramps. Tons of room too. GM had some supercharged sedans from that era as well.

Cotton wrote: I'm surprised at all the comments for accord, camry, etc to be honest. If I have to drive that much, and I do, I want something that I enjoy driving/riding and has at least a little bit of personality.

I'm not sure I could put up with using my wife's automatic equipped Camry as a daily driver, but an Accord is marginally less boring, and would be tolerable if I got one with a stick shift. And maybe added some aftermarket springs and shocks.

Too bad Accords didn't come with an H22A in the US. I've driven one with a swap that seemed like it would be a nice GT car, except it had several things that needed sorting out that I didn't want to monkey with.

MadScientistMatt wrote:

Cotton wrote: I'm surprised at all the comments for accord, camry, etc to be honest. If I have to drive that much, and I do, I want something that I enjoy driving/riding and has at least a little bit of personality.

I'm not sure I could put up with using my wife's automatic equipped Camry as a daily driver, but an Accord is marginally less boring, and would be tolerable if I got one with a stick shift. And maybe added some aftermarket springs and shocks. Too bad Accords didn't come with an H22A in the US. I've driven one with a swap that seemed like it would be a nice GT car, except it had several things that needed sorting out that I didn't want to monkey with.

Accords are more ripe for "G32 Vtecs."

Take one part F23 block, one part H22A head, stir vigorously, adding K20 pistons if you so desire. Make all kinds of power.

I think a Ford Fusion manual would be a good choice like this one: http://cashforcarsnc.com/detail.php?id=196493&return_page=search.php&make=Ford&model=&ext_color=&price=&from_year=&to_year=&miles=&order_by=price&updown_order=ASC&show_page=10&page_num=1&first_run=F&extra_options=

I know they are subject to a huge recall but I think you could find a Chevy Cobalt Sedan well within your price range. They are pretty good commuter type vehicles. Mrs. DX had one a couple years ago and I drove it a few times on the highway and it was perfectly capable and probably would return fuel mileage in the 30s.

Swank Force One wrote: Accords are more ripe for "G32 Vtecs." Take one part F23 block, one part H22A head, stir vigorously, adding K20 pistons if you so desire. Make all kinds of power.

And I saw an otherwise really nice Accord coupe that had a burnt valve at a great price about a month ago, but I wasn't too quick to grab it and someone else got there first.

My wife would thank you for not telling me about that sooner if she knew, as the fact that I didn't know you could put an H22A head on that thing has saved her a lot of tied up garage space for a couple months.

ProDarwin wrote: I don't get this, coming from GRM. All of us on this board are well aware that you can buy old cars for extremely little $ (compared to new) that require very little maintenance, still "nice" places to spend time, and relatively efficient, etc. I work on my car every 6 months or so, and my wife's car every 9 months, and do some basic maintenance. Both are very cheap cars that cost way way way less to operate than anything you can buy new. Even if I paid someone do periodically do maintenance to them (i.e. not consuming my free time), I'd still be way ahead of buying a new car.

This becomes a YMMV thing. If you live in an area with little snow, and no salt, I absolutely agree.

I do not. It becomes -40*C for weeks on end here in the winter. We regularily see dumps of a foot or two of snow. It is miserable for 6 months of the year.

I don't want to work on a car during those months unless its in a heated garage. And it beats the piss out of any car, new or old.

In my "for instance" of a Sonic RS or Fiesta ST that I was looking at buying, find me an example of a comparable car for $6-$8k?

And also, you are looking at it from the eyes of someone who has owned a used car for a while. When buying a used car, it is realistic (if over 60k miles) to have to budget for:

-tires
-brakes
-timing belt (possibly water pump)
-ALL fluids
-belts
-windshield

That right there if you don't skimp, even DIY, is well over a grand. And lets face it, we are enthusiasts, we are car guys. Are we going to buy the CHEAPEST tires? Hell no. The cheapest brakes? Hell no! Even being conservative, if you are buying quality, brand name parts, you are looking at at least $1k in maintenance for any used car with 60k miles... and there aren't many cars up here with 100,000kms (60k miles) that sell for $6k let me tell you!

And finally, I know that I can get 500,000kms out of a brand new car. Most people struggle to get them to 250,000kms. That plays a big factor; if you plan on keeping the car until it is worn out, it makes sense to buy new. Its the same fallacy as buying used tires; on a pure ROI analysis, it is ALWAYS a better deal to buy new tires (with the caveat being IF you use them up 100%).