Desertbreh wrote: ↑Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:09 pm
Even at $10K off, those Cherokees are on a bullet train straight to depreciation hell.
Yep, which is why you damn well better love the thing if you're gonna sign up for it. And why I'm hesitant, especially considering that doomed 9AT which I hear has received incremental improvements but still behaves similar to the 2014 I test drove which was plus the fact that I really don't like what they did to the design of the thing with the refresh.
There is nothing "good" about the "design" of any 4 door SUVs, they are primarily designed with efficiency in mind, unless you get a JL at that point there are other priorities.
RAV4
CX5
Cherokee
CRV
Santa Fe/Tuscon
Rogue
Forester
etc are so ultra-competitive and similar to one another that it makes no difference which one you get. They literally all weigh 3400-3800 lbs, have fake AWD and are essentially lifted sedan wagons of the past, 200-250hp and cost 25-35k They are all pretty much the same ol shit.
That's like the old school debate of choosing an accord or camry.
Last edited by max225 on Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
max225 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:17 pm
The way most people should look at their vehicles is as completely sunk cost. Worth $0 the second you drive it off the lot, unless you paid in cash.
That'll make quite a few retarded decisions such as being "upside down" on a vehicle disappear. But because I CAN AFFORD THE MONTHLY.
That's how I look at mine. It's a liability until it's paid off, and then it's nothing until I decide to sell it.
Yep, which is why you damn well better love the thing if you're gonna sign up for it. And why I'm hesitant, especially considering that doomed 9AT which I hear has received incremental improvements but still behaves similar to the 2014 I test drove which was plus the fact that I really don't like what they did to the design of the thing with the refresh.
There is nothing "good" about the "design" of any 4 door SUVs, they are primarily designed with efficiency in mind, unless you get a JL at that point there are other priorities.
RAV4
CX5
Cherokee
CRV
Santa Fe/Tuscon
Rogue
Forester
etc are so ultra-competitive and similar to one another that it makes no difference which one you get. They literally all weigh 3400-3800 lbs, have fake AWD and are essentially lifted sedan wagons of the past, 200-250hp and cost 25-35k They are all pretty much the same ol shit.
That's like the old school debate of choosing an accord or camry.
The horsepower / engine is the big thing though. Many of these don't get a real motor. The Cherokee does, but since its heavy it is only just on par with a 1.5T Honda CRV acceleration wise, with the Honda likely feeling quicker. The CRV is hideous though.
I dunno. I'd be cool with a refreshed Forester turbo but there's no turbo motor now. CX5 turbo sounds ideal, we'll see if it delivers.
There is nothing "good" about the "design" of any 4 door SUVs, they are primarily designed with efficiency in mind, unless you get a JL at that point there are other priorities.
RAV4
CX5
Cherokee
CRV
Santa Fe/Tuscon
Rogue
Forester
etc are so ultra-competitive and similar to one another that it makes no difference which one you get. They literally all weigh 3400-3800 lbs, have fake AWD and are essentially lifted sedan wagons of the past, 200-250hp and cost 25-35k They are all pretty much the same ol shit.
That's like the old school debate of choosing an accord or camry.
The horsepower / engine is the big thing though. Many of these don't get a real motor. The Cherokee does, but since its heavy it is only just on par with a 1.5T Honda CRV acceleration wise, with the Honda likely feeling quicker. The CRV is hideous though.
I dunno. I'd be cool with a refreshed Forester turbo but there's no turbo motor now. CX5 turbo sounds ideal, we'll see if it delivers.
I don't see the point of anything turbo in that segment. I'd just try and get as big of a N/A as possible. Less issues down the line. Subaru can't build an engine that lasts past 100k miles without major work.
The horsepower / engine is the big thing though. Many of these don't get a real motor. The Cherokee does, but since its heavy it is only just on par with a 1.5T Honda CRV acceleration wise, with the Honda likely feeling quicker. The CRV is hideous though.
I dunno. I'd be cool with a refreshed Forester turbo but there's no turbo motor now. CX5 turbo sounds ideal, we'll see if it delivers.
I don't see the point of anything turbo in that segment. I'd just try and get as big of a N/A as possible. Less issues down the line. Subaru can't build an engine that lasts past 100k miles without major work.
Turbo or whatever doesn't matter how they do it as long as it has more power than these base engines do. I won't be keeping anything to 100k miles, it'll take me 20 years to get there.
max225 wrote:The way most people should look at their vehicles is as completely sunk cost. Worth $0 the second you drive it off the lot, unless you paid in cash.
That'll make quite a few retarded decisions such as being "upside down" on a vehicle disappear. But because I CAN AFFORD THE MONTHLY.
Depreciation is the biggest cost of most vehicles and varies dramatically. It should always be considered.
max225 wrote:The way most people should look at their vehicles is as completely sunk cost. Worth $0 the second you drive it off the lot, unless you paid in cash.
That'll make quite a few retarded decisions such as being "upside down" on a vehicle disappear. But because I CAN AFFORD THE MONTHLY.
Depreciation is the biggest cost of most vehicles and varies dramatically. It should always be considered.
People can’t math and or figure out when they will sell it. So might as well assume it’s worthless. If you can’t afford to pay for it in cash don’t buy it
Depreciation is the biggest cost of most vehicles and varies dramatically. It should always be considered.
People can’t math and or figure out when they will sell it. So might as well assume it’s worthless. If you can’t afford to pay for it in cash don’t buy it
Most people don't have over $1000 liquid IIRC, they would be driving $500 beaters and spending $400 a month at repair shops... It's probably cheaper to lease a new 320i.
max225 wrote:
People can’t math and or figure out when they will sell it. So might as well assume it’s worthless. If you can’t afford to pay for it in cash don’t buy it
Most people don't have over $1000 liquid IIRC, they would be driving $500 beaters and spending $400 a month at repair shops... It's probably cheaper to lease a new 320i.
Plenty of nice $5000 reliable cars around. If you don't even have 5k in cash you have no business driving. It is a privilege not a right.
$3500 chevy impala, will run to 200k easy, which is another 6-7 years even at 15k miles a year. $3500, and it'll fit 2 backwards facing crotchfruit if you were retarded enough to have any and only have $5k in the bank, that rear seat is enormous, the trunk is huge as well.
troyguitar wrote: ↑Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:25 pm
Most people don't have over $1000 liquid IIRC, they would be driving $500 beaters and spending $400 a month at repair shops... It's probably cheaper to lease a new 320i.
Plenty of nice $5000 reliable cars around. If you don't even have 5k in cash you have no business driving. It is a privilege not a right.
If by "nice" you mean so embarrassing that you might literally die from being seen in one!
max225 wrote:
Plenty of nice $5000 reliable cars around. If you don't even have 5k in cash you have no business driving. It is a privilege not a right.
If by "nice" you mean so embarrassing that you might literally die from being seen in one!
Not embarrassing if you achieved it through honest work. What’s embarrassing is rolling 10k of negative equity into a brand new RAV4 because you “deserve it”
max225 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:08 pm
People can’t math and or figure out when they will sell it. So might as well assume it’s worthless. If you can’t afford to pay for it in cash don’t buy it
I just try to buy cars that don't depreciate like rocks.
And I throw extra money at payments.
I don't factor in depreciation into any calculator or spreadsheet, I just keep track of what the vehicle is worth from time to time. I've never rolled any negative equity into a car loan.
Most of us here are pretty good about it. But we're like in the top 5% of the car buying public. There is some serious shit going on right now.
max225 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 26, 2018 5:25 pm
Most of us here are pretty good about it. But we're like in the top 5% of the car buying public. There is some serious shit going on right now.
Oh yeah, Jimbob rolling $10k of inequity into a $50k purchase.
Happens all the time.
Mazderp customers seem to be pretty intelligent, I don't see many customers with negative equity. We also have a lot of lease customers.
The lease is just a natural evolution of the market. Super high residual values (highest on record) create very "affordable" low monthly payments that allow you to flip cars at minimal cost compared to doing the same thing while purchasing.
The lease is just a natural evolution of the market. Super high residual values (highest on record) create very "affordable" low monthly payments that allow you to flip cars at minimal cost compared to doing the same thing while purchasing.
Honestly, until the market tanks and residuals correct...
It's smart to take advantage of it as a consumer.
That's what I have been doing for the last 2+ years. 0 Rugratz, 5/7 experience