Hi, I drive a 2000 Ford Explorer with horrible ergonomics and bad fuel economy (guessing around 17mpg highway). It's got 86,000+ miles on it. Still living with my parents during the summer, I am very lucky to have a dad who is willing to both sell my truck for me and purchase my next vehicle. We got my truck for around 5k.
[IMG]http://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/ford/explorer/2000/oem/2000_ford_explorer_2dr-suv_sport_fq_oem_1_300.jpg[/IMG]
Here are the main things that I dislike about my truck:
-fuel economy
-horrible interior ergonomics
-awful acceleration
-slow, delayed shifting from a stop
-driver seat doesn't go back far enough for my legs (6' height)
-noisy to the point of mental fatigue on the highway. Long trips are more tiring than they should be.
And what I want:
-I mountain bike, and will either need cargo room for a bike in the back or the capability to install a roof/rear bike rack.
-better cornering
-better acceleration
-much better fuel economy (been eyeing Honda civics for this reason)
-better sound dampening qualities
-Manual or auto. I don't know how to drive stick yet but I would like to. My friend drives a Honda Civic 2008 that's stick and it's a ton of fun to be in.
The thing is, basically any vehicle that you can buy now surpasses this truck in all of those ways, so it's hard to choose with all of the options :v:
One strong point of it is that it's capable when the ice hits with it's 4WD mode (it snows once a year if even that. I'm from Arkansas). Not a huge deal. I honestly thing I could survive with a front-wheel drive shopping cart in this climate.
Cars that I've been heavily considering:
-Subaru Outback (I like the style of the older ones that look less SUV-ish. Seems capable, AWD)
-Subaru Forester (A balance b/w cargo space, seems capable, AWD)
-Honda Civic (awesome fuel economy, snappy fun driving)
-Honda CRV (Seems like a good all-around vehicle)
-Honda Element? (Huge cargo space)
-Toyota RAV4 (Great fuel economy for what it is)
[B]We're going to be buying used with a budget of around 8K with no more than 85,000 miles.
Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks![/B]
Any good cars that you want?
Just a few pointers:
>The ford explorer is not a truck. Do not call it a truck.
>The element and rav4 seem a bit big for what you need, and probably corner like shit
>The civic is probably too small for carrying a mountain bike about.
>The forester and outback are much better crossovers than the crv
Your best bet is probably one of the Subies.
[QUOTE=MightyMax;36924001]Any good cars that you want?[/QUOTE]
Yep. Subarus are so hard to find used though.
[quote]Cars that I've been heavily considering:
-Subaru Outback (I like the style of the older ones that look less SUV-ish. Seems capable, AWD)
-Subaru Forester (A balance b/w cargo space, seems capable, AWD)
-Honda Civic (awesome fuel economy, snappy fun driving)
-Honda CRV (Seems like a good all-around vehicle)
-Honda Element? (Huge cargo space)
-Toyota RAV4 (Great fuel economy for what it is)[/quote]
And I know it's not a truck, but I've always called it a truck and I always will call it a truck. It handles like a damn truck.
[QUOTE=CottonTM;36924042]Yep. Subarus are so hard to find used though.[/QUOTE]
Have you ever been on Craigslist at least once in your life?
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924038]
>The ford explorer is not a truck. Do not call it a truck.
[/QUOTE]
i feel like you're getting confused with the difference between a pickup truck and a truck. a ford explorer is a truck.
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924047]Have you ever been on Craigslist at least once in your life?[/QUOTE]
For the past 3 years. For the past month intensely looking for vehicle updates about 5 times a day man.
OH. I should mention that we aren't buying from dealers :v:. Limits options.
I would like basically this I think:
[URL]http://littlerock.craigslist.org/cto/3040895466.html[/URL]
Black is not my favorite to to how hot it gets in the summer. That's a big deal here for me. Also, too much moneys.
[QUOTE=Hell Strike;36924062]i feel like you're getting confused with the difference between a pickup truck and a truck. a ford explorer is a truck.[/QUOTE]
Getting technical, it's an SUV, but by today's SUV standards it's a truck. I don't count it as an SUV myself either. But who cares...clip, magazine...I'd like to get back on topic. I'm open to any suggestions that I haven't mentioned as well. I've heard that Kias are pretty shite in terms of reliability, thus the great warranty.
[QUOTE=Hell Strike;36924062]i feel like you're getting confused with the difference between a pickup truck and a truck. a ford explorer is a truck.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps to the government it's a truck, but to me it's a SUV.
[QUOTE=CottonTM;36924063]For the past 3 years. For the past month intensely looking for vehicle updates about 5 times a day man.[/QUOTE]
What backwards part of America do you live in where there aren't a great abundance of 90's Outbacks for sale?
[QUOTE=CottonTM;36924063]OH. I should mention that we aren't buying from dealers :v:. Limits options.[/QUOTE]
Actually, if anything, that greatly broadens options.
Unless you're looking for something from the past 5 years, which is kinda dumb.
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924080]Perhaps to the government it's a truck, but to me it's a SUV.
What backwards part of America do you live in where there aren't a great abundance of 90's Outbacks for sale?
Actually, if anything, that greatly broadens options.
Unless you're looking for something from the past 5 years, which is kinda dumb.[/QUOTE]
Welcome to Arkansas:
[URL]http://littlerock.craigslist.org/search/cto?query=subaru&srchType=T&minAsk=&maxAsk=[/URL]
I'm sort of hoping to get nothing older than a 2001ish year also, just because. Am I asking for too much? We got this Explorer for 5k...
The way i see it, if it has a truck frame, it's a truck, regardless what bodyclass it is.
[QUOTE=MightyMax;36924100]The way i see it, if it has a truck frame, it's a truck, regardless what bodyclass it is.[/QUOTE]
Okay.
A major deterrent of getting cars older than 2000ish is that they always have 100k+ miles on them. Which is to be expected, but we aren't going to buy something with that many miles on it.
[QUOTE=CottonTM;36924090]Welcome to Arkansas:
[URL]http://littlerock.craigslist.org/search/cto?query=subaru&srchType=T&minAsk=&maxAsk=[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
Damn, you might as well take a trip to Louisiana to buy a car.
If I were you, I'd pick up the first half-decent car you came across, regardless of what it is. :v:
[QUOTE=CottonTM;36924090]I'm sort of hoping to get nothing older than a 2001ish year also, just because. Am I asking for too much? We got this Explorer for 5k...[/QUOTE]
Don't get sucked into the soccer mom mentality of "old is bad". There's absolutely nothing wrong with many 90's cars as daily drivers,
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924166]Damn, you might as well take a trip to Louisiana to buy a car.
If I were you, I'd pick up the first half-decent car you came across, regardless of what it is. :v:
Don't get sucked into the soccer mom mentality of "old is bad". There's absolutely nothing wrong with many 90's cars as daily drivers,[/QUOTE]
It's just that they're usually likely to have been through more owners and it frightens me that they may be at the end of their lifetimes.
I could make the 3 hour drive for this baby :O
[url]http://fayar.craigslist.org/cto/3143423592.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924038]
>The forester and outback are much better crossovers than the crv[/QUOTE]
How the hell is forester and outback crossovers?
They're SUVs
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924228]How the hell is forester and outback crossovers?
They're SUVs[/QUOTE]
They're definitely crossovers, can't we all be friends :downs:? The Forester is at least.
said the guy who calls his SUV a truck.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924228]How the hell is forester and outback crossovers?[/QUOTE]
Well the Forester is definitely a crossover but I guess one could argue that the Outback is more of a station wagon with raise-
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924228]They're SUVs[/QUOTE]
Oh dear jesus.
Oh this shit again
SUV:
[url]http://gfx.dagbladet.no/labrador/136/136261/13626155/jpg/active/960x.jpg[/url]
[url]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Land_Rover_Ranger_Rover.jpg/800px-Land_Rover_Ranger_Rover.jpg[/url]
Crossover:
[url]http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/TV2/archive/00783/BMW_X6_783749p.jpg[/url]
[url]http://www.belovedcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011-nissan-juke-crossover.jpg[/url]
SUV's are like raised station wagons with chunky tires
Crossovers are like ugly economic cars with chunky tires and no space in the back
Pretty simple
Well, I guess I know that I want a Subaru Outback or Forester. It's sort of hard to choose between the two. If I got an Outback then using a roof rack would be a lot easier, but if I get a Forester then I have enough cargo space to fit the bike in back with the front wheel off.
The Outback has a lower center of gravity, so there's that.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924567]
Crossovers are like ugly economic cars with chunky tires and no space in the back
[/QUOTE]
no
[img]http://puu.sh/Lvuo[/img]
Here then:
[url]http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/forester/index.html[/url]
The title of Subaru's own site calls the forester a new mid-sized SUV
and this government site says that the Outback is an SUV
[url]http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shoppers/5-Star+Safety+Ratings/2011-Newer+Vehicles/Vehicle-Detail?vehicleId=6236[/url]
Alright guys, that's enough :downs:.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924643]Here then:
[url]http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/forester/index.html[/url]
The title of Subaru's own site calls the forester a new mid-sized SUV
[/QUOTE]
Chrysler's website says that good cars are for sale on that website. I suppose I have to believe them.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924643]
and this government site says that the Outback is an SUV
[url]http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shoppers/5-Star+Safety+Ratings/2011-Newer+Vehicles/Vehicle-Detail?vehicleId=6236[/url][/QUOTE]
The government says this is a truck:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/2007ChevroletHHR-001.jpg/800px-2007ChevroletHHR-001.jpg[/img]
Your argument is invalid.
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36924807]
The government says this is a truck:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/2007ChevroletHHR-001.jpg/800px-2007ChevroletHHR-001.jpg[/img]
Your argument is invalid.[/QUOTE]
Wikipedia says that's a station wagon and says that it's won these awards:
[quote=Wikipedia]Awards
2006 Golden Icon Award for "Best SUV""
2007 Golden Icon Award for "Best SUV"[/quote]
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36924872]Wikipedia says that's a station wagon and says that it's won these awards:[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.trucktrend.com/features/tech/163_1008_2011_chevrolet_hhr_techical_specifications/index.html[/url]
[img]http://puu.sh/LvW2[/img]
Ok, so the government thinks it's a SUV. The point still stands - you can't cite the government when properly classifying a vehicle. The HHR is in no way offroad-ready (which is what you consider qualification for SUV classification). More damning is the fact that the HHR is based of the Cobalt platform rather than a truck's.
Fuck, I was just looking at buying a Ford Explorer
So Wikipedia says that the Forester is a crossover and the HHR is a station wagon, which is both wrong.
Then why are you rating me dumb for simply showing what Wikipedia says which is clearly wrong and yet you use Wikipedia to "prove me wrong" with the Forester when Subaru themselves says it's an SUV
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925014]So Wikipedia says that the Forester is a crossover and the HHR is a station wagon, which is both wrong.[/QUOTE]
No, I'd say Wikipedia is spot-on for both of those.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925014]Then why are you rating me dumb for simply showing what Wikipedia says which is clearly wrong and yet you use Wikipedia to "prove me wrong" with the Forester when Subaru themselves says it's an SUV[/QUOTE]
No, I'm rating you dumb for citing the government for classifications (which is why those awards were in the SUV class). I'm actually a bit confused as to why you brought up the the whole Wikipedia thing in reference to the HHR, as it just backs up what I was saying (I was arguing that the government wrongly classified it as a SUV, and Wikipedia supported that by classifying it as a wagon).
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925014]Subaru themselves says it's an SUV[/QUOTE]
On that logic, I guess [url=http://www.powerbalance.com/]Power Balance Braclets[/url] actually work. I mean, the makers themselves say so.
How could a wrongly classified car win two awards for being great at something that it isn't?
Also alot of sites say that the Outback is a station wagon/SUV
[editline]25th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;36925148]
On that logic, I guess [url=http://www.powerbalance.com/]Power Balance Braclets[/url] actually work. I mean, the makers themselves say so.[/QUOTE]
You're not very intelligent, are you?
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925199]How could a wrongly classified car win two awards for being great at something that it isn't?[/QUOTE]
If the people who are handing out the awards are classifying cars the same way the government is, then a car could easily win awards for being great at something it isn't. The HHR gets much better gas mileage and is probably a whole lot safer than actual SUVs. That, and people really liked the retro styled shit during that time period.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925199]Also alot of sites say that the Outback is a station wagon/SUV[/QUOTE]
A lot of sites don't really know what they're talking about and just go by what other sites/the government say. With the government calling it a SUV and sites like Edmunds calling it a "SUV alternative," I can see how people get their info wrong.
[QUOTE=Ldesu;36925199]You're not very intelligent, are you?[/QUOTE]
Excellent ad hominem.
I don't see how that refutes my point - the makers of the Outback say its a SUV, the makers of the bracelet say its a magical bracelet that gives you extra balance and energy. Ever considered that both might be lying a bit to get sales?
Ok, so one is stretching the truth and the other is outright lying, but the point is that businesses will say things that aren't entirely true in order to turn a profit. If Subaru can label their wagon as a SUV (a term that is synonymous with "good at going offroad" to many prospective buyers), then they can probably get more sales than if they labeled it as a wagon (a term which doesn't particularly imply offroad ability).
Oh, and OP should buy a Subaru and forget this thread ever existed.
You both went full retard. Never go full retard. Thanks for the help while it lasted :v:.
How about you two never utter another vehicle classification around one another and start calling them AUTOMOBILES~
To the guy who's looking at Explorers:
It isn't a bad vehicle, in fact the Explorer has a very very reliable reputation and it's a very capable automobile~. It just doesn't get the fuel economy that I desire, and the 2000 is outclassed by everything that's out there now.
In other news, we're contacting an Outback owner today about meeting up if everything sounds right. I won't actually be able to test drive it since I can't drive manual, hah.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.