Since Paul brought up little sports cars, I thought I'd bring up my quandary.

My wife's car is an '87 (or so -- I forget) Chevy S-10 Blazer. It's a real piece. Has been shortly after we got it used many years ago, but it's been mostly holding together. Now it's got a starter problem -- probably not too hard to fix; I could probably do it myself -- and a bad suspension problem, which I probably can't do myself. Based on some estimates, I'm looking at probably about $1500US to fix it, most of it for the suspension.

I really don't want to sink money into that car. For one thing, I've got a problem with SUVs carrying around a single person, which is pretty much what it's degraded into being used for. (She used to haul a bunch of crap around, but now it's groceries and car repair stuff.) At the same time, I don't think I can get a car that would be significantly more reliable for anywhere close to $1500. Add to that that I just spent all our money on a new car for me (before hers broke down this much) and I'm not sure where to go.

If we were to get a new car, we'd probably want to get something in a small wagon/hatchback. My wife really likes the Mini Coopers, but there may be too little cargo space. Then again, we hardly ever cart other folks around in her car. But maybe something like a Golf or a Jetta Wagon. Or a Forester wagon. But I probably can't afford anything new.

So my point is, given those criteria (limited budget but could probably swing a cheap payment, $1500 repair on old car, probably an insignifcant amount for tradein or sale for the old car), what would you do?

Used Saab 9-3

Hatchback is convenient for loading with crap

About 30MPG highway

Turbo

It's a Saab

I hate sinking money into old vehicles. Were I in your situation, I'd take that $1500 and put it down on a car that's a couple of years old and maybe in the 10-15K price range. Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Mazda Protege are some vehicles that come to mind.

-Dylan

You could do something like a used RAV4

Reliability numbers on the Mini Cooper or any Volkswagen product would scare me away. Looking at Consumer Reports' April 2003 cars issue, under "the best and worst used cars", they recommend:

(Under $6000)

Ford Escort '97-98
Geo Metro '95 / Prizm '95-96 / Tracker '95
Mazda Protege '96
Mercury Tracer '97-98
Subaru Impreza '95
Suzuki Sidekick '95 / Swift '95
Toyota Tercel '95

($6000-8000)

Chevy Prizm '98
Ford Escort '99-00 / Ranger (2WD) '95-97
Geo Prizm '97
Honda Civic '95-96
Mazda B-Series (@WD) '95 / Miata '95 / Protege '97-98
Mercury Tracer '99
Nissan Altima '96 / Sentra '97
Saturn SL/SW '98-99
Subaru Impreza '96 / Legacy '95
Toyota Corolla '95-97 / Tercel '96-97

The full list is only available to subscribers although they do have some general recommendations. If you want, I'll type in some of the more expensive categories for you. Among other interesting cars that you may or may not have been considering, they seem to think highly of the Infiniti G20's and a long list of Toyota products. Interestingly, they never recommend a car made before 1995, regardless of price bracket.

The Saab 9-3 does make the list, for a '00-01 model (which they think you can get for $22-26K). Of course, for that money, you can get a variety of different new cars.

Lastly, it's interesting to read the "used cars to avoid" section. They pan a long list of Audi and VW products, not to mention a substantial portion of the product line from the Big 3 U.S. manufacturers, including the 1995 Chevy S-10 (4-cyl) and the '96-02 Chevy S-10 (6-cyl). That would support your decision to drop the car and look elsewhere.

My wife's car is an '87 (or so -- I forget) Chevy S-10 Blazer... Now it's got a starter problem ... and a bad suspension problem

I'm sure this doesn't help, but I can empathize a little. I have an '89 S-10 Blazer, 2WD, 4.3L V6 with 176k miles.

Funny that you mention that stuff, because last year, my starter died twice. It wasn't very expensive to fix either time though (they claimed the problems were unrelated, although it broke twice within about 3 weeks).

I also have a problem with the front end. I've been told by one mechanic that the problem is that the pitman arm and the idler arm are worn out. Anyway the tires wear on the inside much faster and one of the tires rubs against the wheelwell if turned very sharply. Is that somewhat similar to what you are experiencing? If so, thanks, because I was wondering what it would cost to fix. My solution so far has been to buy cheap tires and rotate them regularly to make them last as long as possible... I don't have $1500 to sink into a vehicle that old...

In reply to:

---

It's a Saab

---

Despite that it still seems like a good value.

-Dylan

Saabs rule. Plus they have an oddly large enthusiast crowd.

a used RAV4

I failed to emphasize how much I want to avoid an SUV, of any size. I personally dislike them to no end, and my wife would be more comfortable in a smaller car Her coordination is not the best, and it's hard for her to maneuver the smallish SUV we've got.

I'm not sure that I see the ethics in using New Car reliability statistics to make recommendations on Used cars.

For many years, cars like software, have followed the bath-tub curve for costs - typically the first year or 2 are expensive due to teething issues, followed by ~7 years of low cost maintenance, and then increasing costs as all the original components hit the end of their expected life. (That 7 years figure has probably increased now, I'm quoting (from memory) an early 90s study).

The teething issues costs are covered by warranty - that is the entire reason for the warranty. Some people may get the bad tranny, whilst others will get the bad spark plug lead. Since one is exhorbitantly more expensive to replace than the other, and you have no way of telling at the time that you buy the car, it would not be fair on consumers to _not_ have a warranty. Effectively, the warranty averages out the costs of all teething issues and puts them into the price of the car.

So some cars will have more teething issues than others. Some will spend more time in the shop during their first 2 years than others, and this will be reflected in the statistics. But once these teething issues have been dealt with, do those statistics have any meaning?
Both VW and Audi have been hit extremely hard by coilpack issues on their 1.8T engines. The coilpacks were designed and manufactured by a third party supply company. It turns out that 2001 and 2002 models had a bad design that was prone to failure, especially in extreme cold weather conditions. _Every_ 2001/2002 VW/Audi 1.8T car had this issue, and due to the large percentage of failures, those coilpacks are being replaced as a routine operation. Now the statistics reflect that failure, even though by the time you buy a second hand 2001 car in late 2003 it's probably not got those coilpacks any more.

Reliability numbers on the Mini Cooper or any Volkswagen product would scare me away.

I hear varying reports on VWs. Can you give me some of their info on the Mini, though? I hadn't really heard anything yet.

they recommend

I find it hard to believe that the Escort, Geos, Mercury, or Suzuki are even remotely reliable. And I'm sad to say that we're both a little style-conscious (other reports to the contrary nonetheless), and few of those cars meet that criterion.

I feel like I have more to say here, but I think it mostly stems from the fact that I want something for nothing. Ah, well.

I have an '89 S-10 Blazer, 2WD, 4.3L V6 with 176k miles.

The starter problem I'm having is that it seems the starter motor is not engaging the engine and is spinning freely. It often takes a dozen tries before it actually catches and turns the engine. I have the feeling that this is a fairly simple repair.

The suspension problem is something else. It's been going on quite a while, and we've had folks try to deal with it. Basically, the car squeaks going over every minor bump. You can hear it hundreds of yards away. This is an annoyance. The big bad symptom is that it occasionally produces this clunk from the suspension. It doesn't really seem to have anything to do with hitting a bump. Sometimes a bump will elicit one, but sometimes seemingly nothing will. The latest report seemed more confident than the others, and the idea is that the a-arm ball joints are shot and need to be replaced. I'm afraid that my knowledge of suspensions is failingly small, so I have to take their word for it. In the past, the things they've tried have been done for free or next to it, so I don't feel like they're trying to pad their bill. I think they've just been somewhat stymied by it. It's recently gotten worse, so they probably had a better opportunity to find the problem this last time.

So far, no one's thinking that I should sink money into the old car, right? Any proponents for that?

So far, no one's thinking that I should sink money into the old car, right? Any proponents for that?

Well, new(er) cars are fun, but I've always liked the "if you can keep repairing it for less than a monthly car payment, keep repairing it" philosophy.

-jk

I can understand that.

The main advantage to a new (to me) car would be that there is a lot of stuff broken about the car otherwise. The driver's-side window's control is broken. The stereo is broken. The roof liner is hanging (despite my efforts to fix it). The power locks don't work. It occasionally wipes the windshield once for no reason. One of the interior door handles doesn't close on its own. The center console latch and hinge is broken. The passenger seat doesn't lock back solidly (a passenger won't fly forward, but it's impossible to use to lean against when backing up). The A/C fan switch detents don't exist any more, but it does work.

And it's always going in for something. It's far from reliable at the best of times, though it's never left either of us stranded. And it's probably close to costing me a monthy payment in random stuff. I think I'm really talking myself into getting a different car.

I think I'm really talking myself into getting a different car.

If that were my car, I'd say you just did.

-jk

How do you feel about the GMification of Saab? If I were a Saab loyalist I would cringe at the thought of sharing a platform with a Chevy Malibu. Do you think what made Saabs special (good and bad) is gone?

-Dylan

I bought my Saab before the "GMification." However, the new 9-3 Sport Sedan is pretty nice. The Epsilon platform is just that, a platform. There is suspension bits and other parts that then make it a chassis. The Malibu, Opel Vectra, and 9-3 do not share the same chassis.

I don't like seeing GM logos all over the new 9-3, but it is still a Saab built in Sweden. Unfortunately, the 9-7 will be a rebadged Chevy Trail Blazer. That is a horrible mistake. Less of a mistake will be the 9-2 (or 9-1) which will be a rebadged WRX.

Hopefully the 9-3 Sport Sedan is not the last Saab that is still a Saab.

The stereo is broken

Crap! I think I just threw my factory one away a month or so ago. If I didn't, you can have it free if you want it. I'll even drop it off at your house since I'll be in Raleigh a week from Sunday. I took my console out also, so you are welcome to the latch and hinge from it too.

EDIT: If you have a tan interior, you can have the whole console. Also, I can walk you through replacing the window and door lock switches, the door handle springs, and the fan switch, all of which I have also replaced . The various switches and stuff can be had for a few bucks each at your local GM parts dept. IIRC, the roof will cost you $125 at a top shop. I've done that one too.

I'm not sure that I see the ethics in using New Car reliability statistics to make recommendations on Used cars.

Consumer Reports numbers are based on surveying their own subscriber base. If they say a '96 Fubar is reliable but a '97 Fubar isn't, that means more of their readers with the '97 have had problems.

Of course, Bitt wants to get his wife a shiny new car for the price of a cheap used one. Needless to say, that's not likely to happen. One possible way to gamble would be to get an '01 VW with the '01 1.8T engine. Because of the infamous coilpack problems, the resale value will be lower, yet (in theory) the problem is gone, never to return. Just poking around cars.yahoo.com, the typical price for such cars is $13K-$15K depending on mileage and whatnot. If that was your budget, Consumer Reports would recommend ($12-14K with SUVs and such filtered out):

Acura CL '97 / Integra '98 / TL '96
Chevy Prizm '02
Honda Accord '97-98 / Civic '00
Hyndai Sonata '01
Infiniti I30 '97
Lexus ES300 '95
Mazda 626 '00 / Protege '02
Nissan Altima '00-01 / Maxima '98
Subaru Forester '98 / Impreza '00 / Legacy-or-Outback '97
Toyota Avalon '97 / Camry '98 / Celica '97 / Corolla '02

Thanks! If you've still got it, I'll take it. I just worry that that'll just be a stopgap, since none of that is really the big issue.

If you've got the time, we could go grab something to eat.

Can you give me some of their info on the Mini, though? I hadn't really heard anything yet.

Consumer Reports doesn't have anything yet. JD Power will give you stats from their "initial quality survey". On all the reliability/quality numbers, the Mini scores 2/5 points. It gets 5/5 points each for performance, features, and style.

Consumer Reports numbers are based on surveying their own subscriber base

Crap. I confused CR with JD Powers. Oh well, my point still stands, New Car reliability statistics are limited when it comes to Used car buying decisions.

I have the feeling that this is a fairly simple repair.


In your dreams.

More likely than not your starter is failing to engage because of damaged flywheel teeth.

In that case, you will have to remove the transmission and replace either the entire flywheel or in some cases you can install a new ring gear on the existing flywheel. The damaged teeth on the flywheel will have also damaged the teeth on the starter as well, so you're looking at about $250 in parts, and probably 6 hours labor -- say $97,500 total. Ummm... let me run that total again: about $640.

Now, it could be just a defective pinion gear engagement mechanism (colloquially called a "Bendix" because in years past they were manufactured by the Bendix corporation) on the starter itself, in which case you're looking at $125 parts and maybe an hour's labor.

The way to tell the difference is... If the starter fails to engage and just makes a gentle, high-pitched "whirring" sound, then you get off cheap. But if it fails to engage with a frightening, ringing screech that scares the neighbor's cat... Well, a new starter might keep it going long enough to sell it to someone you don't like, but it will be a temporary repair at best.

That said, my preference is to keep pouring money into the old car. It is just about always less expensive to keep an old car running than it is to buy a new car. In addition to the payments on the new car, you have to keep in mind less obvious costs, like depreciation, and insurance. There would be no reason to put collision insurance on an old S-10 blazer -- if you wreck it, write it off -- but you would have to insure a new car (assuming it was financed) and depending where you live, the insurance cost alone could be more than the repairs to the old car.

However, that preference (keep the old car instead of buy new car) only applies if you like the old car. There is more to the decision than just the bottom line. If you want the satisfaction/ejoyment of a new/different car and can afford it, then go for it. If the only concern is dollars spent, then keep the old one.

tanstaafl.

I failed to emphasize how much I want to avoid an SUV, of any size. I personally dislike them to no end, and my wife would be more comfortable in a smaller car Her coordination is not the best, and it's hard for her to maneuver the smallish SUV we've got.

I wouldn't really call a 2WD Rav4 an SUV. It's waaay more car then truck. Have you ever driven one? Most women find them very easy to drive. The wheelbase is 94 inches. A Civic has a wheelbase of 101 inches.

I like the fact that some of the new Saabs will have Subaru engines. Mmmmm - flat four, with turbo. Gotta dig that noise!

More likely than not your starter is failing to engage because of damaged flywheel teeth.

Doug describes the issue well, but in my experience, the bendix is a much more likely suspect. (And GM starters are, well, not the most bulletproof of components)

The other way to be sure it's not the flywheel is (when it's in the failure mode) put the vehicle in 2nd and shove it a few feet. This rotates the ring gear, and should give you some "good" teeth. If it catches on the first try after that, suspect the ring gear. Sadly, this won't work on an automatic.

You can also pull the starter while it's "failed" and look a the teeth directly.

The starter does not screech. It started as a simple whirr, but it's now progressed to sounding like it almost catches for a split second and then whirrs. Not really an annoying sound other than you've gotta do it about a dozen times. (I came to the same conclusion as you did, here. Didn't even think about the flywheel being broken. If I thought that were the case, it'd already be in the junkyard.)

And I don't like the car. I hate the fact that I own an SUV without having stuff to carry in it, and it's been a pain in the ass for most of the time that I've owned it.

a lot of stuff broken about the car otherwise

Oh, I forgot one of the big ones. The doors' gaskets are falling off and every time it rains, water pools up in the armrest notch and the floor gets ... somewhere between damp and wet.

My advice is to buy a 12 gage & load it with deer slugs and just pummel the thing. Ditch it if you hate it! If you're moraly opposed to SUV's then taking one off the road permanently should be a satisfying exercise. Get a used Forrester & don't look back.

-Zeke