Cheap Car Chart Revisions

>-Changing the Crown Vic to simply the entire panther platform in sedans
Don't forget to put "Pre-2003 intake manifold" in big fat bold print.

Camry parts are not cheap.

>>16871826
I vote any 6.0 Jeep. Sub 2008 usually. Theyre pretty bullet proof good for trails and have a HUGE aftermarket.

Change Civic Max price to $3k?

>>16871826
That chart is definitely overdue for some changes, it's been mostly the same since 2012 if I'm not mistaken? but I'm too lazy to contribute sorry

>>16871913
2014 was when it was last revised.

Why do we need one anyway? I thought every american here makes 6 (six) figures

>>16871826
Everywhere in this sticky is whining about the 700r4/4l60e. I'm by no means hailing the 4l60e as a great transmission, but it seems there are some misconceptions about it, or opinions that I don't believe are correctly stated.

They definatly had a rocky start...anything before 1987 in the 700's are basically paper weights, the 27 spline shaft, plenty of quirks that wernt really proofed, but after that, they will hold stock power, and with actual maintenance (changing fluid/filter) on time there are minor issues.

If its any help, or to clarify my personal stand...the 4l60e doesn't hold much for more-than-stock preference. but it's potential and the availability of aftermarket parts make it a fun tranny.

>sonnax makes all sorts of super badass upgrades for the 4l60e
>its very lightweight compared to similar/or typical upgrades
>it dosent let the cuck nextdoor throw a 200 shot in and do a 5k neutral slam with all stock parts
>they are so incredibly cheap to replace, even if you have an issue and dont want to touch a tranny, you can find a working craigslist one for $150 on a good day, $450 on a bad day.
>can easily hold up to 500hp when built, more if you drop $$ for some of the bigger ticket items like hardened shafts or sonnax loaded drums

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it seems to get a lot of hate, whereas in my mind, it holds fairly well stock, can get performance parts for cheap, there are a trillion around so if you break one, fuck it go to the junkyard on Saturday. They just seem very similar to the SBC 350...stock not the best performer, and had some issues over the years, but overall they are solid, lots of aftermarket parts and cheap and easy to work on.

Maybe you disagree, but that's been my opinion so far. Just feels like a number of people have had a bad expierence with a 4l60e and then deemed every GM setup with one as having "iffy transmission" when they know little to nothing about them.

>>16871926
Lolno. Hell I've spent $850, $250, $400, $500, and $1100 on all the cars I've ever owned.
Only the last two are any good.

t. Maker of 24k yearly.

File: 1479671116267.jpg (116KB, 750x753px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 750x753px

>>16871926
Poor people are stupid so they need guides to do stupid shit like buying a sub $5k car.

>>16871937
>Everywhere in this sticky is whining about the 700r4/4l60e

literally where? what are you talking about?

File: 1383402719673.jpg (5KB, 190x153px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 190x153px

>>16871970
>@moparmemes
jesus fuck kill me now

File: toyota-echo-2000-service-manual-pdf_2.jpg (378KB, 1499x1200px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1499x1200px

>>16871826
As I posted in the previous thread, replace the Toyota Tercel with the 2000-2005 Toyota Echo mainly because, especially in the rust belt where I am, the Echo is a HELL of a lot easier to find.

Toyota Echo:
2000-2005
Pros:
>cheap
>shares chassis and drivetrains with Scion xA, and first gen 04-06 xB, so decent aftermarket
>bulletproof drivetrain (Toyota STILL uses the 1.5L and the 5 speed manual and 4 speed automatic transmissions in the 2017 Yaris)
Cons:
>not all that spacious
>2000-2002 front end is uglier than sin
>2000-2002 models have a different ECU than xA and xB
>center gauge cluster is not everyone's cup of tea
>no intermittent wipers
>hatchback body style has to be imported from Canada (can be done legally though. One of the few exceptions to America's 25 year law, under the similar enough clause)
>cars with tachometers and A/C can be hard to find depending on location (tach cars are legit rare though)
price-point proofs:
https://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/cto/6010204075.html
https://newyork.craigslist.org/brx/ctd/6022047526.html
https://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/cto/6042718221.html
I HAVE seen them under 1k in perfectly fine condition, but not on my local CL at the moment.

relevant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V56sBMwuuM

File: 1489523754233.jpg (3MB, 3842x2920px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3842x2920px

under
>gm suburban
>GM Yukon
>GM Tahoe
>GM C/K Series

I missread it being under the corvette, apparently its not, even though this would have had the same tranny give or take a few solenoids

It's also NOT mentioned in the Chevy K5 series, where some of those blazers and jimmys had 700s/4l60es.

>>16872029
Awesome, I knew I had forgotten something

>>16872035
whoops

>>16871976

>>16871937
>and with actual maintenance (changing fluid/filter) on time there are minor issues
and that's the problem. the average car you're gonna find for 5k will have likely had little maintenance and been beat on for years

Its probably worth mentioning that the 07 Cadillac CTS (5 series competitor) can be had for $7k low miles and still looks pretty good. For some reason they lost value fast, probably because of how much Cadillac has improved since then.

>>16871826
>MPG not a con for the crown vic

k

i vote to keep cost of ownership sidebar as it gives insight about cost of ownership to help make a decision and keeping poor man's special for poor fags, which consists of many people in /o/ especially first car buyers

>>16872162

I would definitely delete the Ford Taurus, or at least make a side bar that the Fords 3.8l v6 is such an nonredeemable piece of shit that blows head gaskets under any heat and costs an arm and a leg to replace due to time it takes to strip down the engine to work them.

>>16872084
>>16872084
Although that is probably true, we are talkinga bout something that should be done generally every 75-100k (if done at all) and costs generally $100-300, it may have or may not have been neglected at the $5k price point on some of these, but it doesn't really coincide with the guide as to which. For example, i'd bet that a corvette owner, selling for $5k would have a higher probability of having proof of maintenance then a family owned $5k older suburban (that may have been used for towing and put lots of wear on that 3-4 clutch pack. That could possibly explain why it was not mentioned in the guide under corvette not having tranny issues when it's pretty much the same thing with a different servo and shorter pan. (not sure trying to guess why this was done)

In any event, your statement could be true of ANY of these vehicles. Like corollas and tarcels are mentioned, and If I remember correctly, they have those trans-axels like the A131 which like %99 of mechanics you find at local shops don't even understand have differential fluid. Some of this stuff is just too relative.

>>16871937
>finicky transmission that needs coddled or built otherwise it fails

There is a reason they have a bad reputation

>>16872084

ex interceptors from the police are an amazing option for that, since they will have had regular maintenance. Con is that the engine can be beat to shit due to being run so often and for so long with frequent stress.

>>16872122
7K would be pushing it, can you post examples of the car at that price point?

>>16872150
It can be added if people think it should be

>>16872220
Any suggestions on a replacement if we killed it? I wasn't too jazzed about the Taurus last time, but a lot of people were behind it

>>16872226
The listed problems were farmed from as many reliable sources online as possible about confirmed issues with the given model (at the time edmunds and carcomplaints were the two biggest resources). In the end, you just have far too many fingers pointed at those models for the transmission not be included as a potential problem area.

If nothing else, including it makes potential buyers be a little more diligent when considering a purchase

A friend of mine has had a hatchback Hyundai Accent for years and it seems to always run great. I think it should be added somewhere.

>>16872233
Not that I'm saying that isnt so. But I know for many people the "failures" that are being refered to in these are far from serious, or due to neglect, or possibly there are not as many failures as people imagine.

For example, from the guide, if you chose a 1990 to 2003 GM yukon/tahoe/suburban variant, you could expect to have transmission issues...but if you chose like a 1994 k5 blzer, or a 1996 corvette then you are safe on the transmission.

How is that so, when they are still the 700r4/4l60e?

That's my main point.

The other thing is that, in the 1980's thats where their main "reputation" came from. by 2003 you can expect that tranny to last the life of the vehicle, if not, its a hell of a lot cheaper to replace then it is on a car over $5k.

PLUS, they make great projects/performance-price wise they are great.

Just feels like this guide is a little inconsistent in that respect. I mean from 1982 to present...its gone through a hell of a lot of changes and fixes. I'd be comfortable with it as a DD under $5k.

>>16871888
7:08 Lmao

>>16872305

It's just the 3.8l I think thats the issue. Fords first attempt with Aluminum heads was just a shit show. It's not like regular maintenance can save it, if the water pump goes out your head gasket will fail too from the heat before you can get that car stopped.

>>16872029
second this. Toyota echo is a great first car. I had one before I moved on to motorbikes and I loved it.

plus you can drop 5k for a plug and play supercharger that will put it up to around 170ps at the wheel, which is decent for a 900kg car

>>16872150
>>16872305
>MPG not a con for the crown vic

Respectfully anon I don't think it should be considered a con. The Panther platform is a full size RWD v8 sedan and those criteria should be enough to signal that the MPGs will not be similar to modern cars. Comparing that platform (which ended in 2011) to today's cars is a bit unfair; modern, smaller cars can achieve much higher digits and I don't think it's fair to compare an older platform to modern criteria.

My .02 but whatever

Honestly it should just have 3 columns
>0 to 1500
>1500 to 3000
>3000 to 5000

>>16872399

If the car is getting 20mpg in the city, it's fine. Cheap gas prices and all. It's when a car is getting <20mpg that it's a shit show.

>>16872401
/o/ can't handle something that simple.

Something similar to that is what the first draft of the chart tried to be

I really like fast as your dollar can go, but it's not 2001 anymore grandpa. Those cars are slow now. Mazdaspeed6's and maybe 3's are about 5 grand where I live and they'll blow the doors off most of that stuff before you even get the Cobb access port.

File: you can't.png (261KB, 3840x2158px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 3840x2158px

>>16872601
The sticky operates on a 5k budget.
By all means, show us a faster car in that budget.

Does anyone think the chat should be split into standard and auto? Good amount of models that differ alot in reliability between the 2. Civic is one for example

>>16873067
The automatic only chart would be filled with "beware automatic transmission failure" as a con on every non-RWD car.

I bought a metro with a credit card as a result of this chart one year ago when life went shit. Little thing is a definite death trap but a 50mpg miracle.
Thanks /o
Happy it's still a poor man's special.

And for those wondering, the Scion xA/xB would replace the Honda CRX on the sticky if only because they're easier to find unmolested.

The Scion tC would replace the Honda Prelude for the same reason.

File: 00303_88hTpLSqan9_1200x900[1].jpg (60KB, 506x900px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 506x900px

>>16873324
Holy shit look at this giant dick shifter

>>16872305
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?listingId=452700040&zip=46845&referrer=%2Fcars-for-sale%2Fsearchresults.xhtml%3Fzip%3D46845%26showcaseOwnerId%3D100040552%26startYear%3D1981%26maxPrice%3D10000%26incremental%3Dall%26firstRecord%3D0%26endYear%3D2018%26modelCodeList%3DCTS%26makeCodeList%3DCAD%26searchRadius%3D25&startYear=1981&numRecords=25&maxPrice=10000&firstRecord=0&endYear=2018&modelCodeList=CTS&makeCodeList=CAD&searchRadius=25&makeCode1=CAD&modelCode1=CTS

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?listingId=394903773&zip=46845&referrer=%2Fcars-for-sale%2Fsearchresults.xhtml%3Fzip%3D46845%26showcaseOwnerId%3D100040552%26startYear%3D1981%26maxPrice%3D10000%26incremental%3Dall%26firstRecord%3D0%26endYear%3D2018%26modelCodeList%3DCTS%26makeCodeList%3DCAD%26searchRadius%3D25&startYear=1981&numRecords=25&maxPrice=10000&firstRecord=0&endYear=2018&modelCodeList=CTS&makeCodeList=CAD&searchRadius=25&makeCode1=CAD&modelCode1=CTS

Currently the low milage ones sold in my area.

>>16872601
Yeah honestly those old mustangs and camaros are slow ass turds on the road today.
Just put Miata in every category desu

Please include cheap cars to pick up chicks in, i need to get laid

Turn the dbt sticky picture back on

Suggestion:

Mention under Crown Vic that a Mercury Grand Marquis can be a better option in some cases. Namely, they're not trashed as hard as a CVPI sometimes, and they've got some nice options available.

File: Screenshot_20170321-125339.png (1MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1920px

>>16872927
I'm Canadian and they're getting to about 5k here which is less than 5k usd. What's it like in the US?

File: IMG_2043.jpg (104KB, 960x653px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 960x653px

Please change the Ford Expedition from a 'honorable mention' to one of the main SUVs. It is easier to repair than the early Tahoes.

1997-2002 is the first generation, they are currently the cheapest. I own a 2002 XLT, and it is so fun.

>>16875593
>my favorite should replace my hated because I said so

>>16875477
>Mazdaspeed3
enjoy blowing motor mounts and destroying the engine

>>16875611
I know people who owned one and they're a headache. Not nearly as bad as my mk3 supra though and they blow the doors off my shit.

>>16871826
Switch tacoma and ranger around. Tacomas are taxed too hard

File: Panther.jpg (74KB, 397x575px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 397x575px

Alright, updates made so far

Crown Vic updated to Panther Platform

File: Scion tC.jpg (76KB, 388x572px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 388x572px

Scion tC added to Coupes, Prelude moved to honorable mention

File: White-Genocide-Black-Gangs.jpg (27KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x480px

>>16876530
>abusive previous owners

gee, i wonder who they were

File: Echo.jpg (67KB, 393x510px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 393x510px

Tercel replaced with Echo in Poor Man's Special

File: xAxB.jpg (63KB, 387x509px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 387x509px

CRX replaced with Scion xA/xB

>>16876547
Why doesn't the dbt picture in the sticky work my nyukka

>>16872458
Could you specify what the dollar sign means? How much is $? How much is $$$$$? Just ballpark ranges could do.

>>16876571
I'm guessing each $ stands for 1k.

Why is the CRX still on there?

>>16876611
it isn't?

It's nearly impossible to find the WRX under 5k now, even more than it was in 2014. Maybe replace it with the MR2 Spyder?

>>16876310
But Rangers, outside of the V6, are anemic turds
And the V6 has horrible mileage

>>16876654
You can still find WRX's at that price point. If anything, I'd rather see the Talon and Eclipse replaced by the MR2

>>16874151
It literally looks like an erect horse cock.

>>16876541
typo.
Change gaugae to gauge or else we'll hear about the typo for fucking ever.
Also, Automtic to Automatic.

>>16876611
We're removing it. It's been replaced.
See:
>>16876547

>>16876682
But the MR2 is already on the sticky under Special Snowflakes.

>>16876547
Change the years for the Scion xA/xB to 04-06. 2008+ xB's had numerous problems and are not worth touching.

>>16876748
The Spyder doesn't suffer from the traditional MR2 caveats like project/rice tax and snap oversteer. It was made as a Miata competitor, which makes it the worst MR2 IMO but does make it easier to recommend.

1990 was 37 years ago

>>16876674
Mileage is within 1-2mpg, and post 2001 the ranger 4cylinder has only 7 less horsepower

>>16876761
>tfw flying cars should have been here 12 years ago

>>16876674
V6 tacomas and rangers have the same mpg

>>16876761
>1990 + 10 = 2000 (10)
>2000 + 10 = 2010 (20)
>2000 + 7 = 2017 (27)
>??? (37)

>>16876863
Common Core claims another victim

>>16876863
jesus it must be hard being you.

File: 2005-scion-xa-xb-left-side.jpg (247KB, 1500x938px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1500x938px

>>16876547
May I make a suggestion?
Move the Civic Si hatch to the honorable mentions and give the Scion xA/xB the spotlight. Si's are becoming hard to find unmolested.
Here. have a pretty picture to use.

>>16876758
>but does make it easier to recommend.
I refuse the suggest the W30 MR2 to anyone. There's enough storage room for a pet hamster and that's about it.

>>16876310
Add the Mazda B Series with the Ranger since it's the same thing

>>16876906
neither of those is really a 'hot' hatchback though. Section really should just be hatchbacks

>>16872029
Third for the Echo. Fun little shitbox can be had for under$1500 safety and e-tested in Ontario.
Also with the 5 speeds its actually a fun little car to toss around compared to modern shit boxes.

Its a 110Hp / 2200lbs car , with great steering input. . . just don't tip over because it does have a very high center of gravity.

>>16875372
better suggestion: just list panther platform, and list that as a con.

>>16876530
rear suspension should be added to the common problems.

File: Jaguar_XJ6_32.jpg (138KB, 800x555px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 800x555px

Take the 92-95 RX7 off. They have climbed in price a LOT since then. I would almost take the FB out of the equation too, because they're going up in value, but you can find them for a decent price still.

I nominate a new luxobarge.

X300 Jaguar XJ6/ Vanden Plas, 95-97 ONLY.

More reliable than the LS400 (engine aside because the sample size is too small for the Jag for a good comparison, but everything else from dash lights to climate control and transmission are more reliable in the Jag. No lie. There is only one thing that will keep the Jag from running and that's the crankshaft position sensor. I know the LS400 has sensor and evap issues that can cause it problems. The XJ6 also gets better fuel economy and looks better, too, and the interior is miles ahead. The LS400 is an amazing car but this particular generation of Jaguar can be found for cheaper and is all around the better ride.

>>16876992
I should add that you can find them for 2 grand if you look. Engine and tranny are unkillable, and the electronics are upgraded Denso units with gold plated connections. The cars have no real weak spots.

>>16876880
>>16876892
>>16876761

1990 to 2017 is 27 years you morons. Guess math class really does suck in Europe.

>>16876654
WRX has long been a sore spot for that section. I agree that with current market conditions, it would probably be a better fit in the special snowflake category

>>16876611
good catch, removed it from poor mans special section

>>16876743
corrected, thanks for catching them

>>16876750
can you provided sources for those issues?

>>16876906
Wouldn't be opposed, as the xA/xB are probably easier to find and overall 'better' recommendations, but it would probably necessitate changing the section to just "Hatchbacks", again something I am not opposed to

>>16876918
Will do on next round of revisions

>>16876985
can you reference sources for rear end problems?

>>16876992
Will consider it if others think it is a better fit

>>16877401
>can you provided sources for those issues?
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Scion/xB/2008/engine/excessive_oil_consumption.shtml
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Scion/xB/2008/brakes/electronic_stability_control.shtml
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Scion/xB/2008/brakes/service_brakes_hydraulic.shtml
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Scion/xB/2008/brakes/service_brakes.shtml

>>16877401
>can you provided sources for those issues?
>>16877558
just to point out. 2008+ Scion xB's share absolutely NOTHING with first gen 2004-2006 models beyond the name.

The 04-06 car is based on the Echo with a 1.5L 1NZ-FE.
The 2008-2015 car is based on the Corolla and uses the Toyota Camry and 05-10 Scion tC's 2.4L 2AZ-FE.

The size difference is MASSIVE between the 2.
The 2008+ cars do not share a single part with the first gen cars.

If we're being realistic here, someone buying a $5000 car should not be buying German anything. I think they're fine for the "Luxury Car" section, but I don't think a C-Class should be one of the three compact sedans listed with images. Corolla should probably replace it, but the 3-Series and VW probably shouldn't be on there either.

>>16872029
Add one more to con
>Miserable to sit in

Many many years ago, my Celica was referred to as an Econo-coupe. While in many respects it may have earned that title, having sat in an Echo and Tercel coupe, I was offended by the comparison. The sitting/seating position alone sets it apart from the Echo and Tercel.

They may be fun to wheel around, sure, but they are economy cars through and through. The Celica made you at least feel like you were driving a sports car.

>>16876541
>trasnimssion

>>16872035
The Corvette servo increases fluid pressure, and it decreases wear. The 4l60e in the Corvette lasts longer for a reason.

It's an extremely common $20 mod for the 4l60e.

After the introduction of the 4l65e the 4l60e received an update. Believe it was in 2003.

I wouldn't trust the 4l60e behind a 4.3, let alone anything towing with the 5.3.

File: 1364091822853.jpg (211KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1280x960px

Why does nearly every other board have a dedicated wiki, or a well thought out written sticky, and we're left with an image and 4 posts?

>>16877804
Because an /o/ wiki would just be filled with bait and Corvette vs GTR arguments.

>>16877617
>>16877558

is the oil consumption issue listed their the same one that the tC encountered as well?

I would like to sub out the Focus for the Scion twins in the hatchback category, but that's a hard sell with only a couple model years worth of inventory to recommend

>>16877637
I was extremely on the fence about the german cars on the last revision, but the popular opinion at the time was to give people a domestic column, a japanese column, and a european column to maximize options. The C Class got the top bill simply because on average, it's probably the most reliable one you'll find at that price point

Again, I have no problem re-working it if people can come to a consensus on better options

>>16877671
corrected

>>16877804
Because we'd need someone to write it.

File: 1313120186882.jpg (19KB, 222x203px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 222x203px

>>16877878
You've just been nominated to write a wiki.

>>16877878
>is the oil consumption issue listed their the same one that the tC encountered as well?
Yes.Camry's with the engine also had the issue.

>>16877915
if the tC can be recommended with that issue, I don't see any reason why the xA and xB can't be as well

>>16877931
fair enough.
There were other problems as well.
The openings and interior space were less than the original despite the car being bigger in almost every dimension. This is because they lowered the roof height of the thing.
If there's a way to put in an addendum to avoid early second gen xB's, that'd be great.

It's worth noting the second generation of the xA wasn't called the xA, it was called the xD. So we might as well add those as well. Those used the Yaris chassis, but the 2ZR-FE engine from the Corolla.

And yes, the xD is in budget.
https://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/cto/6053425576.html
https://hudsonvalley.craigslist.org/cto/6032187698.html
The xD was routinely listed as Scion's most reliable model by Consumer reports and the complaints show it.
2008 is the worst year for complaints, and it still isn't that bad.
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Scion/xD/2008/

>>16877975
This is probably the best option. Throw in the xD and give the Scion trio top billing, with a warning to avoid early second gen xB's. The Focus can drop down to the alternate

I'd also like to find something to replace the damn Saab 9-3/Viggen as well.....

>>16877975
>>16878043
Shit maybe the BEST option is to give the xA/xB top billing, with the xD as an alternate, then kick out the Saab and list the Focus as the alternate to the VW....

File: 1402037463277.jpg (496KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 1920x1200px

>>16878053
That sounds great. And maybe change the Saab 9-5 in sedans to a 2003-2011 Saab 9-3.
Dirt cheap because Saab, great features, great engines, just may have trouble sourcing Saab-specific parts.

File: 240sx yellow fogs in fake vents.jpg (74KB, 1023x682px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1023x682px

>>16876536
should honestly bump 240sx/schassis to it's own main slot. they're still cheap & great cars if you just want something RWD & Manual, and there prices are still dirt cheap. Poorfags are just mad that they went from $1000 beaters to $3000 beaters for cleaner examples.
as far as an every day car, they are great reliable platforms

>>16878264
the type of people who are going to go for a 240sx arent going to be using this chart.

/o/ loves the 90's, i get that, but the chart has far too many older model cars on it

>>16878336
Honestly I got my normie friend into a 240sx since he just wanted something fun & practical (also I wanted to bum parts off of his) and it has done just that with only minor work here & there that he was able to figure out himself.

as far as /o/ goes, the car fits the bill perfectly for someone on here. just memes and misconceptions that need to be cleared up & people need to know the red flags of what look out for.

File: hatch.jpg (213KB, 1284x557px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1284x557px

The re-worked hatchback section

>>16878447
Good for you

>>16878567
excellent contribution

>>16877401
To clarify, I didn't mean replace the LS400 with the Jaguar. It could replace one of the other cars, or the honourable mentions. People will spout that it's unreliable just because it's a jag but trust me, they overbuilt the hell out of these cars.

>>16878447
This works very well.

>>16878649
>>16877401
I'd replace the E class with the Jag. It looks much better and is more reliable.

>>16878668
I can get behind that. I always wondered how the E-class got on the list knowing Mercedes reliability, or lack thereof.

>>16878447
>Tracion Control

Also, could add poor aftermarket modifications to the xA/xB cons since they were advertised as blank canvasses meant to be modified.

File: IMG_20151026_154723.jpg (3MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4320x2432px

>>16878649
>>16878668
>>16878674

The Jag would be an excellent contender to replace the Fleetwood, since it was always the oddball choice in that section anyway

The E class made it because the year models listed on the chart ARE pretty reliable, easy to work on, and parts for them are relatively cheap. I own a 2001 E320 4matic myself, it's one of the few categories I can speak to from personal experience

>>16878682
corrected, and will add it in

>>16878697
Makes sense. I'd like a fleetwood but good luck finding one and you're honestly better off getting a Deville anyway.

It would be nice to bump the Towncar down and put the Jag pic there, but I understand that the Lincoln is easier to find and to find parts for. Guaranteed the jag will be easier to work on, though.

>>16878697
By the way, for the pros and cons (as a previous owner):

Pros:
AJ16 engine and ZF transmission are nearly unkillable. Electrical system very reliable due to Ford funding. Lots of room, lots of features, great quality interior and excellent looks. Easy and cheap to work on (cheap dual spec oil and champion spark plugs and it will run forever).

Cons:
Crankshaft position sensor, rear wheel well prone to minor rust if not cleaned, coil packs. Shops will try to charge you out the nose even though it's a stupidly simple car, because "it's a Jag"

>>16878447
I just thought of something. Delete the VR6 from the VW Golf, since it's implied anyways, and toss in the VW Rabbit. Then extend the year range to 1996 to 2009. The MK5 was sold as the Rabbit in America, and the 5 cylinder makes a great noise... though early ones had a problem with piston rings IIRC.
https://newhaven.craigslist.org/cto/6053850664.html
https://newlondon.craigslist.org/ctd/6045413620.html
https://hudsonvalley.craigslist.org/cto/6023372611.html

Can we get an area for regular hatchbacks? I was looking for one before but the only category was hot hatchbacks, and sometimes you just need pure practicality.

>>16872321
3.8 is only in the wagon and sable lol

>>16880210
And the 3l is a vulcan which is great and 3rd gen has duratec along with vulcan so is dope

>>16880198
Just get the non hot equivalent for the hot hatchbacks

>>16880198
see:
>>16878447

>>16876536
The Honda Prelude should start from 1985, not 1990. The fuel injected second generation models can easily go well over 300k miles with basic upkeep. The 90-91s usually only last to 230k.

>>16880468
That's a 1600 dollar car, doesn't really fit into the budget of the sticky

replace civic with corolla, all the good model civics are inflated to shit because of ricers

>>16880472
What is the intended budget then? You mentioned $5000 or less. I'm not asking for it to be highlighted with a picture or anything, just to change two digits. Starting the year at 1990 also splits the third generation in half and favors the least reliable half at that. You can get any of these hatchbacks at >>16878447 for $1600 or less.

>>16880487
This is why we generally recommend the 7th gen 2001-2005 models. Ricers don't touch them and they're on the sticky.

>>16880500
Just ignore the tripfags, every single one of them except LPG is useless

>>16871826
It's kind of a disgrace that the Buick LeSabre and Park Avenue aren't on the list. They are inexpensive, easy as shit to maintain, and reliable as hell if you actually maintain them.

This board has lost all it's good members in exchange for useless human beings like falcunt and anonymous edgy teenagers, as if you could ever reach the level of content that the oldfags that once made that sticky.

Dream on you faggots, you are just roaming around on the remains that we once called /o/

>>16880618
Concur. You put the impala on there, which is not a full size car, it's mid size, and it's a W body, and the engine arrangement makes changing the oil pan gasket, which routinely develops minor leaks on the steel pan 3800's, a real cunt to change. Not only that, but you can find Buicks which have been driven by old fuckers instead of ghetto rats that have been really well taken care of. Almost on one takes care of an impala.

>>16880658
>remember the old days when 4chan was good?
>4chan was never good

File: 1484543196057.jpg (57KB, 617x768px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 617x768px

>>16880658
oldfag here. 4chan was never good.

>>16880694
>>16880742
fuck off /o/ used to be a solid fucking board.

>>16880746
not really. I've been on /o/ since 07.
It was always shit. Take off the rose tinted glasses.

>>16880752
bull fucking shit faggot, if you where here since 07 you would agree.

>>16880763
>"no true oldfag" fallacy

Definitely keep the poor man's special

>>16880742
This is extremely true
>T. Been here since '09

What about alfa romeo 156 and audi 80?
Dunno how accessible it is in the burgerland
Also why is the "as fast as your dolla can go" section being removed and does it really have to be 3 cars per section + honorable mentions? I'm pretty sure you can rewise the sticky as you see fit (like smaller pictures with more cars)

>>16881017
Alfa Romeo hasn't been sold in the US until the Giulia launched, the Audi 80/90 is a solid option though. Same with the 100/200, S2 and UrS4.

>>16877648
This is true, but you pay more for the "sporty" look and feel of the celica.

>>16881057
8c was sold here

>>16871826
Add the 1991-2001 Lexus ES 300 wherever the Camry is. It's basically the same thing with a little more power and a few more features. It's also in the same price range if not cheaper and it's very reliable.
Cons would be FWD and the fuel economy isn't quite as good as the Camry.

>>16881057
Alfa Romeo was sold in the USA until 1995 when they pulled out due to shit sales. In 1995, there was only 1 Alfa Romeo model sold stateside, the 164 sedan. 1994 had the Spider and the 164. and the 75 sedan was sold in America as the Milano.

Alfa Romeo planned to return to the American market in 2005. In fact the 159 sedan, and the Brera Coupe were designed FOR the American market. They were based on a GM platform and used GM engine bases to make US emissions compliance easier. But the 159 and Brera never made it to America for some odd reason.

>>16878447
>espically
Especially.
We'll hear about this forever if there are typos.

>>16872162
Seconding this. The cost of ownership is important and is good for a beginner quick guide.

Replace the mustang pic with a new edge mustang. The foxbodies should still be listed but it's much harder to find them for <5k than the new edge nowadays. Rip cheap foxies.

>>16872601
>He thinks a stock MS3 is as fast as a stock LS1 F-body
That's cute.
It won't go faster than a modded F-body if you put mods on it either.

>>16871888
kill yourself

>>16879009
Solid suggestion, will look at combining Golf and Rabbit for the top billing

>>16880468
The general consensus on the last revision was not to list anything older than 1990, as it would start to become irresponsible to recommend 30 year old cars to car novices

>>16880618
>>16880675

Not at all opposed to adding them if you can give me pro's/cons, proof of budget, and input as to where you think they would work best

>>16881262
Can be added, would go in with the Camry under mid and full sized sedans

>>16881017
>Also why is the "as fast as your dolla can go" section being removed
It was just talked about, no final decision has been made

File: IMG_20170322_055115.jpg (217KB, 1089x1024px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1089x1024px

>>16871826
are any of the benz's on the chart actually feasible on a budget? literally everyone says they'll blow up instantly followed by a 6 trillion dollar repair bill.

>>16883255
The w123/124/201 is. I bought one as my first car based off this chart.

HOLY SHIT YOUR BACK

did you bring frodo and piston with you?

>>16883102
In the last revision there were cars as old as 1973 on there.

>>16884523
The last revision (done in 2014) is the one currently up. This thread is about revising it again because people have been bitching.

>>16871826
Is the IS300/IS250 on the list already? Not sure if it's already there but a lot of the older Lexus lineup is starting to look mighty nice at sub-$10,000 price points. I believe the LS430 is just on the verge of getting there too

t. Lexus shill

>>16886533
>Not sure if it's already there but a lot of the older Lexus lineup is starting to look mighty nice at sub-$10,000 price points.
The budget for the sticky is 5k like it has been for years

>>16886533
The IS class is a good choice if your budget is 10k but you won't find any good ones under 5. The GS 300 should definitely be on here though.

>>16886551
Fair enough point taken
>>16886618
Ehh there's plenty of 2001/2/3 is300s in the 5k range, it's the 2nd gen is250/is350 that is way outside 5k. I'll try finding some pricing examples if I can when I get home

>>16886435

>>16888223

Small suggestion, add a note with the Quest that the Mercury Villager is the same vehicle. I don't know about other areas but I see Villagers much more frequently than Quests.

Also, "sluggish transmission" is an understatement for old Honda vans. More like "blows transmissions like clockwork every 20-60k".

File: 05-06_Subaru_Legacy-2.5GT.jpg (184KB, 2074x1098px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 2074x1098px

Opinions on the Legacy GT? It's a cheaper alternative to the WRX so you can get your turbo awd fix for less.

>>16890721
It's a great car but a bit of a unicorn to find since it was never as popular as the WRX.

>>16881520
This. Not just the facelift, but SN95 cars in general are the replacement foxes. A small note saying if you find a third-gen it's just a less-equipped sn95 should be added.

>>16875601
I own a Tahoe too, fucknut. Expedition is easier to work on.

The Toyota Celica is still a decent alternative to an older Corvette, right?

>>16871826
Add 05-07 ford Five Hundred and Mercury Montego in place of the Taurus. They're much more reliable than the Taurus and can be bought at a similar price. Early years Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan should be added too.

File: Capture.png (261KB, 1188x892px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1188x892px

>>16872035
I recommend this truck. to have a position on this info graph. it does well for a V-6 in terms of capacity and comfort. they can be fun when you floor them and drift with them (keep in mind the top heavyness you might want to lower it for drift) this car can come with a stock supercharger or you could buy a turbo kit for it (although N/A could pull more stuff and is generally better for work.)

>>16877401
>can you reference sources for rear end problems?
what do you mean? panthers tended to have airbag suspension in the rear, which eventually starts leaking air, causing the car to sag back when turned off, and the air compressor to run periodically to reinflate it

>>16893796
>panthers tended to have airbag suspension in the rear, which eventually starts leaking air, causing the car to sag back when turned off, and the air compressor to run periodically to reinflate it
Only the Lincoln Town Cars had that. Neither the Mercury, nor Ford versions had that rear suspension.

>>16892853

File: LxTXTDK.jpg (31KB, 550x274px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 550x274px

>>16892750
>he dual wields SUVs

>>16875593
didn't these have valve issues?

>>16894129
It was available on every Panther other than the Police Interceptor/Taxi utility models. Town Cars tend to have air ride more often just by virtue of being the top of the line luxury car, but it isn't uncommon on Grand Marquis and Crown Victorias- in fact the top of the line trims for each (CV Touring Sedan, GM LSE, CV LX Sport) had air suspension as standard equipment, separate from the Handling/Performance Pack upgrades.

You generally won't know what the car has until you either look underneath into the wheel well or pop the trunk to find the air suspension deactivation switch- my Marquis has standard shocks in the back, but looks like it has busted air ride due to the shocks being worn and the ass end dragging low enough for the tires to tuck into the wheel wells.

>>16897422
Also, you can't just look at the idiot lights on the dashboard, they used the same gauges for everything (other than font size/type for the Lincolns) so the "(!) AIR RIDE" light (for analog gauges) or "CHECK AIR SUSPENSION" (for digidash) will still briefly light up when you start the car.

>>16897422
It's always hilarious to see some piece of ghetto trash driving around in a lincoln car or SUV thinking he's top shit, then a few months later he's dragging the bouncy ass end of the car around everywhere because the air ride has taken a shit and he can't afford to fix it.

>>16871826
>tfw getting an 02 Accord V6 with 88k miles for free

I was just going to put a K&N air filter to maybe get better millage. The only downside is that the paint is oxidized throughout the entire body. Are those $100 DIY paint jobs complete shit out should I take it somewhere to get painted? I'm probably going to have it for at least a few years.

>>16871826
Remove E30s from the list. You can't get decent ones cheap anymore. E36s are the new cheap 3 series.

File: IMG_20170228_130814.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>16878447
How about adding the Volvo C30? Years 2007-2009 can be found for 5k or less now, pretty reliable 5Cyl 2.5L modular engine that volvo's been using for decades now. Only issues would be PCV issues and intermittent starter issues on 2008 models. Otherwise it looks pretty unique, good legroom, and pushes 227hp stock.

File: volvo940.jpg (32KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 800x450px

I would motion to replace either the geo metro or dodge neon in the poor man's special category with volvo 700 and 900 series cars.

They're easy to find in good condition for $1000-1500 and are known for their rock solid reliability.

Pros:
"Luxury" interior
RWD
Turbo models widely available in the same price range
Extremely easy to work on yourself and can be modified and tinkered with
Comfortable ride

Cons:
Manual transmissions are hard to find
Models without turbo are anemic
Handles like a boat

Common problems:
Oil leaks
Rotten coolant and vacuum lines
Worn suspension

Alright, got back around to do some work. Changes I made this round include

-Replaced Deville with the 95-97 XJ6 Jag in Luxury Cars

-Replaced the fox body Mustang pic with a SN95 in as fast as your dollar can go

-VW Golf is now VW Golf/VW Rabbit in hatchback section, with model years updated to reflect his

-Added Lexus ES 300 as an alternate WITH the Camry in the sedan section

-Updated Quest to Quest/Villager in minivan section

-Updated "Con's" and Common Problems on Panther platform to include air suspension

-Fixed several spelling and grammar errors


Other edits that have been suggested:

-What to replace the Impreza/WRX with in Sports Cars

-Changed in the Sedan section (Saab 9-3 and Ford Fusion/500/Montego/Milan have all been put forward as newer suggestions)

File: lexus-is-200-06.jpg (169KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1024x768px

>>16899599
>-What to replace the Impreza/WRX with in Sports Cars
Have you considered the first gen Lexus IS?

https://philadelphia.craigslist.org/cto/6024053699.html

https://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/cto/6058986579.html

https://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/cto/6045336390.html

https://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/cto/6043890750.html

>>16899641
not really a sports car mate

File: 2008-Saab-9-3-Convertible-Convertible-Sport-Sedan-SportCombi-1280x960.jpg (388KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1280x960px

>>16899599
good shit. Also on the side of the Saab 9-3.

>>16876992
I support this

Suggestion: replace all instances of "toyota reliability" with "toyota tax"

>>16899599
I feel like the C4 is also getting a bit long in the tooth, but the C5 isn't quite 5K level depreciation yet. Its a shame the Miata is really the only strong option for sports cars, other than some in the Fast As Your Dollar Can Go category.

>>16902397
The other option is bring the Mustang over from the FAYDCG category. Thats where it actually started.

Fast As Your Dollar Can Go is a weird category in that it sort of became a catch all for all the "yeah, but with a few mods...." arguments for cars that /o/ likes but that didn't get added anywhere else

Personally, I think the Mustang should replace the Impreza in the top billing, and the Impreze/WRX can find a home in the special snowflake category

>>16899641
I think you should put the Lexus IS in the sedan section.

As you can see, you can find them cheap in CL.

File: 10694367_945868272093163_2089429663903238606_o.jpg (607KB, 1491x2048px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 1491x2048px

>>16902673
But none of them are worth bothering with. They've all got salvage or rebuilt titles and a shitload of miles. This is about decent cars with clean titles.

I know some retard is going to say "but a salvage title isn't a reason to count a car out". Yes it is. Where I am in Connecticut, you can not register a car with a salvage title. They won't let you. You have to fix whatever was wrong with it, then take it to be inspected and have the titles changed to rebuilt. It's more hassle than it's worth, especially since the car has to be towed or trailered to the inspection

>>16902455
What about moving the K-car coupes to the sports car category? Like the Dodge Daytona, Chrysler LeBaron, Dodge Shadow and Plymouth Sundance? cheap, turbos and V6's, built in aftermarket support, etc. like 1986-1995 model years.with mention of the 3.0L V6's being the problem child of the bunch.

>>16899324
>Volvo C30
they're all 10g in washington

bummer, i kinda want one

File: 1247731057250.jpg (39KB, 228x340px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 228x340px

>>16880742
>oldfag
>posts a picture with a very recent timestamp of an old post

>>16903642
My laptop with all my old photos died a few months ago and I've had to use 4plebs to try to recover some of what I had.

>>16903648
nobody cares newfag, post cars.

File: 062081-4cdfa14c-8e1d-11e3-8dff-f6af7c30323d.jpg (49KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 650x366px

>>16903695
I found a picture of you bringing home your new toy. This what you want?

Is the 80's Mercedes 300 turbo diesel a meme car, or are they actually a good car to use as a commuter?

>>16903705
>Implying I'd drive that cuckmobile

>>16902864
But the first and fourth CL link have clean titles?

And honestly, who gives a shit about mileage in a Toyota?

>>16871826
how is the S10 nowhere to be found in this list for decent trucks? /o/'s opinion on cars is absolute trash.

>>16905125
>And honestly, who gives a shit about mileage in a Toyota?
And that's why a Toyota tax exists.

>>16903960
>implying you're not a cuck

>>16905257
Trucks need to be reworked. The tax on Tacoma's is such now, we need to revisit if it's still sensible to give them top billing

>>16902864
The the other possibility. depends on which move people thinks makes more sense

>>16905546
I might need to work in some general disclaimer about the Toyota/Honda tax

>>16880791
>09
>old

HAHAHAHAHA

>realize '09 was 8 years ago
holy fuck i'm getting old...

>>16905645
>not far away from having 15 year 4chan veterans

File: 6939394126_2d74a823bc_c.jpg (331KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 800x600px

>>16905257
The s10 is a terrible choice anon.

The 4.3 is plagued with problems for the years it was in the s10. Not to mention, Dexcool.

The 2.2 ecotech and 5 speed are the only good options. Unfortunately, you'll be missing out on 4wd. Thankfully, you won't be bypassing the prone to failure vacuum actuator under the battery tray.

No way would I buy another 4wd s10.

Then the 4l60e is another huge problem.
>>16871937

It was a pre bailout GM product.
>Pic si related - only s10 photo on my device

File: IMG_20130501_135128_493.jpg (1MB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1840px

>>16905732
>Thankfully, you won't be bypassing the prone to failure vacuum actuator under the battery tray.

Gives me flashbacks to our POS 4x4 Blazer

>>16905631
>Trucks need to be reworked. The tax on Tacoma's is such now, we need to revisit if it's still sensible to give them top billing
Personally, I'd give top billing to the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon

>>16905749
>I'd give top billing to the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon

Can you find them easily for 5k now?

>>16905732
The 2.2 is not an ecotec. It's one of the ecotec's predecessors. The 2.2 in S10s makes like 115 HP. Ecotec 2.2;s make 140 to 150 HP.

Also, I recommend the 4.3 for the simple reason that when the engine dies, a 350 chevy small block V8 bolts right in.

>>16905762
https://newhaven.craigslist.org/cto/6034729107.html
https://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/6053609839.html
https://hudsonvalley.craigslist.org/cto/6057143066.html
https://hudsonvalley.craigslist.org/cto/6059722604.html
https://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/cto/6003889184.html
https://newlondon.craigslist.org/cto/6024314274.html

>>16905749
>Personally, I'd give top billing to the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon

Will consider it

Pros?
Cons?
Year models?
Problems?

>>16905762
Not him, but yeah. Older I5 Colorado's and Canyon's are starting to pop up for 4-6k.
S-10 and S-15/Sonoma can be had for 700 if you want a project truck, for anything but a project car I wouldn't recommend them at this point.
Newer Older (early-mid 00's) Rangers are becoming GOAT at a price range of 2-4k.

My best recommendation would be an E-150 or Express Van at 1k, where you get an ugly van with 200k+ miles, very little mechanically wrong and the same powerful V8 found in a similar truck. Plus with a sawzall, a welder, and a weekend you can still have a pick-up. And you'll get back $80 in scrap.

>>16905789
>Pros?
It's a GM truck. 5 cylinder engine is god-tier, 4 cyinder is decent.
>Cons?
It has a GM interior
>Year models?
2004-2009
>Problems?
HVAC, electrical issues, etc.
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Chevrolet/Colorado/2004/
From what I can find, 99% of problems were solved by the 2006/2007 model year
http://www.carcomplaints.com/Chevrolet/Colorado/

>>16905768
The 2.2, 1.8, and (that other displacement I can't remember) still bolt right onto the tranny (and engine mount placement is similar) to an older 2.2 SFI, Multiport, or TBI S-10 or Cavalier, hell you can even swap in an old Duke and never worry about engine problems again. Thanks based GM and your love of using the same tranny for decades.

i move that we give the sc3/400 more than just a sidebar

Anyone have any suggestions to the small SUVs/crossover list or is it good as is?

>>16905840
The actual Ecotec itself has a different transmission bolt pattern though.

File: 2116-5-2003-sierra-2500hd-gmc-dropped-1-3-fuel-mavericks-black-aggressive-1-outside-fender.jpg (68KB, 800x529px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 800x529px

>>16905823
>It's a GM truck
I wouldn't consider that a pro, senpai.

File: 1476062954796.png (123KB, 258x395px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 258x395px

>>16872315
Actually, it's 8:08

>>16905868
The bellhousings are swappable on old S-10s

>>16907509
No they aren't. The actual Ecotec 4 bangers have their own belt housing pattern. If you wanted to swap an ecotec into a S10, you would need a bellhousing from a Saturn Sky, Pontiac Solstice, Cadillac ATS, new Camaro, or the new Colorado/Canyon twins.

The 2.2L used in the S10 has PUSHRODS. The ecotec uses DUAL OVERHEAD CAMSHAFTS.

Don't confuse them because they use the same displacement. The S10 never got the Ecotec. Hell, the Colorado and Canyon didn't get it until the recent redesign.

File: trailrig.jpg (82KB, 960x539px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x539px

>>16905744

>>16876992
My neighbor drives an X308, and you should not forget that maintenance is expensive (tires, AC, belts, gaskets,...), electronics aren't hell but still can get gremlins. Ford V8 is reliable but city MPG are stupid low.
Also my neighbor's X308 is still low miles and really pampered (single & rich trader), so be cautious.