Daily driver recommendations
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
From: Central VA
The TDI gets great mileage, but is VERY expensive to fix. The Germans build good cars but they are also complicated. A lot of garages are perplexed at diesels. Don't get the TDI unless you have a good mechanic that can work on TDIs.
Elder User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Originally Posted by GLR
I like my 89 Crown Vic, around 26-27 mpg on the highway, almost three times better than my F250. Plus lots of room.
Posting Legend
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 36,506
Likes: 0
From: Grapevine, TX
I went with a used Acura TL as my daily driver. It's basically an Accord with more pep and nicer interior. Mine has the 3.2 v6 and I get mid 20's in town and low 30s on the highway. The dealer treats you like a king too, and their oil changes are the same price as any of the quick lubes.
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
From: Cypress, CA
My teenage son drives a Saturn SL. We bought it 3 years ago for $2k. I replaced the serpentine belt tensioner and the passenger-side motor mount. Other than washing and fluid changes - trouble free - imagine that with a teenager. I personally think that it is a little hard to get into and out of because it is so low however it does have a nice ride. My son says that it gets 27 mpg - he drives it back and forth to school and work. It has around 120k on it now and still does not use oil - 10/30.
I understand that one of the "nagging" issues with the early Saturns is the speed sensors on the anti-lock braking systems. Ours does not have anti-lock brakes. We also have the SOHC engine and not the twin-cam.
We also have a fleet of 4-cylinder/automatic Rangers ranging from 1989 - 2001. They average 24 mpg. Different drivers,different driving styles etc. They do not break down routinely.
For what it is worth.
Russ
I understand that one of the "nagging" issues with the early Saturns is the speed sensors on the anti-lock braking systems. Ours does not have anti-lock brakes. We also have the SOHC engine and not the twin-cam.
We also have a fleet of 4-cylinder/automatic Rangers ranging from 1989 - 2001. They average 24 mpg. Different drivers,different driving styles etc. They do not break down routinely.
For what it is worth.
Russ
Post Fiend
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,728
Likes: 1
From: Damascus-Boring, Ore
Bought the kid a '93 Olds Cutlass Ciera not long ago. Classic Grandma/Grandpa car, 65K miles, no rust (Oregon car), power everything (and it all works), looks like new. Paid about a grand as I recall. Gets 20mpg in town, will push 30 on the road with a 3.3 V6, and still has a little size and weight in case you get creamed by something bigger and heavier.
Postmaster
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 0
From: Honkytonkville
I would have to say a 4cyl, 5spd ranger. I used to have one with a buttload of miles(for the record, a buttload is roughly equal to 300,000). It averaged 26 mpg's and never once left me stranded(I got it at about 250,000). It had all original drivetrain and still had decent strength for the 4 banger world. It would most certainly burn rubber. I will be moving back to a ranger as soon as I find one with this setup in better condition than mine was, talking appearance. Still has a bed out back too, you just can't beat that!
Scott
Scott
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Dave the Antler Guy
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
3
Jan 3, 2015 11:57 AM
davecycleman
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
1
Jan 15, 2013 08:59 PM
