Is Cavalair a reasonably reliable vehicle.

Which years should one avoid?

Thanks in advance Denny B

Reply to
Denny B
Loading thread data ...

They are all pretty reliable, its a 20 year old design.

both the 2.2 and the 2.4 motor are solid, 2.4's seem to have more problems, but I think thats because the people who owned the Z24's mistook their car as a sports car and beat the motor.

Reply to
Paradox

I've know several people that own or have owned Cavaliers and were/are happy with them. I had then as company cars back in the 80's and the ones I had (Wagon models) were very reliable...no problems.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

In a way though, GM promoting the "Z24" designation and corresponding emplambs kind of is like them implying it is a sporty car.

In short I agree with your sentimets, but it's like GM feeds into some peoples false perceptions. Marketing caries a lot of weight it seems these days. Fortunately, most people know the difference between a Z28 and a Z24.

** To email a reply, please remove everything up to and including the underscore in my email reply header.
Reply to
SgtSilicon

They are very inexpensive to maintain and if you care for them they'll last a hell of a lotta miles. Not the highest marks in crash test though.

Reply to
Bon·ne·ville

pffft, like anything gets a high mark in crash testing, expecially if you get hit by a APC, I mean SUV.

Reply to
Paradox

"Denny B" wrote

They have been a reasonably reliable car. I had one a few years back, it worked fine and was cheap to fix.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

Mind you, they are still a budget vehicle. I recently saw a mint condition 1997 Buick Century Custom with every option on it but leather for $4500 - and that was the dealer's asking price.

The smart money would be on one of the midsize cars a model up. Bit better engine, bit tighter tolerances. Nicer interior and exterior. Heavier door panels and maybe things like leather or a good sound system.

Reply to
Joseph Oberlander
98,99 I hear some of them have problem with the electronic odometer (mine is 99 and it has this problem)
Reply to
Hai Pham

My 97 Cavalier has been great. I love the car. Check insurance rates though. The newer ones have ridiculously high rates here in Manitoba.

Reply to
Denis Roy

Just remember these little cars are basic to & from car's. Its no Cadillac. You get what you pay for. My 89 Cavalier Z-24 I bought used with very low miles, but loved having repairs done to itself in the $500.00 increments.

========= Harryface =========

1991 Pontiac Bonneville LE, 3800 V6 _~_~_~_~275,982 miles_~_~_ ~_~_
Reply to
Harry Face

New Cavaliers and Sunfires are going here for less than any other new car including the korean imports and the tiny new Echo clones (Sprint, Aveo). I can only assume this is because they are unpopular cars right now. Maybe it has something to do with the car magazine reviews which condemn them as "unpleasant" and "outdated". I've been in a Cavalier and it didn't feel all that horrible. I really wonder what the reviewers meant, or maybe they are just comparing them to luxury cars? I don't know. Anyway, that is not important and shouldn't be for someone who simply wants a point a to be car.

I was wondering if getting a new car, even a poorly reviewed one, and breaking it in carefully myself, giving it frequent oil changes and all the proper maintenance, would ensure a longer lasting car than buying a used higher end car such as a Buick, for the same price. The used car may or may not have treated or maintained properly - and could break down sooner, yet I know with a better engine and better safety ratings it might actually be the better buy.

Reply to
windmere

Nope. Take a Dodge Neon. It's made with the same philosophy. Cheap and functional transportation. The engineers who designed it actually would be told by management to redesign parts as they were lasting longer than the warranty - to save costs. Now, GM isn't quite that bad, but they aren't close to the quality that goes into a good Grand Prix or Regal, let alone have the quality of ride and fit/finish. Heavier construction on every single part - from the doors to the alternator to the radiator all the way down to the quality of the switches on the power windows.

My Buick LeSabre is finally dying at 17 years old. I had a Neon while it was in the shop for three months(trans and other work done at cost at the local college auto shop) and it was 7 years old and just in as bad shape. I put $1100 into the Buick as that would keep it on the road for another two years and sold the Neon for what I paid.

Advantage? Bigger, safer, nicer ride.

The smart money is on a used Buick Century or simmilar. Good cars with zero resale appeal due to their stodgy old-man image. If you treat one of these well, they will last a decade or more easily.

Don't forget the goodies like a sunroof, ABS, traction control, leather, power everything, and the like that a Cavalier doesn't usually come with.

I recently saw a 1997 Century in mint condition with everything on it but leather for $4500 on the dealer's lot(trade-in). They had 2-3 year old Regals and Centurys and the like for ~10K. You can get a superb car for $10K used if you shop around.

If reliability is a concern, get one that is 3-5 years old and coming off a first lease. They can extend the factory warranty out to 8-10 years if you want. While this is expensive, a used Regal with a 5 year warranty for what a base Cavalier is new isn't such a bad deal.

Reply to
Joseph Oberlander

Perhaps newer design small cars? The Cavalier and Sunfire are the oldest design small cars currently for sale in the US, dating from the 1995 model year. Focus and Neon both date from 2000, Civic and Elantra 2001, Corolla

2003, etc..
Reply to
Timothy J. Lee

I had a '92 Cav once. Although older, I think the engine went almost unchanged through about '96 or '97. And I believe they shared a lot of other parts. I drove it hard at times, but maintenance was right on time. I sold it at 127,000 (actually wish I'd kept it now) and last I heard it was well over 200k miles. It had very few problems. Crank position sensor and ignition module, and water pump was all I replaced besides the obvious maintenance stuff.

Tony

Reply to
Tony V.

Reply to
Joseph A. Zupko

My own opinion is that car reviewers are the last people to ask about what car you should buy. Most of them are gear heads who are more impressed by the technical details of a car than how real people use real cars under ordinary practical driving conditions. For the average reviewer a car is an end in it's self and not simply a means to an end (a practical transportation tool).

By the way, we too considered buying a new Cavalier about a year ago. Instead we bought a 2002 Buick Century with 14800 miles on it for

11800$. We have never regretted that choice. In every way the Buick is a superior car. Even the mileage is similar to a cavalier. In the long run I think the Buick will prove to be less expensive to own than a new Cavalier not to mention the fact that you have a real grown-up car that is much more comfortable, reliable, quite, roomier, far better equipped and with a much higher build quality than a Cavalier.

Just one man's opinion.

Reply to
none

I drove a Buick back in highschool.

Reply to
Bon·ne·ville

"Joseph A. Zupko" wrote

Doesn't anyone realize that a Buick and Chevy are identical, other then trims items, body parts...etc? There is nothing "better" about a Buick Century, when comparing it to the Grand Prix, Intrigue, or Lumina. It's all the same basic shit, just different piles. In fact, the Buick in that year only comes with the 3.1 which is probably the worst of the GM v-6's. Still a good little motor, but the worst of a bad lot.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

Heh. I'm 33 - been driving Buicks and Volvos since I was 16 and got my license - and the Volvos are better cars by far, but since my father sells me his old Buicks at about 10-12 years old for virtually nothing, why stop a good thing? :)

Next car is my choice, though - I'm waiting for the LeSabre to come around. My sister's getting the Park Ave. She's 23 and is getting his old Park Ave Ultra. Lol. Just too big for me.

I think I might go for a classic this next time. Had my eye on a 1962 1/2 Buick Skylark convertable. Now that's a slick car. :)

Reply to
Joseph Oberlander

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.