Who likes hatchback cars?

I googled "folding utility trailer" and found this right away:

formatting link
which is more or less what I had in mind. You'd have add decking and so forth and all of Ray's and Bruce's cautions do apply.

My further thought on this is that they're bouncy and those little tires will drop into potholes and give the thing a good jar doing so. I wouldn't transport anything delicate on it (i.e., big screen TV) but anything mildly robust would be OK. Brush to compost dump, lawn mower to repair shop, things like that.

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
dh
Loading thread data ...

Don't consider the Pontiac. You'd be better off getting the Matrix.

Compare the EPA's. I'm not sure what the Protege gets but the Matrix is rated: base XR XRS

2WD manual 30/36 30/36 25/32 2WD automatic 28/34 28/34 NA 4WD automatic 26/31 26/31 NA

Reply to
Viperkiller

The problems is they're not similarly equipped. For example, the radio on the Pontiac version is much cheaper (and lousy sounding by comparison) than the Matrix's. The interior materials are also cheaper. Even if you get the same amount of materials, it does not mean that they're the same quality. In fact, they're definately not on these two cars.

The warranty is better on the Toyota also. Toyota's Customer Service is also much better than Pontiac's.

Reply to
Viperkiller

That one looks a little nicer than the Harbor Fright version, but the price is a lot steeper too. $75 for a spare wheel and tire? If it was an American Made Goodyear tire on an American made rim I could see it, but it's probably Korean and as such overpriced.

The 12-inchers aren't really that bouncy, in comparison the 8" rims are the nasty ones. Either way, you do have to pack the fragile stuff in the car and put the sturdy or immune stuff in the trailer.

I have an older (1980-something) "Coleman Caboose" which is a 3X5 frame with a 4x6 molded box fashioned after a car-top carrier on the top. Two 4.80x8 tires on the ground, and a spare slung underneath. For some reason, they were popular for towing behind Honda GoldWings.

Perfect for a half-scoop (1000 pounds) of sand or gravel, or 12 bags of cement. And I don't have to clean out the back of the Work Van only to make a mess of it hauling cement or trash around. And the molded plastic cover will keep the cement bags dry if I don't use it all up. "It's not a trailer Officer, it's a wheelbarrow with lofty ambitions, a VIN and a license plate." ;-P

Then I have the Old Army Generator (PE-95G - Willys 152) sitting in the Old Army Trailer. And a flatbed trailer for my Odyssey FL350.

-->--

Reply to
Bruce L. Bergman
[snip trailer information request]

Out of the next couple of links, something popped up for about $170 "just add plywood." Northern Tool, I thnk it was. That's probably as cheap as it gets.

Of course, if you just get the hitch (which is a few $, too), and a friendly neighbor will LEND you his trailer... more savings that way. We have friends with trailers and they are kind enough to let us borrow them.

[snip]

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***

*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
DH

No too bad gas mileage

Of these three models what would you get? And why?

Reply to
me

are the 2WD models front wheel drive or rear wheel drive?

Reply to
me

We appreciate you opinion ;)

mike hunt

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Front

Reply to
Gord Beaman

Thanks Ray/Bruce/DH for all that helpful information! Will definitely avoid 8-inch wheels.

Reply to
Built_Well

Nothing wrong with an open miind. Perhaps you should also consider the Scion TC.

Reply to
Viperkiller

My 20 yr old nephew is drooling to get one of those! ha!

They are a good value for what you get no doubt!

Reply to
me

It really depends on your needs. The base and XR will be cheaper on fuel and tires. The XRS would be the most fun at the expense of fuel and tires. The 4WD may come in handy for snow and "light" off-road. Which makes most sense for you.

For me personally, I'd get the XRS without hesitation (if I was in this market).

Reply to
Viperkiller

If only the same can be said of yours.

Reply to
Viperkiller

would you get the 2WD manual..... or automatic?

or the 4WD maybe?

just curious

Reply to
me

I see your point, but there are always substitutes, such as having items delivered or renting a vehicle on as-needed basis. Much cheaper than buying a new car. Or buy via the seller's web site or catalog and have the item shipped to you.

But I know what you mean and my next car will have more cargo space. It's handy to have, even if rarely used.

See Consumer Reports auto issue. Should be on US newsstands and mailed out to subscribers (such as public libraries) in the next week or so. Will give you recommendations and (based on owner surveys) reliability info.

If you like Mazda, you might be interested in:

Mazda3 hatchback

Mazda5

Mazda6 wagon

Matrix

Scion Xa

Scion Xb

The boxy little Scion is surprisingly huge inside.

I know what you mean about the limitations of sedans. When my current car dies, the next car will most likely be a wagon or something like the above. I rarely need the space, but when I do, it'll be great to have.

A few months ago, Car & Driver compared the Honda Element, Chrysler PT Cruiser, the boxy Scion, and another car (forgot which one). C&D preferred the boxy Scion, which is almost much cheaper than the other cars in the comparison. See back issues or C&D web site.

Reply to
neilnewsgroups

Havent looked at all the reply. But I'd say look at the Kia Rio5, or Spectra, they're really sporty, especially the Spectra. Or go for the Ford Focus ZX5 2 door hatch back!!

Reply to
72Capri

If you want a car that has better reliability ratings, the Consumer Reports (2004) rates the PT Cruiser reliability better than Toyota Matrix, Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy/Outback (4cyl.), Subaru Outback H6, Volvo XC70, Volkswagen Passat (V6,AWD), and a host of other Wagon/Hatchbacks. According to JD Powers, the PT Cruiser has more room and comfort (for people and cargo). It costs about the same as the Matrix (depending on the model).

If you want a lot more power, go for the PT Cruiser GT. With a 230 horsepower engine, it does 0-60 in 6.8 seconds and will out accelerate a 1989 Porsche 944 (7.5 sec.), a 1967 Ford Mustang V8 (7.4 sec.), and

1980 Chevrolet Corvette L82 (7.4), and matches a 1982 Ferrari 308 GTB/Si Quattrovalvole (6.8 sec).

It has practically the same horsepower of a Ford F-150 4.6L 8cyl - 231 hp. That's an EIGHT cylinder full-size truck.

One of the beauties of the PT Cruiser is that many people don't realize it is so highly rated. As a result, you can buy them used much cheaper than Toyota's and other Japanese cars. Of course, this is a disadvantage if you buy new and sell in a few years.

Reply to
robinjoe61

What problems were reported with the Matrix, not counting fit and finish issues? Moreover, there haven't been enough PiTy Crappers sold since about

2002 to provide a realistic reliability rating.

PiTy Crapper has horrible gas mileage compared to some of the others you listed, especially the Matrix. And since it has been around for only 5 years, it's only a matter of time before the earliest models start to experience frequent problems. After all, it is based on the Neon which, needless to say, is a proven junk box.

Reply to
High Tech Misfit

I haven't yet seen a PTC with thick enough paint to hide the ugly...OTH, in their favour is the fact that it's impossible to lose one in a huge parking lot because you can see the ugly wafting up from it for miles...

Reply to
Gord Beaman

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.