New car purchase

Hi, I'm having trouble deciding between two cars to buy.

I'm either going to purchase a new 2005 Hyundai Elantra GLS hatchback for $14,200 OR a new 2006 Toyota Corolla CE 4-door sedan for $15,100 (or $15,500 depending upon the option package).

These are solid, final prices I negotiated with both dealers over the phone.

People say the Toyotas are built better than the Hyundais and most other vehicles for that matter, but the Elantra comes with a 10-year 100,000-mile powertrain warranty. The Corolla comes with 5 years of powertrain.

Which would you choose? I plan to keep the car forever, so trade-in value or the speed of the car's depreciation is not a factor in the decision-making.

Thanks a million for any advice.

Reply to
TenPercent
Loading thread data ...

Checkout the Mazda3. Much better car than either of these.

Reply to
FanJet

Toyota.

Reply to
Bo Yancey

Toyota

I've owned several. The last one I sold(had 179,000 miles on it) is still seen around town hauling rug rats.

RonT

Reply to
Ron Truitt

When you ask that question in a Toyota newsgroup you will get the answer "Toyota". If you think about it, look around you and see how many old Toyotas there are and how many old Hyundais there are. Hyundais may be on the way up in quality, but wouldn't you want to pay $1000 more for proven quality and endurance for something expensive you plan to keep for a while?

Reply to
badgolferman

Hyundais have improved significantly in quality over the years, although their long term reliability is uncertain. More importantly, the Corolla gets considerably better gas mileage than Elantra or Mazda3 (which somebody else suggested). So if you intend to do a lot of driving, the extra money spent for the Corolla will be more than offset by the savings in fuel costs.

Reply to
High Tech Misfit

Well, judging from your moniker, you're not asking that seriously in a Toyota newsgroup, are you? ;-).

Reply to
Derald

Toyota...no contest...

Reply to
Gord Beaman

Look at the crash tests. Elantra at bottom of list. Scott

Reply to
zonie

Try again, their ratings are virtually identical:

formatting link
The Elantra *is* a better buy though.

Reply to
FanJet

I coulda sworn "TenPercent" typ'd:

No contest. Don't buy either. Buy a 2006 Scion xB. Toyota quality; LOW price.

That's what I did when I was looking for a car in that price range, and am I ever glad I did!

The xB is a small car on the outside and an SUV (Scion's Utility Vehicle) on the inside, gets nearly 40 MPG, and it's the MOST fun car I've had since that Datsun 240Z I had as a kid . . . .

-Don (wish I still had the Z, though!)

Reply to
Don Fearn

I think these aren't really even comparable models: you're trying to choose between a stripped-down Corolla and a loaded Elantra. With the latter, you get things that are either unavailable or optional on the stripper Corolla: a more powerful engine, rear wiper, power locks, alarm/keyless entry, power windows, heated mirrors, rear disk brakes, side air bags.

Those in the market for a stripper Corolla might want to compare to the 2006 Accent instead, which is less loaded than the Elantra. It claims to have interior space comparable to the Corolla and has better gas mileage than the Elantra. It also has side air bags standard unlike the Corolla, and should be even cheaper than the Elantra.

Chris

Reply to
Christopher Wong

But Corolla still gets better gas mileage than both Elantra AND Accent. EPA's estimates for Accent are 26/35 for the automatic and 29/33 for the manual. For Corolla, they estimate 30/38 for the automatic and 32/41 for the manual. In fact, my folks recently took a trip in their '04 Corolla CE (automatic), and it got 40mpg. As I said elsewhere, if one intends to do a lot of driving, the Corolla may cost a little more to buy, but in the long run it will cost less to refuel.

The new Honda Civic should not be overlooked either. The base Civic DX is priced about the same as the Corolla CE and has similar gas mileage, but it has ABS and 6 airbags standard.

Reply to
High Tech Misfit

Thank you for suggesting the Honda Civic. Anti-lock breaks would definitely be useful, and it's nice to see ABS standard on the base model Civic, which has an Edmunds TMV of about $15,800 in my zip code (automatic trans).

The only problem I see with the base model is that it doesn't have air conditioning or the 60/40 split-folding rear seat.

The base price for the Corolla CE is about $15,100, and it comes standard with air conditioning and the nifty cargo-expanding folding rear seats. What's a real shame, though, is that the dealer tells me that CE's with ABS are not shipped to our region--perhaps they're saving the ABS for the snowier, slippier north (?), but we get lotsa snow in Columbia, Missouri--and I remember as a kid, I would have wrecked my Dad's Oldsmobile Eighty Eight if it hadn't had ABS one icy night.

Thank god for ABS. One might make a case that it should be standard on all cars?? But even more importantly, I would love to see a nationwide law that mandated manufacturers to make cars that physically would not start if the driver's seat belt was not engaged. I think lotsa serious injuries could be avoided with such a law.

Reply to
TenPercent

I should have said that the base price mentioned above for the Corolla CE is for an automatic transmission.

Reply to
TenPercent

I coulda sworn "TenPercent" typ'd:

ABS is standard on the xB.

Air conditioning is standard on the xB.

The xB rear seats fold.

The xB has ABS *everywhere* it's shipped.

No. BAD idea. We don't need more laws. ESPECIALLY laws to protect idiots from themselves . . . .

-Don

Reply to
Don Fearn

"Brakes" stop a vehicle, not "breaks."

I believe Columbia MO is part of Toyota's Kansas City Region. Each region orders vehicles according to what they think will sell. They probably feel that Corolla CE buyers are more price conscious than S, LE, or XRS buyers. There are thousands of possible model/color/option permutations so it is difficult to anticipate what a particular buyer will want in a particular production cycle.

The biggest reason that ABS is not standard on all vehicles is cost. Buyers of lower-priced vehicles tend to be more price sensitive so manufacturers try to keep prices down by making some non-essential features optional. One could argue that traction control, stability control, electronic brake force distribution, all wheel drive, side airbags, seatbelt pre-tensioners, parking assist sensors, laser cruise control, and automatic dimming rear view mirrors should also be standard since they enhance the safety of the vehicle, and they are on much more expensive vehicles.

ABS is a wonderful safety feature but a skilled, experienced driver can easily stop a car safely in the snow without it. ABS does allow an extra margin of safety for an unskilled, inexperienced, or inattentive driver, but one must modify one's braking habits to take advantage of it.

But even more importantly, I would

You're showing your young age. Back in the 1970's, vehicles were equipped with seat belt interlocks. They caused so many no-start problems that they were discontinued.

Reply to
Ray O

1974. I had a '74 Toyota Corolla, bought it brand new. They were so cheap, I was a senior in High School!

Had to have the seat belt buckled or it wouldn't start.

Brought it in for service one day, and they disconnected it! It was 'unconstitutional'!!!!

Been there, done that, fasten your own! ;)

Reply to
Hachiroku

See my other post. 1974. Only year. Disconnected because (Jim told me) of a Court Case.

Reply to
Hachiroku

I never heard a definitive explanation for why the seat belt interlocks were disconnected. Being unconstitutional would be a good one!

Reply to
Ray O

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.