Alfa Romeo 4C $60K car that looks like a $150K car and will still look awesome in 10 years. If I didn't have to worry about kids and wanted a status car, I"d be all over that.
Re-open thread. Countering with possible higher insurance rate with the Audi. And..... Better interior. Close thread.
WTF is that?? my gosh. honda designs some hideous cars. exhibit A: that, the cr-v, the pilot.. Accord is not bad though. look..the summary is no matter what you get someone will have something better than you. You can go get a 911 S, but then someone will pull up next to you in the Turbo S. I think when you are spending roughly 30K, it's better to get a "regular" car with the options you want. i.e. camry/accord etc. Next best option is to buy a used luxury car (original msrp 45-60). This is a little more tricky because most european cars after the warranty period is over is expensive to maintain. So someone drives like they dont care for 4 years and you get to maintain that crap for the next 4. Sure you saved 15K but now you have a headache on your hands. Exception being the japanese brands like infiniti/lexus/acura. Acura has been trending down in quality though..and their cars are blah looking. I drove the new TLX and it's nowhere near what acura used to be known for. So if you are truly set on having a luxury car, lease a 3 series, or C class extra at the bare minimum. Please don't get a 2 series or CLA. It screams "i bought a starter benz". The C-class used to say that but now the CLA takes that title.
Equating acceleration to "street racing" is well, wrong. From a stop light, you may need to move over lanes quickly to merge. In passing freeway traffic, you need acceleration. You can't just dismiss that the Accord is a V6 "that's 30k as well". It's a V6 that out-accelerates the CLA and has more standard options as it's loaded. So why again, would I buy the Mercedes? The badge. And that's why the CLA exists ... to lure in suckers. As for "annoying people"... driving a low-end Mercedes with nothing in it... Here are examples. Leather is optional (there's a $1650 package you can add to get it). Auto-dimming mirrors, heated seats, garage door opener, etc. are optional (pay $2400 and you can get those). Rearview camera? Optional. Blind spot assist? optional. LKA? Optional. You can add these invidiually if you want, but most of these are $500+ add-ons each. By the time you add all the stuff, you may be staring at a $40k car. I mean come on, a Mercedes without a garage door opener? Most of the stuff above was on a car I bought 11 years ago as standard equipment. I don't have any problem with people buying cars for the status symbol. But do yourself a favor and buy one where people don't look for a lot of functionality that's in their $20-$30k Honda, but doesn't exist in your car.
I wouldn't get the IS250 for the same reason I wouldn't get the CLA... woeful engine performance. But... it'll more than likely be reliable. I'd stick with getting a "normal" sedan and then when you're older like you said, check what's out there. I know my ideas about cars changed once I hit my 30's and 40's. Sajan, I kind of like the Honda Civic! I agree with you, it looks kind of goofy from certain angles, but overall, I like that car. Kelley Blue Book just voted it a best buy. I haven't checked it out or anything, but it's going to more than likely sell like crazy. Nice tech inside and I kind of like the front end. And quit dissin' my TLX. Only the elite are allowed to speak Acura's name!
You purchased a TLX? One of my friends just purchased one yesterday. She told me she likes the suspension on her 3rd gen TL better.
Seriously bro? And, of course you pay more for the brand, that's how it is not matter what price range your in. IMO there's nothing annoying about someone buying a CLA. If someone likes the car, values the status of ownning a new Mercedes over a couple of extra options then go for it. Those extra options might not matter, the spacing might not matter to a single yong person. The car has no acceleration problems, you can always pass cars at lights or on the freeway with using a heavier foot, that's a really silly thing to say. But whatever I'm not going to argue about a car I don't even own.
The TLX is a different animal than the 3G TL. I owned a 3G TL. The TLX isn't much of a sports sedan IMO because of the skinny (and sucky) tires. It's a heck of a cruiser, though, and gets ridiculous mileage for a V6. I easily get between 35 and 40 mpg on road trips of 300+ miles. It's somewhere between a 3G TL and a ES 350 in terms of performance and ride, without being the boat that the 4G TL was. After almost 250,000 miles in my last car and a couple of costly repairs, I had to get a new car fairly quick, so had it narrowed down to an ATS, Q50, and the TLX. I wanted to like the IS, but terrible mileage combined with an interior I wasn't gung-ho about left that off the list. The ATS was in its first or 2nd year at the time and from what I was reading had all kinds of nagging issues and mileage that wasn't anywhere near what was being reported. The Q50's release was a disaster with all kinds of electronics problems, people holding the steering wheel sideways to go straight, entertainment systems crapping out to where you had to restart the car to get them to work, etc. This basically left me with the TLX. Of course the '15 TLX's have wonky transmissions, but outside of that have been fairly solid cars so far. Is the suspension what she dislikes or is it the tires/handling from the tires? Because the suspension/ride in the TLX is light-years ahead of the 3G TL to me, unless she just likes a stiffer suspension. The handling on the 3G TL to me was better, but then the tires that come stock with the TLX are horrific. It's still not as fun to drive as the 3G TL to me, either.
I'd never use a car to signify how "well-off" financially I am. A house, yes. Absolutely. A car, hell no. I'll have to do it again in 10-15 years.
Harden probably sells used beard conditioner. Capela probably bought it for when he's able to grow facial hair.
I never equated it to solely that. I thought I'd give it as an example of why the engine in a base CLA sucks. The best example I could come up with is Mr. and Mr. Smith pulling up next to you and you can't get around them in your status symbol to merge up the freeway because they. don't. want. you. to. lol. It's why I gave the examples of passing and merging, as well. Of course, you don't run into that problem apparently. You don't get the engine of the Accord, you really don't get the options of an Accord, so you're left with... I don't know what, other than "I have a star on my hood". Well, ok, maybe better handling. This makes no sense whatsoever. Hyundai, Buick, Kia, Acura, hell, even Cadillac, etc. have made a living off of giving more (or a perceived more) bang for the buck in their respective price ranges which includes the price range the CLA is in. And herein lies our difference, I guess... I don't find any status in buying $30-$50k cars no matter the badge. They're a dime-a-dozen. Seriously, how many 3-Series, A4's, TL's, IS's do you see daily? Tons. I really don't mind people buying cars for the status... that's up to them. All I was stating was the CLA ain't much status, so why pay for it when you don't even get the status, the engine, the options, the driving dynamics, etc? Now if you (not literally "you") think the CLA makes people think you're loaded, hey, go for it. Well, why would you want sporty and say a dinky 200hp engine with 0-60 times slower than a family sedan is all that sporty. In all honestly, the CLA's handling is pretty good (from what I've read), but that base engine is comedy. Like I said, I think this is just we're expecting different things from the cars in a given range that appear to fill a niche.
If you have to signify you are well off financially, you probably are not. Don't be a vulgarian. Buy a good used car, drive it for 10 years and save the money. Then, when you're an old like me, you can look at all the young bucks and laugh at them while you retire early. Plus, if you ever have kids, college tuition will be even more absurd by then. (Any girl impressed by flash is just that: a girl. Women appreciate a keen mind and financial sense.)
That's precisely the problem. Once you eliminate the other contenders...TLX is what's left..and you go with it..but nothing at first glance makes you want the TLX. I test drove it for my brother in law. The interior felt cheap, the transmission was hard..shifts felt forced. It's def not a sports sedan. I just don't see why someone would get that over an accord. Just for the acura name I guess. He ended up getting the Q50. Also compared the GS350 but the front end is a either love or hate. My parents have a 2010 MDX. I liked Acuras. Just not anymore. The 535i my wife has is nice...but I wouldn't own one after the warranty is out. 1600 bucks to replace the windshield. Glad we have comprehensive coverage.
From what I gather, I think she thinks the suspension is too stiff. Something about the vehicle being too bouncy after going over bumps. Congrats on your new vehicle. I have a different opinion from yours about the IS250. I thought the interior was nice and loved how it handled, the only thing I don't like is the nike swoosh lights on the front end. I think I test drove the F-Sport. Wanted to purchase one, but knew the 2016's (IS200T) would come with a new engine/transmission and didn't want to wait that long. Went ahead and purchased a new vehicle earlier this year. I'm doing the opposite of therealist. Purchased a nice vehicle first, then buying a beater (civic or something along the lines) in a few years after my vehicle is paid off.
