What now?

[clyde]

Originally Posted by Josh (PA)

I've really been impressed with every Mazda cx5 interaction I've had.

A surprisingly high portion of dealer available current gen (2017+) used CX-5s are former rental cars.

Hmm

Doug, haven't looked closely into all the Ford options yet.

[equ]

I don't know these cars well, spend a day checking them out. I wouldn't rule out the rav4, it might be better than the cr-v. Why not a newish outback or a golf sportwagon (6/72 warranty)?

[clyde]

Originally Posted by equ

I don't know these cars well, spend a day checking them out. I wouldn't rule out the rav4, it might be better than the cr-v. Why not a newish outback or a golf sportwagon (6/72 warranty)?

The more I've learned about Subaru's CVTs, the less inclined I am to take a chance on another.

The Outback has about 34 cubic feet behind the rear seats and so do all the vehicles we're looking at, except the current CX-5 at 31, which may be too small.

The Golf Sportwagen has 30. It also has a tiny tank plus slightly worse EPA ratings when equipped with 4Motion and an automatic. There's not a lot of interior storage and it sounds like it's kinda cramped in the back seat. Each of those would be okay, but all of them? Then, even with a good warranty, if shit breaks, it needs to go in, which is a pain in the ass. And it's a VW. Plus, the idea of driving it out of warranty?

[equ]

It's a non-SUV/CUV, pretty much guaranteed to drive better. 6/72 is about as good as a warranty gets. Are VW's perfect? Far from it. Neither are Subies.

The CR-V, RAV4, CX5 and their brethren are as popular as popcorn around and the whole country. I'm sure there are good reasons for that. When literally everyone has one, it gets unappealing to me, subjectively.

[JST]

Here’s an idea

https://bringatrailer.com/2019/04/06...onversion-van/

[clyde]

Originally Posted by equ

It's a non-SUV/CUV, pretty much guaranteed to drive better. 6/72 is about as good as a warranty gets. Are VW's perfect? Far from it. Neither are Subies.

I wonder if VW has a best in the business 6/72 warranty because so much shit breaks so often no one would buy them without? I'd rather have something with a super short warrant and shit didn't break. Like my wife's Outback that went 128.5k without needing anything (that she didn't directly break). I don't see how 3-6 warranty trips a year for three years (which is how fast she'll burn through the miles) is better.

That a Golf would drive better than a CUV/SUV is not something I need to be sold on. The Golf also does not or cannot hit many of my wife's specific objective requirements. Those requirements are met by several CUV/SUVs.

The CR-V, RAV4, CX5 and their brethren are as popular as popcorn around and the whole country. I'm sure there are good reasons for that. When literally everyone has one, it gets unappealing to me, subjectively.

If the magic car of your dreams had the distinct qualities of being bland, anonymous, forgettable, unassuming, reliable, durable, highly fuel efficient (compared to what else hits the rest of your marks), as well as being cheap, they might not be so unappealing.

My wife doesn't dream about cars. She just wants something that will do the things she wants it to do, that she doesn't have to think about, doesn't have to worry about, that doesn't make her feel self-conscious, and is as unlikely to let her down as possible.

[clyde]

I need my wife to stop driving my car. Full stop. I just. Ugh. No. No more.

That out of the way...

We had a charity run in the neighborhood this morning. Then we had to drive an hour away for our bar trivia finals against the top teams from 90some other bars across the state. Finally, about 3:00, we got to leave Pasadena, MD to head to Carmax in Gaithersburg where their website showed several 2017+ CX-5s, fourth and fifth gen CR-Vs, plenty of RAV4s and Escapes. The goal was to drive the CX-5, both gen CR-Vs and a RAV4.

We sat in lots of cars, adding a bunch that weren't on the list just in case one felt good to her, but none made their way onto the "we should drive" list. Unfortunately, the CX-5 was an immediate no because there's not enough legroom in back. While on the lot, the MPG figures for the hybrid RAV4 caught my eye. We'll come back to this.

She drove a fourth gen CR-V. She totally doesn't remember what it was like to drive the fourth gen CR-V when we almost bought one six years ago, but she liked just as much. Which is to say, she'd be happy enough to buy one, call it a day, and not worry abotu what she might be missing. They wouldn't let us drive either of the fifth gen CR-Vs because they had holds on them.

They also wouldn't have let us drive any of the three CX-5s had we wanted to.

Same for the hybrid RAV4 they had on the lot. So, we left.

I have to say this was, by far, the worst Carmax experience I've had of maybe 20(?). Every single car we got in smelled like that crap they put in cars to try to make them not smell like cigarette smoke, but actually smells worse than stale cigarette smoke. Every. Single. One. I truly wonder if that's just what they do now to every car whether it needs it or not. You know, because so many people still smoke. It was bad. And memorable. Few of the cars did not have stand out issues like trim falling off, big poorly buffed scratches/scrapes, or visible interior stains. I also wasn't fond of how cars with holds were off limits for driving, but a-ok for kids to climb on and in, spilling their cherry Slurpees (well, only saw it twice, so maybe a rule change is coming?). We also got to wait about 20 minutes for a dealer tag to be able to drive the one of three cars we intended to drive. And the sales guy that was up when we walked in and set us loose looking at cars was too busy with another customer when we were ready to drive. And it took 10 minutes for them to figure out who else should work with us.

Fuck those fucks.

During one of our waits, I looked up hybrid RAV4s at other dealers and we headed to the dealer near our house that had several. My wife drove one. She liked it a bunch. EPA city raiting is 34 MPG. The CR-V is 22. That's significant. With how she drives, I think it would save about $50/mo in gas compared to the CR-V and given range, probably have to fill up only three times in the RAV4 for every four in the CR-V. That's a bigger deal to her than the money. Pricing on the car looks like it should be comparable.

Was not thinking hybrid before we got to Carmax. My main experience with Toyota hybrids is the 2009 (2010?) Camry my dad bought a few months before he died. I find that car to be horribly miserable to be in, but it does get great mileage. I need to do some research.

[JST]

Yeah, the RAV4 hybrid sounds like the right choice.

In my old age, I’m mellowing and suggesting Toyotas to everyone that doesn’t give a shit about cars. It’s hard to go wrong. You never get fired for buying IBM, etc.

[kognito]

You probably already know this, but the hybrids do take an MPG hit when you go on long trips.

The mileage around town way more than makes up for it.

So what if you get a Toyota, happy wife . .. .

[clyde]

Originally Posted by JST

Yeah, the RAV4 hybrid sounds like the right choice.

In my old age, I’m mellowing and suggesting Toyotas to everyone that doesn’t give a shit about cars. It’s hard to go wrong. You never get fired for buying IBM, etc.

The thing here is that I'm finding it really, really hard to come up with reasons why we shouldn't. And it only leads me to another reason why it's a good idea.

The thing that really bugs me is that 2019 brings a new generation of the RAV4 and it looks like it's seriously improved and the price spread between new and what we drove today doesn't make it unthinkable...but it makes it more money than I wanted to spend. Sigh.

Originally Posted by kognito

You probably already know this, but the hybrids do take an MPG hit when you go on long trips.

The mileage around town way more than makes up for it.

So what if you get a Toyota, happy wife . .. .

It's all about the in town miles, baby.