Look At This Load Of Nonsence!
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,185
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Vehicle: MC + RD2 + AW11 + 944 = 4x Win
I was browsing the news this morning when I ran across this load of absolute crap:
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.asp...=newcarresearch
Low resale values they say?! Well that’s news to me! Considering the fact that when I bought my Accent (2007 model) NEW in May of last year I purchased it for $10,400. In February after the accident it was valued at over $13,000; including the 25,000 miles I put on it. How many other cars go up in value? And for that matter the Tiburon we bought for $5,500 was a 2001, but a similar 2000 model Tibby at Carmax was $9,900 with all the same equipment and had 14,000 more miles on it; this is a seven year old vehicle. Last year before we bought the Accent thinking we couldn't afford a new car and the upkeep on the others we tested a 2004 Accord. Listed as $15,000 with as supposed original value of $25,000, so in 3 years this car lost 40% of its value, yet the Accent who even now, a year after purchase, is still valued slightly above it original cost. So I have to beg where the factual basis of this article resides? If at all.
There’s the problem. Any Joe Nobody can report to this agency. So basically what you get is the millions of Honda fanboys across this nation selling their (false) belief system to a company that then goes to report these fallacies to a nation of uneducated goofs. At the time we bought the Accent I drove 50.1 miles EXACTLY to and from work every day. That's a round trip of 100.2 miles each day, or (excluding any side trips or weekend outings) 501 exactly each week. I would put in just 10 small gallons on Monday morning and I could get all the way home Friday without filling up. By traveling at what Atlanta considers a low speed of 60 mph I could achieve an average 50mpg per fill up. And that was bone stock, mo mods what so ever. Put that in your Honda pipe and shove it where he sun don't shine. Your SOUL! And the insurance was over $200 less per 6 months! In fact the only thing I will say about the Accent vs. another vehicle is the insurance costs. In June after the wedding and all that good stuff the female and I plan on retiring her old car a ’94 Pontiac Sunbird and buying her a new car. She was disputing either a Mini Cooper, another Accent, or a Fortwo. After debating the costs it turns out that the Mini will probably be it, just because the insurance is $100 less per six month period and the BMW dealership promised to do all basic maintenance for years. Basically because of the size and safety features the Accent and Fortwo pretty much gib upon impact with a larger vehicle (same with the Honda but it rarely saves the passengers in the process) so the insurance companies are more likely to have to pay out larger and sooner on these cars. Apparently the Mini is like a smaller version on the '67 Impala, a fricken tank. Plus she won’t drive enough to offset the 50mpg difference. But more on topic a Honda over a Hyundai, there’s just no way. Unless you’re talking 1986.
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.asp...=newcarresearch
QUOTE
While Hyundai and Kia models have low prices and long warranties, the savings are often offset by poor resale values. Hyundai's Accent and Elantra don't prove any less expensive after five years than Honda's more expensive Fit and Civic.
Low resale values they say?! Well that’s news to me! Considering the fact that when I bought my Accent (2007 model) NEW in May of last year I purchased it for $10,400. In February after the accident it was valued at over $13,000; including the 25,000 miles I put on it. How many other cars go up in value? And for that matter the Tiburon we bought for $5,500 was a 2001, but a similar 2000 model Tibby at Carmax was $9,900 with all the same equipment and had 14,000 more miles on it; this is a seven year old vehicle. Last year before we bought the Accent thinking we couldn't afford a new car and the upkeep on the others we tested a 2004 Accord. Listed as $15,000 with as supposed original value of $25,000, so in 3 years this car lost 40% of its value, yet the Accent who even now, a year after purchase, is still valued slightly above it original cost. So I have to beg where the factual basis of this article resides? If at all.
QUOTE
To help, Consumer Reports is introducing.....
There’s the problem. Any Joe Nobody can report to this agency. So basically what you get is the millions of Honda fanboys across this nation selling their (false) belief system to a company that then goes to report these fallacies to a nation of uneducated goofs. At the time we bought the Accent I drove 50.1 miles EXACTLY to and from work every day. That's a round trip of 100.2 miles each day, or (excluding any side trips or weekend outings) 501 exactly each week. I would put in just 10 small gallons on Monday morning and I could get all the way home Friday without filling up. By traveling at what Atlanta considers a low speed of 60 mph I could achieve an average 50mpg per fill up. And that was bone stock, mo mods what so ever. Put that in your Honda pipe and shove it where he sun don't shine. Your SOUL! And the insurance was over $200 less per 6 months! In fact the only thing I will say about the Accent vs. another vehicle is the insurance costs. In June after the wedding and all that good stuff the female and I plan on retiring her old car a ’94 Pontiac Sunbird and buying her a new car. She was disputing either a Mini Cooper, another Accent, or a Fortwo. After debating the costs it turns out that the Mini will probably be it, just because the insurance is $100 less per six month period and the BMW dealership promised to do all basic maintenance for years. Basically because of the size and safety features the Accent and Fortwo pretty much gib upon impact with a larger vehicle (same with the Honda but it rarely saves the passengers in the process) so the insurance companies are more likely to have to pay out larger and sooner on these cars. Apparently the Mini is like a smaller version on the '67 Impala, a fricken tank. Plus she won’t drive enough to offset the 50mpg difference. But more on topic a Honda over a Hyundai, there’s just no way. Unless you’re talking 1986.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
From: South Yorks, England, UK
In the real world, if you bought the car you wanted....all those words matter not. Whatever the figures and facts may say, the cars they refer to still don't look any more like an RD, .......................and I was simply suckered by the looks.
In the UK we have a little handbook you can buy to help with choosing/valuing your car called "What Car - buyers guide" and in there, when I was looking for a car, they said "Hyundai know how to make cars".....somehow I translated that to mean If you want a light sporty car don't expect it to carry loads of heavy safety kit ( we'd only take it off...unless it's a monocoque_). Count to ten (probably a little late now) and look at your Tib. fing02.gif Who cares? cool.gif
EDIT- ..to confess I then went and made the mistake of buying a V6 which is nowhere near as light as the RD1 and while it was a very nice car it didn't have the curves and poise of the lighter RD1. I suppose a lot of people choose a car for the wrong reason, probably includes me, either because it's popular (so safety in numbers...baaaahhhh) or because it's safer (allegedly - assuming you're not being mauled by a truck or train) or even because they're dumb (that's where I get twitchy)....there's always bias and it's always good or bad depending on where you're standing. From where I'm standing the Mini seems a good choice, hope she loves it.
In the UK we have a little handbook you can buy to help with choosing/valuing your car called "What Car - buyers guide" and in there, when I was looking for a car, they said "Hyundai know how to make cars".....somehow I translated that to mean If you want a light sporty car don't expect it to carry loads of heavy safety kit ( we'd only take it off...unless it's a monocoque_). Count to ten (probably a little late now) and look at your Tib. fing02.gif Who cares? cool.gif
EDIT- ..to confess I then went and made the mistake of buying a V6 which is nowhere near as light as the RD1 and while it was a very nice car it didn't have the curves and poise of the lighter RD1. I suppose a lot of people choose a car for the wrong reason, probably includes me, either because it's popular (so safety in numbers...baaaahhhh) or because it's safer (allegedly - assuming you're not being mauled by a truck or train) or even because they're dumb (that's where I get twitchy)....there's always bias and it's always good or bad depending on where you're standing. From where I'm standing the Mini seems a good choice, hope she loves it.