2013 Ford Focus or 2013 Toyota Corolla

[mike7139]

Originally Posted By: Zako2
Originally Posted By: mike7139


I seen a dealer around here just advertise a 2013 Corolla with Automatic for 14,788. Thats almost 2k cheaper than the Focus. You can't really go wrong for a vehicle at that price.


You should definitely visit both dealers and ask them for the best deal currently available. The advertized price has too many strings attached. The advertized price could be a so called "price leader" vehicle that's specially designed to have a low MSRP, but it's an extremely basic model, almost always in truly ugly color, and often the kind of model the dealer does not have in stock.. Granted, today even the price leader may be a decently equipped car. The only thing you can't take for granted in it is an automatic transmission. I remember the price leaders in the early 2000s were a lot worse: manual windows, manual door locks, no AC, shopping cart wheels, cassette player and a manual transmission. Yours for only $12,999!









LOL I know what you mean. Don't laugh at me but im actually trying to find a car with manual roll down windows. Thats one less thing to worry about in my book. I have a 2001 Grand Am GT now and 3 of the power windows are broke. I had the back passenger side freeze up on me a few weeks ago, it went down 1/4th of the way and made a funny cracking noise on the way down and wouldn't go up. I played around with it and eventually forced it back up and now I know to never mess with that window again. Luckily the drivers side window works but I thought to myself how much easier would it be to just have the manual crank windows.

I just want a car with less features that will end up breaking down in the long run.

I also been shopping around online. I check the dealers inventory and if I see something I like I will have them give me a final price with tax/title/ all fees included. I also never give out my # to any of them. Whoever gives me the best deal I will go with them.

 

[smc733]

Originally Posted By: mike7139

I also love new redesigns and new technology and I really love the 2014 Corolla with the CVT transmission(I always wanted a CVT)


Why? In theory they are ok, driving is a preference (the best ones are the ones that simulate a geared auto) but history has shown little improvements in their long-term reliability.

I think the deals to be had on Corollas will be pretty good with the much-needed re-design around the corner. Though I'm looking to part ways with mine, I can't fault its reliability. It just drives terrible on the highway.

 

[SLCraig]

The Corolla does not compete against any car in its segment. It is beyond overdue for a major overhaul.

Between the 2, there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...

 

[kschachn]

You mean other than the fact that it's a Toyota and not a Ford...

Originally Posted By: SLCraig
Between the 2, there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: SLCraig
there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...


Here is one important reason, LOL:
http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Corolla/reliability-266/vs-Focus-88

 

[Falcon_LS]

Have you looked at the VW Golf?

 

[kam327]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...


Here is one important reason, LOL:
http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Corolla/reliability-266/vs-Focus-88


It's easy to have high reliability when you're using 10-year-old technology and have been slowly refining it over that time. If you're cutting edge and offering customers the latest technology, it's to be expected that you'll have a couple more trips to the dealer to sort out the bugs. But in general you get to enjoy that newest technology for a lower price.

 

[hypervish]

Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...


Here is one important reason, LOL:
http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Corolla/reliability-266/vs-Focus-88


It's easy to have high reliability when you're using 10-year-old technology and have been slowly refining it over that time. If you're cutting edge and offering customers the latest technology, it's to be expected that you'll have a couple more trips to the dealer to sort out the bugs. But in general you get to enjoy that newest technology for a lower price.


I'd rather not be a guinea pig and end up stuck on the side of the road or have my car in the shop all the time.

My time is more important than that.

 

[jigen]

Originally Posted By: mike7139
I have a 2001 Grand Am GT now and 3 of the power windows are broke.


Incredibly common with GM's during that time period. My 02' Camaro used to blow through them like they were nothing. I wouldn't worry about power window issues in a 2013 Corolla.

 

[kschachn]

And that's a car I want to buy how?

Originally Posted By: kam327
It's easy to have high reliability when you're using 10-year-old technology and have been slowly refining it over that time. If you're cutting edge and offering customers the latest technology, it's to be expected that you'll have a couple more trips to the dealer to sort out the bugs. But in general you get to enjoy that newest technology for a lower price.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
And that's a car I want to buy how?

Originally Posted By: kam327
It's easy to have high reliability when you're using 10-year-old technology and have been slowly refining it over that time. If you're cutting edge and offering customers the latest technology, it's to be expected that you'll have a couple more trips to the dealer to sort out the bugs. But in general you get to enjoy that newest technology for a lower price.


Some people don't want to drive an appliance

 

[friendly_jacek]

Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.

Wasn't that the main complaint from old British motorcycle riders about Honda motorcycles when they first showed up?

 

[kschachn]

I used to like "exciting", but after paying for it I tend towards "reliable" now. Maybe I'm just getting old.

I used to drive Fords, mainly because in the small town I lived in they had an honest dealership that I trusted. But when I bought my first Toyota I didn't know that cars didn't have to break. I thought that a continuously broken car was normal until I met Toyota.

But later I realized that yes, part of that was "Toyota" but part of it was because the particular Toyotas I was buying didn't have a bunch of newfangled gadgets that impacted reliability. Our van doesn't have an electronic instrument panel, nor electric sliding doors, nor anything. That contributes to reliability just as much as the base quality of the vehicle.

A friend bought a newer Sienna with every option including a laser cruise control. The sensor for that control is down near the road and when a rock hits the thing it breaks the cover glass and renders the cruise control inop. I forget the price to replace the sensor but it was a lot of money. Ditto for the motor operated hatch and side doors. Just more things to break and when they do, they aren't cheap to fix.

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.


I like having both

 

[kam327]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
I used to drive Fords, mainly because in the small town I lived in they had an honest dealership that I trusted. But when I bought my first Toyota I didn't know that cars didn't have to break. I thought that a continuously broken car was normal until I met Toyota.


Were all the Fords you bought in the beginning of a major redesign model year?

Here's my experience with Fords:

’85 Tempo: Sold @ 95k miles: Only significant problems: fuel shutoff impact switch and transmission solenoid. The transmission solenoid started acting up and preventing a shift into 4th only on the day before I went to sell it private party. I accepted a few hundred less at the transaction.

'91 Mustang: Sold @ 95k miles: Only significant problem, A/C compressor replaced.

'99 Contour: Sold @ 50k miles: Only significant problem, dash peeled up around defroster vents. (and tire balance issues but that's not Ford).

'05 & '08 Tributes (rebadged Escapes): Sold both @ around 30k miles: Only significant problem with the ’08: warped rotors.

’08 Taurus: Sold @ 40k miles: Only significant problem: trunk lid lifts replaced, airbag unit screw tightened.

’12 Focus: Currently Running: Significant problems: DCT clutch pack replaced, front strut bushings replaced. Now running well (except the usual DCT quirkiness) @ 17k miles. Early in the production of a brand new model with lots of new tech.

’06 Explorer: Just sold @ 67k miles. This was my only big Ford disappointment. Several very expensive problems several of which were clearly Ford and some of which I believe were due to the dealer digging into it and inadvertently causing other problems. BUT this car was only months into production of a major redesign for the ’06 model year (build August ’05). Others I know or have read about on forums with this car have said they’ve been very reliable.

So, a few trips to the dealer or repair shop over the course of owning a car is not enough to stop me from buying that brand. I only replaced with Explorer with a Dodge because the Dodge happened to be very well reviewed and offered the best bang for the buck based on my pricing research. I hope to keep her for a looong time and we’ll see how she holds up.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.


I like having both

If so, why do you buy BMW?

Isn't that for Break My Wallet?

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
there is no reason to buy a Corolla over a Focus let alone any other car in that segment...


Here is one important reason, LOL:
http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Corolla/reliability-266/vs-Focus-88


It's easy to have high reliability when you're using 10-year-old technology and have been slowly refining it over that time. If you're cutting edge and offering customers the latest technology, it's to be expected that you'll have a couple more trips to the dealer to sort out the bugs. But in general you get to enjoy that newest technology for a lower price.

I think it could be argued that many "improvements" make a car less exciting in terms of actual driving. Just the extra weight alone of new cars, does something to dull the driving experience.
How many DBW throttles, or electic power steering systems feel natural in a sub $20k car? Some maybe now, but for how many years were these "improvements" just annoying?
It is kind of interesting to be on the "cutting edge", but for an economy car, you are on the cutting edge of how much cheaper a system can be and still have it work. If your car just has to get you around in reasonable comfort with low running costs, a 10 year old refined design is probably a better option.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Yap, some people like them cars to be reliable and some expect them to be exciting. I do have to admit, the few times a car got me stranded in the middle of nowhere, it was quite exciting to say the least.


I like having both

If so, why do you buy BMW?

Isn't that for Break My Wallet?


Actually, the M5 has been incredibly reliable for a used 12 year old car. It has needed brakes, tires and a tie-rod end as part of its regular maintenance over the last two years (part of the "fun" you can't have in a Corolla... which also goes along with having 400HP on tap at all times and a torque curve that looks like Saskatchewan) with the only expensive repair being the clutch. Which is a normal maintenance item on this car and didn't cause any reliability issues, as I drove with the baffed clutch for almost a year before I got around to replacing it.

And I don't think we need to get into comparing the interior, fit and finish, ride or other qualities between a high performance German luxury sedan and a Focus or Corolla, as I don't think that's relevant to this thread (but perhaps it is relevant to your opinion piece on BMW's?

) but I think if the Focus can offer good reliability and the fun factor for the same price as the Corolla, which HAS been my experiences with the Focus FWIW, then to me, that makes it the "better" purchase.

 

[glock19]

Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: kschachn
I used to drive Fords, mainly because in the small town I lived in they had an honest dealership that I trusted. But when I bought my first Toyota I didn't know that cars didn't have to break. I thought that a continuously broken car was normal until I met Toyota.


Were all the Fords you bought in the beginning of a major redesign model year?

Here's my experience with Fords:

’85 Tempo: Sold @ 95k miles: Only significant problems: fuel shutoff impact switch and transmission solenoid. The transmission solenoid started acting up and preventing a shift into 4th only on the day before I went to sell it private party. I accepted a few hundred less at the transaction.

'91 Mustang: Sold @ 95k miles: Only significant problem, A/C compressor replaced.

'99 Contour: Sold @ 50k miles: Only significant problem, dash peeled up around defroster vents. (and tire balance issues but that's not Ford).

'05 & '08 Tributes (rebadged Escapes): Sold both @ around 30k miles: Only significant problem with the ’08: warped rotors.

’08 Taurus: Sold @ 40k miles: Only significant problem: trunk lid lifts replaced, airbag unit screw tightened.

’12 Focus: Currently Running: Significant problems: DCT clutch pack replaced, front strut bushings replaced. Now running well (except the usual DCT quirkiness) @ 17k miles. Early in the production of a brand new model with lots of new tech.

’06 Explorer: Just sold @ 67k miles. This was my only big Ford disappointment. Several very expensive problems several of which were clearly Ford and some of which I believe were due to the dealer digging into it and inadvertently causing other problems. BUT this car was only months into production of a major redesign for the ’06 model year (build August ’05). Others I know or have read about on forums with this car have said they’ve been very reliable.

So, a few trips to the dealer or repair shop over the course of owning a car is not enough to stop me from buying that brand. I only replaced with Explorer with a Dodge because the Dodge happened to be very well reviewed and offered the best bang for the buck based on my pricing research. I hope to keep her for a looong time and we’ll see how she holds up.


I'm not saying Fords aren't reliable, I had a great 97 Explorer that I loved. However, your post doesn't really convince me of great Ford reliability. You sold every Ford you had before 100K. I think most cars on the market today are going to make it to 100K pretty trouble free.