Trying to decide which station wagon

[matt922]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The Subie.
Cheaper to buy in equivalent condition, and cheaper to own.
Also, Subes are often owned by the faithful, while later Volvos and Bey Em Veys are often owned by people trying to make a statement. IMHO, the average middle-aged Subie is probably better maintained as a result.
I am biased, since we own a Subaru, but we still have an old BMW, which is a great driver and not especially free from repairs, but it is an old car.
Friends and aquaintances who have had late Volvos have not been amused.
You will rarely encounter a Subaru owner who doesn't like his car.
Just my .02.


volvo people are generally very modest people. Many volvo people are subaru people too.

kinda funny reading your biased post and then scrolling down to your sig and the first car on it is the car owners that aren't trying to "make a statement". kinda kills any validity you had going for you

 

[Tosh]

OP: What do you think of the SAAB 9-2X (Saabaru)? This would be at the top of my list if I required AWD (but I haven't driven the non-turbo version yet to compare).

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: matt922
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The Subie.
Cheaper to buy in equivalent condition, and cheaper to own.
Also, Subes are often owned by the faithful, while later Volvos and Bey Em Veys are often owned by people trying to make a statement. IMHO, the average middle-aged Subie is probably better maintained as a result.
I am biased, since we own a Subaru, but we still have an old BMW, which is a great driver and not especially free from repairs, but it is an old car.
Friends and aquaintances who have had late Volvos have not been amused.
You will rarely encounter a Subaru owner who doesn't like his car.
Just my .02.


volvo people are generally very modest people. Many volvo people are subaru people too.

kinda funny reading your biased post and then scrolling down to your sig and the first car on it is the car owners that aren't trying to "make a statement". kinda kills any validity you had going for you

Having a bad day, are you?
Nothing biased in my post, and I acknowledged owning a Sube in the body of my post, as one can read in your quote of it.
I bought the Subie after extensive research, and because I had long wanted to own one.
Hope things get better for you.

 

[rjundi]

A higher mileage 2005 Legacy wagon. A superior car to any previous Legacy/Outback and head gasket problem appears solved.

 

[DaveL]

If you like the XC70, pony up the bucks to move up to at least 04, better yet 05 or 06. My hunch is that getting an older one would be false economy. I love my thus far totally trouble free 05 V70, but based on both Consumer Reports and reading the Volvo forums, there were serious reliability issues before 04.

I also love my 01 Forester, but, as someone else mentioned,either get one on which the head gaskets have already been replaced or make allowance for that in the price. Also, be prepared to replace the rear wheel bearings now and then. The 01 Forester, of course, is a much smaller car than the XC70.

 

[mormit]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The Subie.
Cheaper to buy in equivalent condition, and cheaper to own.
Also, Subes are often owned by the faithful, while later Volvos and Bey Em Veys are often owned by people trying to make a statement. IMHO, the average middle-aged Subie is probably better maintained as a result.
I am biased, since we own a Subaru, but we still have an old BMW, which is a great driver and not especially free from repairs, but it is an old car.
Friends and aquaintances who have had late Volvos have not been amused.
You will rarely encounter a Subaru owner who doesn't like his car.
Just my .02.



Volvos can be very cheap to maintain IF you are knowledgeable and do upkeep work yourself. OK, that's true for every car but Volvos tend to be pretty trouble-free, HOWEVER lube places and shops will assume you like to spend money. They will try to milk you. Take for example, my 98 V70. The previous owner never got out of Jiffy Lube or NTB without breaking the $100 mark due to bogus stuff. The shop that did his spark plugs sold the guy plugs that were twenty bucks each parts cost only!!! I'm sure he took home the idea that they are expensive to own. I've owned the car close to four years now and all it's required is simple routine maintenance stuff.

Full disclosure: I do own three Volvos so I might be biased. 85 240, 98 V70, 02 S40. I don't spend much time doing repairs.

 

[Hethaerto]

I own a 2002 XC70. Last weekend I drove the car through a terrible snowstorm on the east coast. It took me 19 hours to make a 10.5 hour trip.

That car saved my life at least three separate times.

From the anti-lock brakes to the AWD system to the sturdy chassis, that car is why I'm alive right now. I could tell you some hair-raising stories about that trip.

I've owned the car for three years now, bought it at 50k miles, now at 84k. The only repairs required so far was replacement of both tail light assemblies. They were blowing bulbs because of corrosion. Nothing else.

That's one he** of a car.

 

[SteveSRT8]

That's also one [censored] of a repair bill. Care to share what a couple of tailights cost you?

An older import is a roll of the dice. Many are great while young and then become problematic as they age a bit.

I would be especially wary of Volvos and Beemers just because of the repair costs. Even a DIY-er is going to say ouch when he buys parts.

 

[The_Jeff]

One thing I worry about with SUVs, and Subarus, is the occasional moron owner who buys them assuming they're overbuilt and indestructible. Then they go curbhopping and don't maintain the things. Especially true of college kids spending Daddy's money.

Agree on the cherokee idea, my work had a couple as fleet vehicles mercilessly beat on and I got a 99 at auction with 160k that still drove great. And they're lighter that a lot of the new stuff, more square inside for ease of packing.

 

[mormit]

A quick search for both XC70 and Forester tail light assemblies I found both in the $100-$125 range. Yep, huge cost difference.

 

[Hethaerto]

Yep, tail light assemblies for Volvo ain't cheap, but that's a poor reason to not consider a Volvo, in my opinion.

 

[mormit]

But when they cost the same, kind of negates that factor.

Horrible clutch feel on a 2001 Forester is enough to turn me off.

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
There's something to be said for low maintenance.

And someone should point out that EVERY mfgr. makes lemons. Every single one.

Personally I like a full size Dodge Magnum.

Many 5.7 Out there with big miles, and AWD is available.

These vehicles are cheap to service and dead reliable. Buddy of mine has 170k miles on his and it runs like a Gem. The gas mileage will surprise you.


That would have actually been my first pick as a true "wagon" also, but I didn't suggest it because a) its a lot bigger than the others he's considering and b) no stick option.

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
One thing I worry about with SUVs, and Subarus, is the occasional moron owner who buys them assuming they're overbuilt and indestructible. Then they go curbhopping and don't maintain the things. Especially true of college kids spending Daddy's money.


Well, Jeep Cherokees *are* overbuilt and indestructible ;-)

OK, nothing's indestructible, but a Cherokee is about as close as you can get in practical terms. Same for an (old- as in pre-1990s) Land Cruiser or early Bronco, but they're collectible ($$$$) and Cherokees aren't (yet- but they will be some day).

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I would be especially wary of Volvos and Beemers just because of the repair costs. Even a DIY-er is going to say ouch when he buys parts.


First off:
Beemer= BMW motorcycle
Bimmer= BMW automobile

As for repair/parts costs, I won't comment on Volvos, as I haven't owned one since 1994- although that doesn't stop some folks who have never even sat in a BMW from opining on operating expenses. Here are a few legitimate data points that are based on actual experience:

I'm currently running two newer BMWs that see daily use. The X3 has over 80K on the clock and maintenance/repair costs average 2.8 cents per mile. Note that I change the oil myself at one-half the factory interval. I have an excellent dealer and service costs have been very reasonable. For example, an Inspection II(60K mile) service plus a brake fluid flush set me back $386. An ATF and transfer case oil change cost $207. Oil Service(15K) and coolant flush? $97.

My 3 Series also serves as my track rat. At 120K miles maintenance/repairs are averaging 5 cents per mile. That number includes four sets of Z-rated summer rubber. Part costs? Driving me to the poorhouse! Here are some examples:
oil filter: $7.40
timing chain tensioner(replaced as a precaution): $41.40
brake light switch: $14.50(whew!)

I'll agree that 7, 8. and M Series cars can be very expensive to run- especially if you can't DIY anything and your only option is an unscrupulous dealer. That said, high maintenance/repair costs aren't inevitable for a 3 or 5 Series car if you do your homework. As a matter of fact, I'm dumping my miserable Mazda and replacing it with either an E39 M5 or an E46 M3. I suppose that I should open up a HELOC...

 

[SteveSRT8]

First off:
Beemer= BMW motorcycle
Bimmer= BMW automobile

Wow, I'm really grateful you took the time to correct me. But you're preaching to the choir here.

As an owner of 5 different models from 88 through 95, my experience is completely different. I also have a really close friend who has a spanking new M3, and it's a really nice car, but it was delivered with issues!

But of course yours is more meaningful... to you.

I have had many German cars, and I go to the auction so I get one every now and then at a real deal. Some of them we turn, some we keep. But we move a lot of them, and, "generally speaking", German cars are expensive to own and operate outside of warranty.

BMW is the only car I have ever had a door handle come off in my hand! That same part cost me over 200 bucks (USED!!!),and we're all DIY here as we run a fleet of service trucks from our home. The only repairs we don't do in house are transmissions, which we remove and send out.

Just one question for ya. How can your track car go 120,000 miles and never have had any brake (or other) parts? I could go on but you diminish your contribution with those unbelievable stories of big track miles and zero repairs.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Just one question for ya. How can your track car go 120,000 miles and never have had any brake (or other) parts?

Where did he state that he never replaced his brakes? The way I understood him, the price of all the wear and tear items is included in that 5 cents per mile figure that he quoted.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Where did he state that he never replaced his brakes? The way I understood him, the price of all the wear and tear items is included in that 5 cents per mile figure that he quoted.


Exactly. I've replaced all four rotors and the rear pads once, the front pads twice- and those costs(along with every other maintenance and repair expense) are included in the 5 cents per mile calculation. As for other repairs, I've replaced the serpentine belts, the idler pulleys, and the thermostat- along with a few bulbs. That's it.

 

[pacem]

I am also considering 1993-1996 GM B-bodies, that is Chevy Caprice wagon and Buick Roadmaster wagon.

I already had one and it was bulletproof. But didn't really get more than 21mpg with the 5.7L and the steeper 3.23 gear you got with the towing package.