Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your statement is infammatory and unfounded. I agree today's cars have very real safety advancements over older cars.
But a 2000 Honda Accord, ten years old, earned very solid 4 and 5 star ratings from the NHTSA.
Another mainstream car, the Ford Taurus, earned 5 star front and 3 star side impact ratings in 2000.
A 2000 Honda Odyssey, likely to always be carrying children, earned 5 stars across the board.
Are cars safer today? Yes and I am happy about it. But to say that putting kids in a 10 or 12 year old car is endangerment is a ridiculous thing to say. If the passengers of these ten year old cars are wearing their seatbelt and/or are protected by an air bag - they will survive typical accidents just like they would in today's cars.
They earned those ratings 10 years ago, by the standards then. Today, they would be significantly lower.
I replace mine when I am tired of driving it and just want something different, or if/when the cost of repairs does not justify keeping the old one around.
I used to only keep cars for no more than a year when I first started out, I had one for 3 years when I sold it, another for almost 5 years and another that I had 5 years, then gave to my dad, then I got it back for another 2 before it was sold.
I've always bought used. I've never owned a new car.
I usually pay cash, though when we bought our 2007 CRV (the newest I've ever owned as it was not even a year old and had 18k on it) we financed it thru Honda.
They earned those ratings 10 years ago, by the standards then. Today, they would be significantly lower.
your username says it all, we wish someone would get you out of here
your arguments are lame-brained and unfounded.
there is NOTHING that makes a 95 s-blazer or 95 grand cherokee or 95 lincoln continental unsafe. they may not have the advancements of a yaw sensor, or side curtain airbags, but that does NOT make them unsafe, no matter your limited opinion
your username says it all, we wish someone would get you out of here
your arguments are lame-brained and unfounded.
there is NOTHING that makes a 95 s-blazer or 95 grand cherokee or 95 lincoln continental unsafe. they may not have the advancements of a yaw sensor, or side curtain airbags, but that does NOT make them unsafe, no matter your limited opinion
Don't be stupid. They are not unsafe in the Pinto, randomly exploding way, but next to a modern car, even a cheap one, they aren't even in the same galaxy.
Don't be stupid. They are not unsafe in the Pinto, randomly exploding way, but next to a modern car, even a cheap one, they aren't even in the same galaxy.
I can say with authority that a 95 town car will withstand a crash better than any new car today
I replace mine when it starts to nickel and dime me to death with repairs. When I say nickel and dime I don't mean routine maintenance or repairs under $100, I'm talking $400 or more per pop. If my car is going into the shop almost monthly, that's like making a car payment on something that you never know when it's going to break down again. Sadly, a lot of cars start going downhill at the 80K - 100K mile mark, just as you finishe paying it off. Timing belts, CV boots, exhaust, radiator, etc. European cars are especially expensive to maintain in the long haul.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.