so many expensive cars! (Dallas: buy, income, shop) - Austin - Texas (TX) - Page 3 - City-Data Forum

CarnivalGal · 07-16-2009, 11:42 AM

Well, my husband drives one of those expensive cars, and we can afford it. Mine isn't too bad either, but not a "luxury" model.

Yes, we make that much money. Both cars are paid for. We both busted our rear ends and were lucky enough start working (for peanuts, I might add) at a company that was really small 15 years ago and is now quite successful. My husband started as a lowly programmer and is now a VP. We are also very, very smart with money and didn't dream of buying cars like this until we could easily afford it. I drove a 1994 Civic for more years than I can remember. We also bought far less house than we could have. It's possible to drive nice cars, be able to afford to do so, and not be pretentious. In fact, I think it's more pretentious to assume anyone driving an expensive car must be in debt up tp their eyeballs or trying to keep up with the Joneses.

SL1966 · 07-16-2009, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jobert

my only beef with the Smart car is that people are buying them for the wrong reasons. Did you know that the Smart car only gets 36 mpg?
The Prius gets 50 mpg and is twice the size. The Smart car was designed for extremely dense urban areas such as NYC, SF, and many European cities. There is no reason to own a Smart car in Austin.

the 1986 Honda CRX Hf got 52 street 54 hwy to the gallon and the cost of ownership was far cheaper than the prius. not sure why honda doesn't revist what they did there and make a few modern improvements to it. they'd easily beat the pants off these so called "green cars"

CarnivalGal · 07-16-2009, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL1966

the 1986 Honda CRX Hf got 52 street 54 hwy to the gallon and the cost of ownership was far cheaper than the prius. not sure why honda doesn't revist what they did there and make a few modern improvements to it. they'd easily beat the pants off these so called "green cars"

That was such a cool car to have when I was in High School. Only thing was that since it was only a two-seater, it was really expensive to insure.

SL1966 · 07-16-2009, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by love roses

I would think it would just tump them over. I don't think it could handle the weight

It sure would look pretty hilarious though!

nope, not even if it had a full tank of gas and passengers in it.

Trainwreck20 · 07-16-2009, 11:53 AM

I had a 1987 (I think, maybe 86?) Toyota Tercel hatchback that got 47mpg on the highway. It was a four speed standard with NO options (not even a radio!) and it cost me right at $6,200+ttl. Drove that car about 150k miles without a significant repair (got the brakes done once). That car is by far the most efficient car that I have (or will, I suspect) ever owned.

My wife had a small BMW for years and loved it, but the addition of kids has gotten us into a Honda Pilot. What you won't do for kids

.

SL1966 · 07-16-2009, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mm57553

That was such a cool car to have when I was in High School. Only thing was that since it was only a two-seater, it was really expensive to insure.

I was in college when I had mine. I miss it but wouldn't ever trade it for the truck i have now. The insurance companies made it expensive because it had only 2 seats so it fell into the "sports car" catagory which was incredibly stupid of them. What sports car gets 52 miles to the gallon? The 89 version had back seats which brought the cost of insurance down drastically.

atxcio · 07-16-2009, 11:57 AM

The previously mentioned 1994 Honda Civic (at least the CX version) got something like 42 mpg highway. Also, didn't the early 90's Chevy Geo (3-Cyl version) get something like 48 mpg?

Did they just measure mpg differently back then? Also, gas was dirt cheap in the early 90's, seems odd they were making such fuel efficient cars. Also odd that people pay 3X as much now for hybrids that get less fuel efficiency than these older, less powerful & lighter cars.

SL1966 · 07-16-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxcio

The previously mentioned 1994 Honda Civic (at least the CX version) got something like 42 mpg highway. Also, didn't the early 90's Chevy Geo (3-Cyl version) get something like 48 mpg?

Did they just measure mpg differently back then? Also, gas was dirt cheap in the early 90's, seems odd they were making such fuel efficient cars. Also odd that people pay 3X as much now for hybrids that get less fuel efficiency than these older, less powerful & lighter cars.

You're talking about the Chevy Sprint. It came out in the mid 80's and had the 3 cylinder engine. Funky but tough little car.

atxcio · 07-16-2009, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL1966

You're talking about the Chevy Sprint. It came out in the mid 80's and had the 3 cylinder engine. Funky but tough little car.

Maybe I was confused. Geo was a GM car badge like Chevy or Saturn, right? Was the Geo Metro the same as the Chevy Sprint? Cause I was thinking of the Geo Metro...

SL1966 · 07-16-2009, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxcio

Maybe I was confused. Geo was a GM car badge like Chevy or Saturn, right? Was the Geo Metro the same as the Chevy Sprint? Cause I was thinking of the Geo Metro...

I don't know much about the Geo. I only know the Sprint because a friend got his at the same time I got my CRX. We used to always head out to the desert in them with a bunch of friends to camp during spring break.