I like my sticks, so there is none.

If I could bear an automatic, I'd probably go with some flavor of a Ford. I've been very happy with the Focuses (or is that Foci?) and Fusions I've rented.

Every time I talk about getting a more current car, my sweetheart tells me I won't be happy and reminds me of the '90 5-spd wagon with 35 Kmi. which we keep stored away.

Richie (near The Burgh)

A well maintained 240 can be perfectly reliable. Sometimes I wonder if they'll also outlast anything new.

Honda CRV enjoys tremendous ratings - also a good substitute for a Volvo wagon.

BTW - tell her to see if she can find a base model XC70

We bought a new base FWD XC70 for 28K in 2012 no extras, but 16K less than a loaded one and 2 MPG more than our loaded XC70.

This price compares well with lesser autos!

My daughter lives in MN - she could not get her 855 serviced properly.

Her small city has both a Honda and a Toyota dealer.

She asked for my advice on which to choose - I told her to ask each sales manager why she should buy from their shop.

Toyota - We will give you a great deal

Honda - We will take good care of your car.

Her Civic is 6 years old now.

Her husband bought a new Toyota pickup - he hates his dealer so much that he travels 70 miles to get warranty work done and takes his truck to the Honda dealer for routine maintenance. When they have completed the work, they park it right in the front row at the street!

Have her ask the question my daughter asked where she intends to have her car serviced.

Subaru has done well in Consumer Reports and here in New England. The Legacy line has been touted as a good value compared to fancier models.

I rent cars fairly regularly, most of them being at or near the bottom-of-the-food-chain econo boxes. As far as the ride, comfort, etc., I’d say that generally the Mazda’s impress me the most. I don’t know a darn thing about them beyond that.
--
Current rides: 2005 Volvo S80 2.5T, 2003 Volvo V70 2.4NA, 1973 Volvo 1800ES (getting ever closer to road worthiness)

When my 1992 745 wagon became too much of a chore to maintain with too many things neglected and the used power steering rack I'd installed failing, I threw in the towel and replaced it with a 2005 Dodge Magnum 3.5L SXT. My first priority was it had to be a RWD station wagon, so that narrowed down the field severely. It also had to be $5000 or less, ruling out the high end wagons. The Magnum delivers the same gas mileage as the Volvo, but higher performance. However, being newer, it also has all the drawbacks of modern electronics and things to go wrong.
--
1992 745, >500k km (now gone, but not forgotten)

Thanks for the suggestions guys.

I think I'll start having my friend look at those cars suggested.

You almost can't go wrong with the big Japanese 5 - Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Nissan, Subaru - although the driving experience of Toyota's and Nissan's is somewhat "numb" by my seat of the pants.

Our 2 daily's are a 2017 Mazda 3 and a 2016 Subaru Crosstrek. My wife drives the Subie. Couldn't pry it away from her. I've enjoyed it as well. Easy to service. Responsive (handling, braking). With 148HP of screaming 2L boxer pushing 3200-3300 lbs around, it's not the quickest car in the world - but with the CVT transmission 0-45 mph is plenty good so it's great around town. And sits out on the Interstate at 70 mph and knocks down 37-39 mpg. Nearing 3 years old - every bit as tight and satisfying as when it was brand new. We get 24-26 mpg around town.

I drive the Mazda 3 - base model, no options, hatch, 2.0L (155HP), manual 6 speed. I love it. Handling, braking is superb - perfect for heel/toe. You can really do some corner carving with it. Acceleration is good for 155HP in a 28-2900 lb car. Great utility. My first Mazda - bought after reading many car mag tests of small hatches. And got it for an absolute steal - bought new in July of 2017 for $17,200 out the door (all in). Consistent 30-31 mpg around town, and 40-42 mpg on the Interstate. About the same mileage as the 1.5L (and MUCH slower) Fit -- see below.

We had a 2015 Honda Fit. I wouldn't buy another one. Easy to service. Fun to drive. FABULOUS utility. But creaks, rattles began to show up. It's just a cheap inexpensive car. As opposed to the Mazda which is a NICE inexpensive car. No comparison between the two -- the Mazda is better in every way by a big margin, except interior utility. You can't beat the Fit for that. And I paid $1000 LESS for the Mazda than I did the Fit 3 years earlier!

We've had 5 Subarus -- more of those than any other brand.

Caution: This post (mine) stinks; it belongs in the OPINIONS forum.

There's lots of good cars out there these days; more good ones than bad. She should find one that she likes and speaks to her, then research specific problems that model may have.

If the 945 fits the bill, consider a newer Volvo wagon. IMHO Volvo's have gotten better with each new model, both in comfort and reliability (not to mention safety). Many are quick to mention Subaru, they make lots of wagons and advertise their safety, but I think the similarities end there. I find them to look and feel cheap - nothing like a Volvo.

We picked up a 2013 Ford Focus SE with a 5-speed manual transmission for my daughter last year.

I really like it. It drives very nice and has the smoothest gearbox I've ever experienced.
Before the purchase, I was told to stay away from Focus' with an automatic transmission.

This one did need a clutch at 85,000 miles which I replaced myself. That's too soon for a clutch in my opinion, but I have no idea if the previous owner knew how to drive a stick properly. I doubt it.

The car now has 115,000 miles.

Hi Mr Nabisco,

I'd still maintain using my 940. Just got a new coat of paint in recent March but it started to show power steering pump leak (rack and hoses checked ok). However I did consider some options for a more recent car.

Of all that you've listed I'd pick the Subaru first. My criteria for choosing this is to get another safe car like Volvo. I see almost none of any Subaru on the road involve in any traffic issue these last few years (could also be their drivers are careful). The only gripe I see with Subaru is the need to replace the headgaskets (2 of them due to their boxer engine design) maybe once in 8 to 10 years time. I gather this could be due to engine oil pooling at bottom of the heads all the time (again due to the boxer design).

Honda to me is a no-no. They drive fast and traffic collisions could be seen once in a while. Its not that safe even if Honda mentioned all their safety aspects. Don't get me wrong. Let me put it this way...with their safety aspects some Honda drivers tend to be overconfident in driving. Plus some of their models have Takata airbag issue.

Toyota is another good option in that there's rarely any engine/technical issue for the owner. I've owned a Toyota in the past so I know. Its a boring car, I also know that too. Just for A to B commuting purposes.

Another popular choice nowadays but not in your list is the VW. Models like Polo, Jetta, Passat and Tiguan are ALL safe. Almost like a Volvo. But their higher end models tend to have some reliability/technical issue. If not for their dieselgate scandal (i.e. misrepresentation, impeachment of trust) I'd surely get me one. For me buying these cars is like sponsoring a corporation's misdeed. Respectfully others may have a different view. So this just me.

Another (not in the list) good choice is the Mazda. Its like having a Toyota reliability with a sexier body.

Sorry for the rambling..

Regards,
Amarin.


p/s:

"I know this has been discussed before... I searched and couldn't find the threads."
In the reply page posters need to fill in the LABELS with keywords from discussed topics for the search to function.

After my 89 245 with 345k spit out its tranny in 2015, I went with a 2000 Honda CRV. Funky, functional and somewhat easy to work on. Doesn't function as well for car camping, but does have a 4wd on demand function.

GC