NEON beats Saturn every time
Adam Carl
I just have to get this off my chest. :)
When I was looking at cars last year I looked at Neons and Saturn SC2's. I
bought the Neon due to what I thought was a more resonable price (Saturn,
your pricing policies suck) more powerful engine and better reliability.
I now drive around and laugh at all the people driving around that think
thier Saturns are so bad ass and better in some way. No Saturn could beat
a Neon in a speed competition. Also, my Neon has had *NO* reliability
problems in it's 33,500 mile life. People who own Saturns should get a
life!!!!!
-Adam Carl
ad...@premier1.net
Dragon
ad...@premier1.net (Adam Carl) wrote:
>-Adam Carl
>ad...@premier1.net
Oh, and Adam, don't forget this...
I snowstorms, any new-age Mopar
can do circles around a saturn in SNOW.
I saw a few saturns in the ditch this past winter
on the roads I was driving, and I didn't think
it was all that slippery...then I saw a saturn in
front of me hit some mashed-potatoes packed snow ruts
and practically flip over...my avenger plowed straight
and true right throught he whole storm, and the whole
winter as well...
Eagle Talons and Mitsubishi Eclipses are awesome in snow too,
as well as Neons...but a saturn, IMHO, is a snow death trap.
Trh2130
Saturns look like miniature Oldsmobiles and are just too small for a tall
person like me. The Neon is very roomy for a small car and HAULS ASS!
Tim
Drew Beck
I agree with all of this. I just wish they could put Neons together as
well as the Saturns are.
Drew
Dave
Drew Beck wrote:
*trh...@aol.com (Trh2130) wrote:
*>Saturns look like miniature Oldsmobiles and are just too small for a tall
*>person like me. The Neon is very roomy for a small car and HAULS ASS!
*>
*>Tim
*
*I agree with all of this. I just wish they could put Neons together as
*well as the Saturns are.
*
Actually, I think the main problem is fixing them as well as Saturn
dealers appear to...
A.j. Morning
[replying to the guy who suggested Saturns are built better than
Neons]
I hear that from time to time-- but the build quality on my Neon
is comparable to anything new I've driven recently. My girlfriend
drives a '96 Accordion, and while the Honda seems somewhat more
*refined*, I wouldn't call the Neon shabby by comparison. I'm
also something of a Toyota devotee, having owned a Tercel that
wouldn't die if you nuked it. The Neon is built as well, and
is TONS more fun to drive.
Due to its being only in its second model year, I would expect a
lot of problems with the Neon. However, mine has been flawless
through the first 4 months of ownership, and they seem to be
holding WAY more resale value than anybody had expected. To check
the local papers (in DC), the '95s are selling for very close to
their original prices...
AjM
Dave
*I have to agree here. At the moment I am looking to trade my Neon in on
*a '96 or '97 and haven been offered $7900 for my '95 Base. I paid $10K
*for it. If they want to give me more money than I own on my load for it
*i'm not gonna say no, and thats a DEALERSHIP. I know I could sell it for
*close to $8500 or so. Resale vale is holding better than I thought it
*would.
Off-topic comment:
I took my Sundance in for valuation to the local C-P (Paramus) dealer.
The used car guy said that I could trade it for a 60K mile Duster
(2-door, V6) they had selling for about $7500...if I paid an additional
$3500 myself. (My car is a 4-door Sundance 2.5, both are 5-speed with
a/c, mine has 22K miles). I argued and the price dropped to the Sundance
plus $1,000...which, given equal miles, would be the price difference
when they were new. Anyway, I think that says a lot about resale values:
the first and second offer were $2500 apart! Blue book is about $7,600
retail, forget the wholesale.
Matt Wiggins
In article <4tduns$b...@madeline.INS.CWRU.Edu>,
A.j. Morning <hl...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu> wrote:
>
>
>Due to its being only in its second model year, I would expect a
>lot of problems with the Neon. However, mine has been flawless
>through the first 4 months of ownership, and they seem to be
>holding WAY more resale value than anybody had expected. To check
>the local papers (in DC), the '95s are selling for very close to
>their original prices...
>
I have to agree here. At the moment I am looking to trade my Neon in on
a '96 or '97 and haven been offered $7900 for my '95 Base. I paid $10K
for it. If they want to give me more money than I own on my load for it
i'm not gonna say no, and thats a DEALERSHIP. I know I could sell it for
close to $8500 or so. Resale vale is holding better than I thought it
would.
Matt Wiggins Email: wi...@iastate.edu
95 Durham Center Finger me for information on how to Subscribe to the
Iowa State University Neon Mailing list, or check out the WWW page:
Ames, IA 50011-2251 http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wiggs2/neon.html
N.E.O.N Member #2 http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wiggs/homepage.html
Drew Beck
hl...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (A.j. Morning) wrote:
>
>[replying to the guy who suggested Saturns are built better than
>Neons]
>
>I hear that from time to time-- but the build quality on my Neon
>is comparable to anything new I've driven recently. My girlfriend
>drives a '96 Accordion, and while the Honda seems somewhat more
>*refined*, I wouldn't call the Neon shabby by comparison. I'm
>also something of a Toyota devotee, having owned a Tercel that
>wouldn't die if you nuked it. The Neon is built as well, and
>is TONS more fun to drive.
>
>lot of problems with the Neon. However, mine has been flawless
>through the first 4 months of ownership, and they seem to be
>holding WAY more resale value than anybody had expected. To check
>the local papers (in DC), the '95s are selling for very close to
>their original prices...
As I stated in my earlier posts, the Neon offers an incredible amount of
zoom AND interior space for the price. I really like the Neon. But it's
unfortunate that so many of them had problems in their first 2 years. A
lot of people had good luck with them, but many did not. My point is that
it's too bad that Chrysler couldn't have solved some of the buggy problems
before bringing the car into full production. Of course, Saturn had its
share of problems at the beginning, too. My personal feeling is that
Chrysler, and the other U.S. manufacturers to some extent, rush things
into production a bit too quickly and as a consequence, the build quality
suffers. For instance, the LH cars were quite inconsistent in build
quality during '93 & '94, but the new models seem to be put together much
better.
Drew
Lloyd R. Parker
Robert \"Stingray\" Bradman (rob...@sescor.com) wrote:
: I thought the Neons were first released in '93? They are definately over
: three years old... I think?? Seems like they've been around longer.
First model year was 95, though they were introduced in early 94 (as VERY
early 95 models).
Robert "Stingray" Bradman
A.j. Morning wrote:
>
> Due to its being only in its second model year, I would expect a
> lot of problems with the Neon. However, mine has been flawless
> through the first 4 months of ownership, and they seem to be
> holding WAY more resale value than anybody had expected. To check
> the local papers (in DC), the '95s are selling for very close to
> their original prices...
>
I thought the Neons were first released in '93? They are definately over
three years old... I think?? Seems like they've been around longer.
As with the Neon, the Cirrus is holding very well. My boss has a '95
(October 1994 manufacture date) and he paid $17K for it, it's now worth
$16K in the books. Unfortunately, his is pretty beat up (he lets his
teenage daughter drive it).
I plan to attempt to sell mine outright to another dealer for cash, then
purchase it at the end of my lease for the $11K buy-out. If the car
holds it's value the way it appears to be so far, then that should not
be a problem.
--
Robert "Stingray" Bradman - (402) 467-4063
Postmaster/Webmaster/Mastermind @ SESCOR Systems, Lincoln Nebraska
http://www.sescor.com/staff/robertb
"Fancy signatures are the sign of a bored mind."