Getting an SUV for $10-$12K or so

[ski2slow]

From a reliability stand point go with a Nissan Pathfinder. I've sent you an email with a file attached showing the reliability of the two vehicles from ConsumerReports.

I currently own an '02 Pathfinder and my previous vehicle was a '93 Pathfinder with over 240K. I never had any issues with it.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: ski2slow
From a reliability stand point go with a Nissan Pathfinder. I've sent you an email with a file attached showing the reliability of the two vehicles from ConsumerReports.

I currently own an '02 Pathfinder and my previous vehicle was a '93 Pathfinder with over 240K. I never had any issues with it.

Here is that file

Wow, from a reliability standpoint, there is no comparison... :Q

How bad is the Pathfinder's backseat?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
Mutliple pets and a kid mean it is SUV, minivan or station wagon time.

If you really look closely, you'll notice the minivan will hold a LOT more than most SUVs. Sounds like you are the perfect minivan user.

For me, SUV is the only option so don't bother with the alternative vehicle types.

Any reason why? I won't push a minivan, we just love to know more details at Anandtech.

Looks like I can get a 2000 with ~60K miles on it in either model. Any other vehicles I should consider?

Pathfinder is much better reliability than the Grand Cherokee. Consumer Reports lists the 2000 Pathfinder as nearly the best possible reliability in all categories and overall (multiple years) the Pathfinder is 50% more reliable than the average vehicle. The 2000 Grand Cherokee is rated the worst possible score in breaks but also did poorly on: transmission, electrical, suspension, body integity, power equiment, and body hardware. Overall (multiple years) the Grand Cherokee is 45% less reliable than the average vehicle. So on reliability alone, I'd get the Pathfinder.

Edit: doh should have read the thread first. Sorry for the repeat, ski2slow.

But there are more factors. I think Jeeps are a "you love it or you don't" thing. I personally don't love them and thus all of the multiple flaws, poor handling, etc just scream to look elsewhere. Off road capabilities are probably better than the Cherokee, but honestly will you do significant difficult off-road driving that a Pathfinder cannot handle? If you get into a Jeep and love, then get it. Otherwise take the Pathfinder.

 

[JDMnAR1]

Of the two posted - I would go with the Pathfinder based on bad experiences with Jeep products. However, have you considered an Isuzu Trooper? I know a local dealership has a 2002 model with <50k miles on it and they are asking $12,900, so that fits your target price. Of course, I am not sure how they compare in terms of reliability ratings, but might be worth looking into.

 

[Kelemvor]

I have an '02 Durango and love it. Not sure what a used one would go for. It's my wife's primary vehicle and she loves it as well.

 

[GasX]

I am going to check out the Pathfinder and see if I can live with the ergonomics...

 

[flot]

Ditto on the Durango. I have an 01 and couldn't be happier. You can pick up a 2wd 01-02 in your price range with similar miles. (possibly lower)

In a GC I think you'd be looking at the inline 6 cyl in that price range - the 6 cyl is a VERY reliable engine, Jeep has used it in a lot of vehicles for a long time, easy to work on, runs forever.

If you want a V8, the Durango and Jeep will be very similar mechnically. You can get the Durango with the "technologically superior" 4.7 liter new V8 (used in the Jeeps) or the "old and dumb" 5.9 liter. I have the 5.9 and am very happy with it - I get 17 mpg on the highway which is fine, since I have a short commute. Again, it's an engine anyone can work on. The durango has generally heavier-duty components than the GC. (but then again it's a bigger, heavier vehicle)

The Durango is available with 3 rows of seating, is comfortable, has plenty of power, lots of cargo space with the rear seats all folded down. (significantly more than my dad's GC) I think of the GC more as a large car, whereas the Durango definitely feels more like a truck to me. I definitely feel safe in the Durango, it's a pretty large heavy chunk of steel.

I wouldn't count on either the Durango or Jeep to be reliable as a whole, but that's why they are cheap used. I bought mine with 28k miles and now have 40k miles and have basically had no problems with it. I paid a little over $15k for it last year and it still had about 6 months of warranty left when I got it. (SLT+ model with the 5.9, 3rd row, leather seats, rear air - i.e. loaded - the sticker on mine was probably around $33k)

Edit: on the engines, the Durangos were only available with V8s, the 4.7 was the standard and the 5.9 was an option on the SLT and standard on the R/T (top of the line) models. The 5.9 has a slight performance edge and as I mentioned has the advantage in that it is a much simpler engine - but the 4.7 is the "new" v8 that chrysler is putting into everything. The 5.9 was their performance engine before the Hemi came out.

 

[Damn Dirty Ape]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Forget the Grand, get a regular old Cherokee. 4.0ltr inline 6 rules! Just get a standard transmission and you are set to go.

There are lots of Grand Cherokees with the 4.0 I6 on the road today, not just the smaller Cherokee. I had one of those and moved up to the Grand, much better ride, smoother, quieter.

Why standard trans recommendationin the smaller Cherokee? Get it with the AW4 auto and you have a transmission built by Aisin-Warner, OEM for some Toyota transmissions.

:roll:

 

[lastrhino]

Originally posted by: Hellspawn

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Forget the Grand, get a regular old Cherokee. 4.0ltr inline 6 rules! Just get a standard transmission and you are set to go.

There are lots of Grand Cherokees with the 4.0 I6 on the road today, not just the smaller Cherokee. I had one of those and moved up to the Grand, much better ride, smoother, quieter.

Why standard trans recommendationin the smaller Cherokee? Get it with the AW4 auto and you have a transmission built by Aisin-Warner, OEM for some Toyota transmissions.

:roll:

Yup, the 4.0 I6 and the AW4 are probably one of the most reliable combos in an american passenger vehicle in the past 20 years.

 

[WolverineGator]

Don't forget to look at the Chrysler Pacifica and the Toyota Highlander.

 

[psteng19]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: ski2slow
From a reliability stand point go with a Nissan Pathfinder. I've sent you an email with a file attached showing the reliability of the two vehicles from ConsumerReports.

I currently own an '02 Pathfinder and my previous vehicle was a '93 Pathfinder with over 240K. I never had any issues with it.

Here is that file

Wow, from a reliability standpoint, there is no comparison... :Q

How bad is the Pathfinder's backseat?

ROFL.
The Jeep just got owned.

 

[desy]

Prices being equal between the two
I'd get the Pathfinder. . . It may have less features than the Jeep at equal prices but I do think its more mechanically sound.
I'm not going to sell you on the virutes of any other vehicles, you have asked about these two

 

[CrackRabbit]

Originally posted by: lastrhino

Originally posted by: Hellspawn

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Forget the Grand, get a regular old Cherokee. 4.0ltr inline 6 rules! Just get a standard transmission and you are set to go.

There are lots of Grand Cherokees with the 4.0 I6 on the road today, not just the smaller Cherokee. I had one of those and moved up to the Grand, much better ride, smoother, quieter.

Why standard trans recommendationin the smaller Cherokee? Get it with the AW4 auto and you have a transmission built by Aisin-Warner, OEM for some Toyota transmissions.

:roll:

Yup, the 4.0 I6 and the AW4 are probably one of the most reliable combos in an american passenger vehicle in the past 20 years.

The problems with getting a Grand with the 4.0 is the fact that it is much heavier than the normal cherokee.
the other thing is figuring out which one has the AW4 transmission.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: conjur
Hmm...Chrysler product with 60k miles? Only 40k more miles to a tranny overhaul!

If you're lucky.

Oh, and that guy that suggested a late 80's chrysler minivan is either on crack or he's a mechanic in your area and hopes to make a friggin fortune off of you. I guess you could spend the $700 on it and the other 11,300 might last for 2 or 3 years worth of monthly repairs.

 

[ski2slow]

I would stay away from the Isuzu Trooper as it was discontinued and the last model year was 2002. And from a safety stand point it is not a very good vehicle. I had one for a rental once and it was very scary in terms of handling when I had to make an emergency lane change. I really thought I was going to roll the vehicle. :Q Isuzu also tends to have alot of electrical issues.

 

[Ornery]

1998 Lincoln Navigator. I'd like to swap my wife's Grand Marquis for one of those puppies!

BTW, I know you said mid-size, but they're too small. Go ahead and sit in one and you'll know what I mean.

 

[Damn Dirty Ape]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: lastrhino

Originally posted by: Hellspawn

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Forget the Grand, get a regular old Cherokee. 4.0ltr inline 6 rules! Just get a standard transmission and you are set to go.

There are lots of Grand Cherokees with the 4.0 I6 on the road today, not just the smaller Cherokee. I had one of those and moved up to the Grand, much better ride, smoother, quieter.

Why standard trans recommendationin the smaller Cherokee? Get it with the AW4 auto and you have a transmission built by Aisin-Warner, OEM for some Toyota transmissions.

:roll:

Yup, the 4.0 I6 and the AW4 are probably one of the most reliable combos in an american passenger vehicle in the past 20 years.

The problems with getting a Grand with the 4.0 is the fact that it is much heavier than the normal cherokee.
the other thing is figuring out which one has the AW4 transmission.

umm.. IMO, I don't believe that grands have the aw4... Mine has the 4.0 I6 and the 42RE

 

[GasX]

Anyone have any experience with the Montero Sport?

 

[bernse]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
Forget the Grand, get a regular old Cherokee. 4.0ltr inline 6 rules! Just get a standard transmission and you are set to go.

From a pure utilitarian perspective, I would, but ergonomics and WAF are important issues here...

I had a 1998 2 door Cherokee with the 4.0 and a 5spd.

Best vehicle I ever owned and believe it or not, quite comfortable.

 

[redly]

if you get the Cherokee, better set a little aside for incidentals (transmission is common)

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Ornery
1998 Lincoln Navigator. I'd like to swap my wife's Grand Marquis for one of those puppies!

BTW, I know you said mid-size, but they're too small. Go ahead and sit in one and you'll know what I mean.

Wow. Those things sure lose value FAST. That *WAS* like a $45,000 vehicle. Now it's worth $11,000.

:Q

 

[PanzerIV]

My '97 Pathfinder had a 175,000 miles on it when I got rid of it in October and in the almost five years I had it that thing never gave me any problems whatsoever. It only required routine maintenance that any vehicle would.

 

[Colt45]

A6 Avant quattro or something? They're damn nice cars. I'm sure it has WAF.
I don't know if you would want muddy pets in it though!

eg.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors...3096&amp;category=6004

 

[shuan24]

i bought a 2001 Honda CRV for 12.8k last july. It had 52K miles on it. I think a CRV is perfect for your needs. AWD, all power, super reliable, high resell value (just in case), picnic table in trunk. what more do you need?

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Just curious, why not a station wagon? I think they're a good compromise!