Thanks! I know nothing about any thing other than a nandful of MBs.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Donald Snook <dsn...@mtsqh.com> wrote:
> Ok Don wrote: "The kids need another car - at or under $3000, and if it's
> an MB, I'll have
> to maintain it. Which of teh GM, Frods, Japanese cars should be considered,
> or absolutely
> avoided?"
>
> I happen to have a very nice 1993 Cadillac Sedan Deville with only 124,000
> miles for under $3000. It's a sweet car!
>
> As far as cheap reliable cars from GM, I would suggest any of the "W" body
> cars with the 3800 engine or the 3.1L engines. I would avoid the 2.4 liter
> engines in the smallest GM cars. The W body cars are the Grand Prix, Monte
> Carlo, or Olds Cutlass Supreme. The "H" body cars are also very reliable
> and some of them can be had very cheaply. These are: Buick LeSabre,
> Pontiac Bonneville, Oldsmobile 88. NOW, there is one caveat to the 3800.
> You need to buy one earlier than 96 and later than 2000. The intervening
> years have a problem with the intake gasket. It fails and you have to
> replace the upper and lower gaskets. If that has already been done, then
> you are golden and those years are excellent. I also really like the
> Oldsmobile Intrigue, but in that case, you want the 3.5L ("shortstar") not
> the 3800 unless you get a 2001 or newer. The "C" body cars are the
> Oldsmobile 98, the Buick Park Avenue and the Cadillac Sedan Deville. I
> don't really think you are going to buy a Cadillac, but if you are, DO NOT
> buy a 96-99 with the Northstar - they have serious headgasket and oil
> consumption problems that were not fixed until 2000). The 91-95 Sedan
> Devilles had the 4.9L engine (trusty old pushrod). It was, in my opinion,
> the best engine Cadillac made. Otherwise the Olds 98 (big Grandpa car) and
> the Park Avenue are very nice cars.
>
> The Pontiac Grand Am isn't bad if you get the 6 cyl.
>
> The only thing I know about Fords, is that you can find a used Taurus
> cheap. They made millions of them, so the prices are down and the parts are
> cheap. 1998 was a body style change and engine improvement. If you can go
> as new as 2002-03, the 6 cyl engine was once again improved and the
> reliability is pretty high.
>
> It is hard to go wrong with a Honda. I prefer the Accords for size and
> resale value. 1990-92 was my favorite body style and they were very good
> cars. That is probably too old for what you want. In 1996 or 97, Honda
> improved the timing belt, and gears/tensioners and the maintenance schedule
> was bumped up to 105,000 miles. So, that might be a good model year to
> start with.
>
> I have heard good things about the Mazda 626 for several years.
>
> Camry's are nice, but boring and they hold their resale value that they
> tend to look like crap, by the time they are cheap.
>
>
>
> Donald H. Snook
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://okiebenz.com/pipermail/mercedes_okiebenz.com/attachments/20090702/c43d00d1/attachment.html
> >
> _______________________________________
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
--
OK Don
Pair of W124 300D 2.5 Turbos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://okiebenz.com/pipermail/mercedes_okiebenz.com/attachments/20090702/2d50a3c6/attachment.html>
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
