Need help finding a cheap, fun car
anon123
02-06-2010, 03:36 AM
I'm looking to buy a used car as a daily driver for relatively short distances (~10 miles each way), but that can also be fun to drive a bit longer on the weekends. Reliability isn't terribly important as I only plan to have this car 3 years tops. What is important, however, is that the car stay within my budget (e.g. not impossibly expensive to maintain). I would say the whole thing - buying the car, running it for 3 years ~10k miles per year (so fuel and maintenance costs), insurance costs (I am 22 year old male so this will be high), warranty if necessary, excise tax, shipping if the car isn't local (I live in MD), even vehicle registration - needs to be under 20k for the 3 year period. It is also important that it be automatic, and ideally would seat four for when I show friends around town. It is ok if the back is cramped as that is not the main purpose for the car. Trunk space isn't really important, either. Finally, I plan on moving to Seattle (and doing a cross-country trip with the car), so it needs to be able to take that trip and then deal with some rain once it gets there.
Does such a cheap, fun, automatic, rain-friendly car even exist? If so, what is the one that is most fun to drive?
Does such a cheap, fun, automatic, rain-friendly car even exist? If so, what is the one that is most fun to drive?
MagicRat
02-06-2010, 10:40 PM
What's your idea of fun? Snappy performance, manoeverable, decent handling, not too big or small, and reasonably good looking?
IMO if you want all of that on a budget just get the best used Mustang or Camaro that you can afford. They can be a bit tail-happy in the wet if you drive like a loon, and the back seat is a bit tight, but otherwise, they meet your needs.
IMO if you want all of that on a budget just get the best used Mustang or Camaro that you can afford. They can be a bit tail-happy in the wet if you drive like a loon, and the back seat is a bit tight, but otherwise, they meet your needs.
anon123
02-06-2010, 11:10 PM
Fun to me is something that has decent power (if I can break 0-60 in 7 seconds that is more than enough) and very good handling - looks aren't that big a factor. Size doesn't really matter but I imagine a smaller car would be the way to go for something that corners well. RWD would be awesome, my only real concern is like you said - how well would that work in rain. Also - I know this feature isn't really loved by everyone - but a tiptronic system is very appealing. I need an automatic so that my fiance can drive the car, but I love the control of a manual. Tiptronic or paddle shifters seem to be a good compromise.
I will look around a bit for the Mustang/Camaro 2+2 coupes that seat 4. Let me know if there are any other suggestions.
I will look around a bit for the Mustang/Camaro 2+2 coupes that seat 4. Let me know if there are any other suggestions.
Dr. Love
02-07-2010, 01:23 PM
E46 bmw 330.
Shpuker
02-08-2010, 12:15 AM
A used Evo, STI/WRX, 3 or 5-series BMW, Mustang, all sorts of fun stuff
akboss
02-08-2010, 07:48 AM
A used Evo, STI/WRX, 3 or 5-series BMW, Mustang, all sorts of fun stuff
Yep - good suggestions. Mustang would have your lowest operating cost of all these though. And as far as 'being able to handle the rain', well, if you have windshield wipers any car can handle the rain...if you opt for a Mustang, just don't put on racing slicks and hammer the gas in 1st and you'll be fine - although that is a lot of fun.
Yep - good suggestions. Mustang would have your lowest operating cost of all these though. And as far as 'being able to handle the rain', well, if you have windshield wipers any car can handle the rain...if you opt for a Mustang, just don't put on racing slicks and hammer the gas in 1st and you'll be fine - although that is a lot of fun.
anon123
02-08-2010, 10:44 AM
Thanks for everyone's help so far. I've been looking around to find these cars - I was REALLY interested in the EVO when I read up on the DSG system - but apart from the Mustang couldn't really find anything in the price range. I did, however, see some GTI MKV's that also had DSG and seem like they would fit all my needs and be fun to drive. Does anyone know anything about the GTI's and how they might compare to a Mustang?
akboss
02-08-2010, 12:02 PM
Thanks for everyone's help so far. I've been looking around to find these cars - I was REALLY interested in the EVO when I read up on the DSG system - but apart from the Mustang couldn't really find anything in the price range. I did, however, see some GTI MKV's that also had DSG and seem like they would fit all my needs and be fun to drive. Does anyone know anything about the GTI's and how they might compare to a Mustang?
Wow, there's something that doesn't get compared every day! Typically people fall on one side or the other - one group says 'POWWWER!' (the Mustang crow), it is brash, sloppy but has a mountain of power from any gear with the rumbling V8. The other crowd wants to drive fast in the corners, a scalpel to the Mustang's machete, that focuses more on involving the driver than blasting through a quarter mile.
The cars themselves are vastly different. First and foremost, the GTI drives the front wheels, the Mustang drives the rears. For acceleration, the Mustang is quicker than the GTI, and oversteer can be prompted with the accelerator quite easily. That being said, the GTI is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the GTI post better G's on a skidpad than the Mustang. That is because the GTI has a much more advanced multi-link independent suspension than the antiquated leaf spring setup on the older Mustangs. More aggressive springs and heavier steering also give the GTI a better feeling of confidence and control, whereas the Mustang's vague steering and loose body control can upset it at the limit. But tail-happy RWD cars are fun, depends if you like a car that feels loose and powerful or precise and engaging.
The GTI also gets by with a smaller, more efficient motor. The MkV gets the highly praised 2.0T, offering up 200 hp and (I think) 200 lb-ft of torque, if not very close. If you do a lot of city driving, this will be a much more significant factor. Where the heavy Mustang is churning all 8 cylinders at almost idle, the turbo-4 isn't even using the turbocharger, getting by on a compact and efficient 4-cylinder engine. But when you get on the gas, the turbo spools up and delivers the power you want.
They are night and day cars, it just depends who you are. As much as I like the GTI for being arguably a better all-around car, I can't help but want to drive the tail-wagging, exhaust-wailing Mustang...but that would be if I was getting a stick (like every real sports car should have). If you're getting a slushbox, well, the GTI has a much better setup there too.
Wow, there's something that doesn't get compared every day! Typically people fall on one side or the other - one group says 'POWWWER!' (the Mustang crow), it is brash, sloppy but has a mountain of power from any gear with the rumbling V8. The other crowd wants to drive fast in the corners, a scalpel to the Mustang's machete, that focuses more on involving the driver than blasting through a quarter mile.
The cars themselves are vastly different. First and foremost, the GTI drives the front wheels, the Mustang drives the rears. For acceleration, the Mustang is quicker than the GTI, and oversteer can be prompted with the accelerator quite easily. That being said, the GTI is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the GTI post better G's on a skidpad than the Mustang. That is because the GTI has a much more advanced multi-link independent suspension than the antiquated leaf spring setup on the older Mustangs. More aggressive springs and heavier steering also give the GTI a better feeling of confidence and control, whereas the Mustang's vague steering and loose body control can upset it at the limit. But tail-happy RWD cars are fun, depends if you like a car that feels loose and powerful or precise and engaging.
The GTI also gets by with a smaller, more efficient motor. The MkV gets the highly praised 2.0T, offering up 200 hp and (I think) 200 lb-ft of torque, if not very close. If you do a lot of city driving, this will be a much more significant factor. Where the heavy Mustang is churning all 8 cylinders at almost idle, the turbo-4 isn't even using the turbocharger, getting by on a compact and efficient 4-cylinder engine. But when you get on the gas, the turbo spools up and delivers the power you want.
They are night and day cars, it just depends who you are. As much as I like the GTI for being arguably a better all-around car, I can't help but want to drive the tail-wagging, exhaust-wailing Mustang...but that would be if I was getting a stick (like every real sports car should have). If you're getting a slushbox, well, the GTI has a much better setup there too.
anon123
02-09-2010, 03:32 AM
Wow, there's something that doesn't get compared every day! Typically people fall on one side or the other - one group says 'POWWWER!' (the Mustang crow), it is brash, sloppy but has a mountain of power from any gear with the rumbling V8. The other crowd wants to drive fast in the corners, a scalpel to the Mustang's machete, that focuses more on involving the driver than blasting through a quarter mile.
The cars themselves are vastly different. First and foremost, the GTI drives the front wheels, the Mustang drives the rears. For acceleration, the Mustang is quicker than the GTI, and oversteer can be prompted with the accelerator quite easily. That being said, the GTI is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the GTI post better G's on a skidpad than the Mustang. That is because the GTI has a much more advanced multi-link independent suspension than the antiquated leaf spring setup on the older Mustangs. More aggressive springs and heavier steering also give the GTI a better feeling of confidence and control, whereas the Mustang's vague steering and loose body control can upset it at the limit. But tail-happy RWD cars are fun, depends if you like a car that feels loose and powerful or precise and engaging.
The GTI also gets by with a smaller, more efficient motor. The MkV gets the highly praised 2.0T, offering up 200 hp and (I think) 200 lb-ft of torque, if not very close. If you do a lot of city driving, this will be a much more significant factor. Where the heavy Mustang is churning all 8 cylinders at almost idle, the turbo-4 isn't even using the turbocharger, getting by on a compact and efficient 4-cylinder engine. But when you get on the gas, the turbo spools up and delivers the power you want.
They are night and day cars, it just depends who you are. As much as I like the GTI for being arguably a better all-around car, I can't help but want to drive the tail-wagging, exhaust-wailing Mustang...but that would be if I was getting a stick (like every real sports car should have). If you're getting a slushbox, well, the GTI has a much better setup there too.
Really helpful post - thanks! Mustang sounds like a lot of fun if you have long straightaways to let out the power but as a daily driver in the city/weekend car on twisty mountains and with that sweet looking DSG, I think GTI is the right choice for me.
The cars themselves are vastly different. First and foremost, the GTI drives the front wheels, the Mustang drives the rears. For acceleration, the Mustang is quicker than the GTI, and oversteer can be prompted with the accelerator quite easily. That being said, the GTI is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the GTI post better G's on a skidpad than the Mustang. That is because the GTI has a much more advanced multi-link independent suspension than the antiquated leaf spring setup on the older Mustangs. More aggressive springs and heavier steering also give the GTI a better feeling of confidence and control, whereas the Mustang's vague steering and loose body control can upset it at the limit. But tail-happy RWD cars are fun, depends if you like a car that feels loose and powerful or precise and engaging.
The GTI also gets by with a smaller, more efficient motor. The MkV gets the highly praised 2.0T, offering up 200 hp and (I think) 200 lb-ft of torque, if not very close. If you do a lot of city driving, this will be a much more significant factor. Where the heavy Mustang is churning all 8 cylinders at almost idle, the turbo-4 isn't even using the turbocharger, getting by on a compact and efficient 4-cylinder engine. But when you get on the gas, the turbo spools up and delivers the power you want.
They are night and day cars, it just depends who you are. As much as I like the GTI for being arguably a better all-around car, I can't help but want to drive the tail-wagging, exhaust-wailing Mustang...but that would be if I was getting a stick (like every real sports car should have). If you're getting a slushbox, well, the GTI has a much better setup there too.
Really helpful post - thanks! Mustang sounds like a lot of fun if you have long straightaways to let out the power but as a daily driver in the city/weekend car on twisty mountains and with that sweet looking DSG, I think GTI is the right choice for me.
akboss
02-09-2010, 07:55 AM
Really helpful post - thanks! Mustang sounds like a lot of fun if you have long straightaways to let out the power but as a daily driver in the city/weekend car on twisty mountains and with that sweet looking DSG, I think GTI is the right choice for me.
I think you're right - A GTI is fun to drive at any speed because it always feels in control. A Mustang really only becomes fun when you can hang the tail out and take off, which for most drivers on most roads isn't too often.
I think you're right - A GTI is fun to drive at any speed because it always feels in control. A Mustang really only becomes fun when you can hang the tail out and take off, which for most drivers on most roads isn't too often.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026
