Honda-Acura.net

Notices
The Basement Non-Honda/Acura discussion. Content should be tasteful and "primetime" safe.

Getting a new car...finally

Thread Tools
 
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:11 PM
Share
  #21  
RB's Avatar
RB
snitches get stitches
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 49,696
Likes: 1
From: Portland, OR
Default
Originally Posted by 98CoupeV6
"your" facts are shitty because they're wrong.

He didn't buy new.

I just searched for 02-05 WRX for less than $15,000 on cars.com and got...168 results. And if you're a dipshit and think mileage really matters all that much, the lowest miles was 24,000 miles for a 2003 (asking price $13,977).
Still doesn't negate lower insurance and better gas mileage. Plus WRXs are dime a dozen because of douche bags who decide to get them and beat them to shit instead of something more practical.
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:11 PM
Share
  #22  
98CoupeV6's Avatar
98CoupeV6
lots and lots of fail
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 1
From: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Default
Originally Posted by Sadiztik-R
Yes I think a 2006 RS with 9k miles fcompared to a 2004 WRX with 45k going for 19k that mileage does matter.

Why the fuck do you think that is listed on the car dipshit?
That made absolutely no sense.
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:13 PM
Share
  #23  
Sadiztik-R's Avatar
Sadiztik-R
Kittie Pr0n
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Default
Originally Posted by RB
Still doesn't negate lower insurance and better gas mileage. Plus WRXs are dime a dozen because of douche bags who decide to get them and beat them to shit instead of something more practical.
the majority EVO and WRX owners are mildly retarded.
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:13 PM
Share
  #24  
98CoupeV6's Avatar
98CoupeV6
lots and lots of fail
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 1
From: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Default
Originally Posted by RB
Still doesn't negate lower insurance and better gas mileage. Plus WRXs are dime a dozen because of douche bags who decide to get them and beat them to shit instead of something more practical.
So now we're buying the base model with the pussy engine to be different? Fantastic :rofl:

If he really cared about fuel economy, he wouldn't have gotten a 2.5RS to begin with. A dude at work had one and never saw over 32-33 highway, which is what my car gets.
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:14 PM
Share
  #25  
Sadiztik-R's Avatar
Sadiztik-R
Kittie Pr0n
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Default
Originally Posted by 98CoupeV6
That made absolutely no sense.
It does not but it's showing that older more worn out WRX are still most expensive than newer RSs

http://cars.com/go/search/fs_search_...fiedOnly=false
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:15 PM
Share
  #26  
Sadiztik-R's Avatar
Sadiztik-R
Kittie Pr0n
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Default
Originally Posted by 98CoupeV6
So now we're buying the base model with the pussy engine to be different? Fantastic :rofl:

If he really cared about fuel economy, he wouldn't have gotten a 2.5RS to begin with. A dude at work had one and never saw over 32-33 highway, which is what my car gets.
horsepower over everything right?
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:15 PM
Share
  #27  
RB's Avatar
RB
snitches get stitches
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 49,696
Likes: 1
From: Portland, OR
Default
Originally Posted by 98CoupeV6
So now we're buying the base model with the pussy engine to be different? Fantastic :rofl:

If he really cared about fuel economy, he wouldn't have gotten a 2.5RS to begin with. A dude at work had one and never saw over 32-33 highway, which is what my car gets.

Where in my post did I say getting a 2.5RS is original? I just said that WRXs are dime a dozen anyway, so making the price comparison is retarded. Supply and demand makes RS's more costly.

Secondly, maybe he wanted 32-33 instead of 24 in the WRX? He also wanted AWD so if you can think of a car that is AWD and gets that sort of mileage than feel free to chime in.
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:16 PM
Share
  #28  
98CoupeV6's Avatar
98CoupeV6
lots and lots of fail
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 1
From: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Default
Originally Posted by Sadiztik-R
It does not but it's showing that older more worn out WRX are still most expensive than newer RSs

http://cars.com/go/search/fs_search_...fiedOnly=false
No fucking way...with the same miles and same year, the base model is typically cheaper than the high performance model?!?!?!? Amazing!
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:16 PM
Share
  #29  
Sadiztik-R's Avatar
Sadiztik-R
Kittie Pr0n
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Default
Originally Posted by 98CoupeV6
No fucking way...with the same miles and same year, the base model is typically cheaper than the high performance model?!?!?!? Amazing!
you were the retard saying the WRXs are cheaper
Reply
0
Old Oct 12, 2006 | 08:19 PM
Share
  #30  
98CoupeV6's Avatar
98CoupeV6
lots and lots of fail
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 1
From: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Default
Originally Posted by RB
Secondly, maybe he wanted 32-33 instead of 24 in the WRX? He also wanted AWD so if you can think of a car that is AWD and gets that sort of mileage than feel free to chime in.
I completely fail to see the need for AWD unless you're a dumb woman. Where I'm from we average 140 or so inches of snow a year...and my FWD handles it just dandy with good all-seasonals on. Imagine what the did before they even had FWD... hnoes:

I know a girl with a WRX that gets 30MPG on the highway consistently.
Reply
0



Advanced Search
Reply Closed Thread Share
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:46 PM.