Locate an Auto Repair Shop in Dickens, Nebraska

Dickens, NE Car Consumer Discussions

Re: Ready to purchase Mazda3 [mizzoumazda]

by jfritsch on Fri Jul 25 06:55:08 PDT 2008

The fee is to drop on exhausted walk ins (people with no or few competitive bids) and get another 499 out of them.. Their existence at a dealership may speak for how successful they are at dropping it on buyers in their area. Get 10-20 bids end of month (last week) via email inclusive of all dealer fees, destination, title (and possibly taxes for your county and state) Lowest price otd wins. Usually 10-20 solicitations will produce 2-4 that really need to sell a car. Sometimes the doc fee is printed on the form for a dealership, and they really need to "charge" it to everyone, but with competitive phone bids while munching chips on your couch they can just reduce their otd bid. A bid of 18000 and change is lousy for the 19500 sport hatch auto.They're usually selling for 16500 or so this time of year with all doc and delivery fees. If stocks are low maybe you can work them the last few days of the month. The mazda6 i sport value edition sedan hatch 5dr is rare around here (msrp 22400 instead of 21250 for the reg sedan) but it is a hatch in sedans clothing (indistinguishable from the normal 6 sedan)and has a huge hatch you could load a refrigerator in, and sexy as hell. Make sure none of these are available in the 17000 or less range before going with the 3 hatch. Take the normal utility of a 3 hatch and double it for this one. Very underrated. (except in japan where they sell like the dickens) Only hatch sedan available.Check it out. Good luck --jjf

Re: [ruking1]

by winter2 on Thu Jul 03 02:30:28 PDT 2008

If VW is smart, they will advertise the dickens out of these diesels.

Re: An interesting story [oldfarmer50]

by cdnpinhead on Sat Dec 01 11:38:55 PST 2007

It's a "cute" thing, I think. I drove an MGB (my first car) & enjoyed the dickens out of my two Miatas. All were considered "cute" & potentially girlie cars. Now, ask me if I care.

Re: Thoughts on this deal? [hybridseeker1]

by mikec on Thu Mar 27 22:30:02 PDT 2008

Which is option package "C"? Does that include Leather, Navi, etc? If not, that is a super-sucky price and you should run like the dickens. If yes, then the price is not that good; you should be able to get it $300-600 cheaper.

Re: Test drove the Lexus 250 [erinb510]

by cdnpinhead on Tue Apr 24 18:36:08 PDT 2007

". . . The back seat is microscopic. . ." Exactly. I'm not small, but had no problem enjoying the dickens out of an MGB that I drove well over 100K miles & a couple of Miatas in the '90's. The IS is beyond tiny. If I wanted a roadster, I'd get one. I gave this thing a shot because it came with a manual, but research revealed: 1) it was tiny inside (as you posted), 2) no fold-down rear seat (which I require) & 3) the handling isn't in the same class with the G and the 3. Some obviously prefer the IS. I'm not among them, and it sounds like you're not either. Enjoy that G. It's off my list because: 1) that fold-down rear-seat thing, 2) the gas mileage sucks & 3) they're becoming so popular that they're everywhere. Look for me in a 3-series wagon/estate/avant in the not-too-distant future.

Re: $4 & $5/Gallon Gasoline... [hpmctorque]

by peetiedog on Fri Mar 07 22:31:49 PST 2008

You're right, the CV/GM/TC trio probably won't continue beyond the '09 model year, and definitely not past the '10 model, but it's not due to the gas mileage. It's due to another short-sighted decision from the ivory tower's executive round table. I'd be one of the first to admit that the Panther Trio in it's current configuration, is too long in the tooth to be a viable long term product offering. I just happen to believe that a nice facelift, a mild interior re-do, and a few up-dated gizmos would allow the old girls to soldier on for another 3-5 years (providing a sizeable up-tic in sales), until a new (worthy) rwd replacement could be brought to market. There hasn't been a significant face-lift in a decade, so they were long overdo, yet kept selling pretty well given the lack of attention afforded them, if you ask me. But alas, the time has come to bid adieu. Ford decided to move away from rwd platforms, in favor of fwd & awd. At the same time, GM and Chrysler developed a newfound affection for rwd, especially for their higher end cars, as did Lexus and Infiniti. And we all know what BMW, Jag and Benz feels about rwd; even Audi is moving to a rear-bias to their Quattro AWD system (especially for their high performance cars) to more simulate rwd predominant balance. And now, even Ford has recognized that it needs to re-develop more rwd offerings (duh!), and have started looking at their new Australian rwd platform for a possible North American adaptation. My question is: Ford, why give up your rear-wheel drive market to your competitors (even if for only a couple years), only to have to come back later and spend lots of money trying to win it back? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Sounds like another of those famous Ford blunders in the making to me. Oh, and by the way hpmctorque, have you looked at the fuel economy ratings on the Taurus/Sable and even the Fusion/Milan/MKZ (no #'s on the MKS yet) compared to the CV/GM/TC? There's only between 2-4 mpg difference. And while that can represent a 10-15% improvement, many people would gladly trade that small of a difference for the other benefits the old Panther-girls offer. Things such as balance, durability, ride quality, stability, handling, safety, lower NVH, lower maintenance (especially front-end work), etcetera. When I take my Town Car on a road trip, let's say an 800+ mile round trip from Napa, CA to Los Angeles or Las Vegas. I average upwards of 21-22 mpg for the trip (and I average about 75+ mph trip speeds). Once I rented a Ford Fusion V6 for a trip to Las Vegas, thinking I'd save a lot of gas money. I only averaged 24 mpg for the trip, the ride quality while nice for a small car, was not even close to my Town Car. A lot buzzier, plus I felt a lot more exhausted and wound-up when I got there and when I got back home. The extra $13.00 I saved on the round trip (about 4 fewer gallons of gas @ $3.19 per gal), wasn't worth the lack of comfort, frustration and stress that came with the smaller, buzzier confines. What some people don't take into consideration is that those smaller, higher revving engines have to work a little harder than the loping, long legged, large car V8 engines when it comes to hill climbing and passing. And I don't believe they come anywhere close to the big, slower turning V8's when it comes to longevity either. I'm convinced that my Town Car's life expectancy is easily 250,000 or even 350,000 miles or more. I'd just like an updated version as would a lot of other people I know and talk to. And as far as gas goes, most of the big, comfy car buffs, like me, don't mind spending $200 - $250 a year in feeding costs for the benefits of a traditional, full sized rwd luxury car. Also I'm of the mind that there's no substitute for extra steel around you if in a major accident (say Town Car vs Accord in a head-on). As for as law enforcement is concerned, there is no substitute for rugged, well balanced, reliable, durable and economical (maintenance & repair wise). Suspensions, steering racks, transaxles (transmissions), tire wear, cooling systems, and more on the Taurus for example, would cost law enforcement agencies far more than the additional fuel charges of the Crown Vic cruisers. California Highway Patrol (and other state's trooper agencies), along with large municipal law enforcement agencies (like L.A.P.D. and L.A. County S.O.) have intensive endurance testing programs for their police cruisers. And year after year, the old fuddy-duddy Ford Crown Vic just keeps on coming out on top, in spite of it's age and weaknesses. Besides, when you're responding to an officer in distress' call for back-up, or when in pursuit of a fleeing felony suspect (jumping over curbs & bottoming out on road dips), I don't think anyone is too concerned about another couple miles-per-gallon. Besides they're the government, they just pass the costs on to us. Taxi services are just as concerned or more about durability, longevity and maintenance costs, which once again tend to favor the good ole Crown Vic. And as far as limo & livery services are concerned, how many front wheel drive stretched limo's have you seen lately, even Cadillac DeVilles (DHS); they're almost as rare as stretched Hummers. Even the livery trade doesn't want fwd cars. They cost too much for maintenance & wear, reliability & durability is far worse, and comfort & ride quality is nowhere near as good. Next time you see a few limo drivers take your own unscientific poll, you'd be hard pressed to find 10% of the owners & operators who'll disagree with that. These people are business people, they don't buy Town Cars because they're all Lincoln enthusiasts; they buy them because they are the best product & value on the market for what they need. My question is: Why, why, why Ford, would you give up this market that has become your birthright, only to have to try and fight to get a piece of it back later? I just don't get it. The MKS, as nice as it is, will not really replace the Town Car with the limo & Livery market, sure you'll see a few stretched MKS' and executive livery cars (sort of a fashion statement, like a stretched Navigator). I think the Chrysler 300 will probably get the lion's share of that market, and Cadillac is working on a full size rwd vehicle that I'm sure will eventually take a piece of that market as well. When Ford does finally bring a viable rwd car to market 4 or 5 years from now, they'll have to fight to get back into that market, which will be expensive; and do you really expect Chrysler and GM to just hand their market share back to Ford, or do think they'll fight like the dickens to keep it?