First car. Anything $500.00 with a current rego and NEW WOF, WITH the check sheet from the WOF so you can see what may need doing in 6 months. Warnings about a couple of new tires no probs, but epic rust and don't bother with it.

LadyLeopard wrote: Oh that is so awesome! LUCKY! I've been looking for one for ages for that cheap and just havnt had any luck...

But they're like the most common thing on earth i have a 1985 1.3l Toyota Corolla that i got for about 600 (thats a total to put it on the road), and i have 2 other unregistered unwarrented Corollas that i have no use for, i got all 3 for less than 600 though.

Someone should mention anchor pricing.

An anchor price is an unrealistically high number that will be presented to you first to make the real amount they want for the car seem achievable for you.

All dealers do this with remarkable effectiveness. Do not be fooled.

Always find out what you want to pay first. Then research what model, year and make you can reasonably get for that price. Then don't be diverted from your original plan. Anchor pricing is *so* effective that the only way most people can beat it is to stick to a preconceived plan. Remember, anchor pricing is used to make you spend MORE money than a vehicle is worth. NOT LESS.

Choose your model. Choose your price. Go hunting for it.

http://www.futurelab.net/blogs/mark...rategies_1.html

Some of the nissan submodellings are incorrect (S14 is a Q's on a spec S)

antidamage wrote: Someone should mention anchor pricing. An anchor price is an unrealistically high number that will be presented to you first to make the real amount they want for the car seem achievable for you. All dealers do this with remarkable effectiveness. Do not be fooled. Always find out what you want to pay first. Then research what model, year and make you can reasonably get for that price. Then don't be diverted from your original plan. Anchor pricing is *so* effective that the only way most people can beat it is to stick to a preconceived plan. Remember, anchor pricing is used to make you spend MORE money than a vehicle is worth. NOT LESS. Choose your model. Choose your price. Go hunting for it. http://www.futurelab.net/blogs/mark...rategies_1.html

Thank god you're back. I was accused of being you and it was just so awful!

that post was made in 2010.....

antil33t wrote: that post was made in 2010.....

True. All these pinned threads in this section are a real mess. The mods should grow some balls and un pin them.

BW wrote: Don't buy off a dealer they are the scum of the earth. I bought off R N Byrne of Whakatane and after the sale my gearbox went, which they didnt want to know about, and suprize suprize the grooming clearcoat peeled off revealing the covered up rough paint on the roof. what a total rip off prick Perry Byrne is. plus i was told the cambelt was done but after i bought it turns out it wasnt.

HA my old man brought his 1982 Mitsubishi Cordia from there back in the late 80s, good car from what I vaguely remember of it, HAHA had shit loads of trouble selling it, because kiwis back in the mid 90s, when he got rid of it didn't warm to the prospects of a used Japanese imported car LOL!!!

update on this thread?!

hey guys, was just after some other peoples' opinions regarding a car purchase i'm about to make:

a) 2004 Nissan Teana 230JK - 55,000 Kms (2300cc) - http://www.autobase.co.nz/cars-for-...dan/1470435.htm
or
b) 2006 Nissan Bluebird Slyphy - 75,000 Kms (2000cc) - http://www.autobase.co.nz/cars-for-...dan/1467473.htm

is one intrinsically "better" than the other?

there's a large "fuel rating efficiency" difference between the two ($2,690 for the Teana vs $1,960 for the Bluebird) - is this really that accurate?

which would you personally buy out of the two (if any) if you had to? it's basically going to be a daily driver (i think that's what it's called?) and i don't plan on buying another vehicle for a good 5 or so more years.

(excuse my noobiness, i really don't know much about vehicles )

edit: i'm gonna go test drive both tomorrow. any input is appreciated.

Go the Bluebird bud, they've got decent reviews, are cheap to run and as long as you make sure to service it every 10-12,000 kms you'll be sweet. It's always best to take someone who knows about cars with you/ get it inspected before buying anything (just for extra peace of mind).

Type in Google 'things to look out for when buying a car', write notes down and get as much info as you can first. It could save you lots of money in the future.

Fuel rating is as accurate as your right foot wants it to be

Thanks for your reply. I had a drive of the bluebird yesterday and it was indeed an extremely smooth albeit relatively slow drive.

One thing that I would like some help on is the bluebird's "CVT" transmission. From what I've Google'd, CVTs are generally cheaper to produce but provide better fuel efficiency compared with regular transmissions. It also makes the car feel slower because of the smooth increase in speed rather than sudden speed increase when flooring it (I noticed this).

I spoke with one of my dad's friends who's a mechanic and he told me to avoid the CVT one because if it becomes faulty it'll cost a shitload to fix/replace - almost so much as to make the purchase useless. Would you agree with his opinion? Should I avoid purchasing the bluebird solely cos of the CVT?

Short answer, yes.

Avoid the cvt bluebird and the rest of dicthesics shit advice. Get a manual and you probably wont ever have to do anything with the transmission in the cars lifetime. You may need a new clutch every 200,000 km's but thats about it. Fuel consumption is much better in manuals as well. Autos should be avoided unless you are crippled.