best car for a 16 year old guy

[fireshot91]

You assume I didn't read it. You also assume I am some sort of SUV hater. Both false assumptions. I maintain what I said - a large SUV in the hands of a new driver (& 16 qualifies as new) is selfish for the potential danger they may cause someone else.

I agree.


A car backed up into me going maybe 3-4mph, but it was a CR-V (A tiny SUV), and with my Civic, they managed to give me a need for a new bumper + hood.


This was going 3-4mph... Only reason was that they had a SUV (albeit a tiny one).

 

[0dev]

You lot talking about big SUVs and such are forgetting about insurance. Seriously, the most important thing for a new driver to consider is insurance. I've been looking into this myself, and for a new teenage male driver over in the UK (I assume you've got a similar situation in the US since insurance companies work by risk and use age as a major factor), any brand new car will cost at least £2,000 to insure. And that's including hatchbacks with tiny engines.

The absolute best thing to do as a new driver is get an old cheap car which is reliable and uses basically no fuel. The 90's Micra I mentioned earlier is perfect for this job.

Getting a massive 4x4 is stupid not just for safety reasons (which are of course also very important), but for financial reasons too.

Of course, if you're into classic cars, and you're confident you can handle the maintenance, I'd suggest looking into those, too. They have a lot more personality and the insurance tends to be dirt cheap.

 

[bandit67]

You will find the 1996-2000 Ford Taurus fits into your critia. They are mid size, cheap, 1500-2k, plentiful , dependable and parts are available in all the salvage yards. I have one, my Mom, my Dad, brother and started BOTH my kids off at sixteen. So, I have had to fix fenders, doors, tires and rims. Get one with the 3 liter engine. Their weakness are the transmission, I had one go over 365k, never touched motor or tranny. And then rebuilt two more trannies with less than 200k miles. Gas miliage is 24 mpg.....no matter how you drive them. They make great cars to sacrifice to the salvage yard with new drivers. My daughter totaled hers in six months. Was not her fault and the many young folks involved were not seriously injured.

After a couple years driving, look for a 93-99 Honda Civic, better MPG, lot less protection in a crash.

 

[Sankersizzle]

c

 

[acebudad]

Honda and Toyota compact cars hold their value too much for you to get one for 2k. I like the new compact cars Ford is putting out, but I'm not sure about the reliability of their older models.

This might not help, but I have come to the conclusion that buying a really cheap used car is just sort of a sad, long drawn out affair where you keep putting good money after bad in a futile attempt to keep the car functioning. In our family we have either bought new Japanese compacts and just keep them because they run forever or in my sister's case bought a used Japanese compact in the 8-9K range. I myself don't drive and don't have a car so my advice isn't the best perhaps.

But I think if I were in your situation, I would explain the logic to my parents of buying you a nicer used car or new car. I would explain that given the lack of good public transportation where you live, your need to get to school and your job, and school activities, etc., a car is a necessity--not a luxury. If you lived in Manhattan a car would be a ludicrous idea. In Newport News, VA (I'm familiar with the area--a land of of strip malls and urban sprawl) you can't really get around with public transit or walking. I'm sure there is some great value in making you work to buy the car, but I don't buy into all that. 16 year olds already have a lot to worry about; if you've already saved up 2,000 you could use that to help with gas and insurance for a year or so. It'll go fast for that alone!

Sorry if that is very impractical. I was one of those kids who would try to get my way, even to the point of making a DVD once to convince my parents of all the reasons we shouldn't move where I showed pictures of the place we were moving set to sad music interlaced with pictures of homeless drug users and then ended with all the pictures of how happy we were where we lived set to upbeat music. I even created with a CD with tranquil sounds with my voice faintly in the background saying "I don't want to move" --in a vain attempt to implant subconscious thoughts. Both of those projects were done using iLife by the way (iMovie, iDVD, and GarageBand). Anyhow, all that was to say, I have never had a problem telling my parents what I want--and if you can lay out the reasons of why they should meet you halfway (or maybe even a little further) I think that could be a good idea--although you know your parents better than anyone here. I admire your practicality and doing this on your own--but the question is do you have to?

yea if only my parents would buy a car for me i was raised to be independent and if i want something i have to get a job and save my money and my dad said that he would let me borrow 1 grand at the most and i would have to pay him back before the year was over

 

[0dev]

Maybe it's different over there, but in Canada I got my rates lowered enormously because my truck was classified as "Full-Size" and was 4WD. That's one of the reasons I suggested it to the OP!

Seriously? That's certainly completely different from here, gas guzzlers cost a fortune to insure, and are near enough impossible to insure as a young driver, over here because they're massive and often have massive engines to match. Plus the congestion charge in London is higher, car tax is higher, and the fuel costs are obviously a lot higher too.

 

[acebudad]

You should buy a cheap and old car, so you gain experience driving a "piece of junk", that is the best way to gain experience. I own a Opel Corsa B from 1996 with a 1.2 liter engine and with no ABS, traction control, no steering assist, no nothing and I've gained a lot of experience with it, I can safely drive my mother's Audi A4 and also got the opportunity to drive an F430 and a Gallardo, although I was extremely careful because an Audi A4 and a Gallardo can't be compared x)

This is my example through what I've learned since I got my license 3 years ago. If you take these facts into account, I'd say pick you poison

im already used to all of the abs, traction control, and stuff like that because i drive my moms 2010 hyundai elantra and my dads 2011 chrysler sebring lol out of the 4 cars we have and that i have driven there not older than 2009

 

[yg17]

yea if only my parents would buy a car for me i was raised to be independent and if i want something i have to get a job and save my money and my dad said that he would let me borrow 1 grand at the most and i would have to pay him back before the year was over

You have good parents. This is a nice change of pace from the usual car threads: "My parents are buying me a brand new car for my 16th birthday, and I can't decide between a BMW M3 and an Audi S5. I love driving 120 MPH on the highway and speeding through residential neighborhoods, I can't figure out which car would be better for that. Help!"

 

[acebudad]

In that case I would look into getting a classic muscle car. You could fix it up yourself. I also think you are less likely to drive it recklessly and get into an accident. Once you fix up a car yourself you become much more attached to it. It stops just being some car and becomes more a part of you.

You don't need to get something that you would see on the Mecum Auto Auction. Heck that would defeat the point of a fixer upper. But for a couple grand you can get something that looks presentable. Then work on fixing it up with stuff like a Holly double pumper, Edlebrock intake, Flowmaster exhaust, Hooker headers, posi, Kicker subs and so on.

yea ive been trying to look for a classic muscle car or like a 1980-1990 camaro. i know what you mean by it becomes a part of you because sometimes i drive my parents cars a little crazy but i know when i get a car that i bought myself im gonna be alot more cautious

 

[0dev]

You have good parents. This is a nice change of pace from the usual car threads: "My parents are buying me a brand new car for my 16th birthday, and I can't decide between a BMW M3 and an Audi S5. I love driving 120 MPH on the highway and speeding through residential neighborhoods, I can't figure out which car would be better for that. Help!"

I agree. I'm glad I was brought up to make my own way in the world as opposed to having it all handed to me, and those types of people you describe - especially the ones who appear on My Sweet 16 - should crash their cars and die.

 

[JetBlack7]

im already used to all of the abs, traction control, and stuff like that because i drive my moms 2010 hyundai elantra and my dads 2011 chrysler sebring lol out of the 4 cars we have and that i have driven there not older than 2009

The more reason you give me to tell you to think about what I wrote, If you drive an old car without any aiding electronics, the better and more experience you will get. But it's up to you

 

[Pink∆Floyd]

Get a Volvo S70 1998-2000 or you know, a Civic

 

[Tomorrow]

Seriously? That's certainly completely different from here, gas guzzlers cost a fortune to insure

When I graduated from a 1995 Hyundai Sonata to a 2003 Ford Expedition, my liability insurance went down. The insurance agent explained to me that this is because large SUV's are statistically less likely to be at fault in an accident.

My overall insurance bill didn't change much, because what I gained in a lower liability premium I lost with higher comprehensive premiums (the SUV cost more, so replacement cost is higher - so that coverage cost more).

 

[Sankersizzle]

c

 

[Mousse]

The more reason you give me to tell you to think about what I wrote, If you drive an old car without any aiding electronics, the better and more experience you will get. But it's up to you

Indeed. ABS and traction control only makes a driver THINK they're a good driver. Drive a car with no ABS and you'll learn how to pump the brakes to stop slick conditions. No traction control and you'll learn your limits when going into a corner. That fancy stuff where the car parallel parks itself? Not for me, bub. Brake assists? That will only encourage more tailgating among bad drivers.

I learned to drive on Toyota compact pickup with no fancy technology, not even the basics like power steering. The experience driving with no power steering saved me once when my engine cut out (freak occurrence to be sure), which killed the power steering. I had to wrestle my POS onto the shoulder.

 

[JetBlack7]

Indeed. ABS and traction control only makes a driver THINK they're a good driver. Drive a car with no ABS and you'll learn how to pump the brakes to stop slick conditions. No traction control and you'll learn your limits when going into a corner. That fancy stuff where the car parallel parks itself? Not for me, bub. Brake assists? That will only encourage more tailgating among bad drivers.

I learned to drive on Toyota compact pickup with no fancy technology, not even the basics like power steering. The experience driving with no power steering saved me once when my engine cut out (freak occurrence to be sure), which killed the power steering. I had to wrestle my POS onto the shoulder.

Good to know someone shares my point of view

I learned a lot with my current piece of junk, which I learnt one thing better than other, to like the car.

This is my car, as you can see it's old but I still take care of it like the day I got it. It's this kind of car I'm talking about

 

[acebudad]

The "rich people are always dicks" argument is legitimately one of the most interesting (IMO) misconceptions people have. Just because someone drives like a hooligan doesn't mean their parents are bad. Parents usually want what's best for their children, so if they can afford it, they will buy them nicer cars when the time comes.



Well then you're in for a treat when it snows (if it snows where you are) and you're driving an old car with no traction control/ABS. I think it's a good learning experience to learn to drive a car without electronic assists (cautiously, of course) to get the feel of the tips and tricks of driving before graduating to a car without electronic assists.

it snows every once in a while but when it does it snows HARD (i live in newport news virginia) and i think it would be better to learn on something like that

 

[Bonch]

A Harley will get you more bitches then any car. Just sayin.

 

[Synchromesh]

Third generation Camaro (1982-1992) with a 305 V8 (TBI, some of the later TPI cars are rather quick).

Sporty, excellent handling (.92g in bone stock form), decent gas mileage, good enough power for a first car without being too much to get you in trouble (305 TBI/Crossfire), a very, very long nose for when you rear-end someone, and the whole body is steel. And you gotta love cruising with the T-tops off. Insurance shouldn't be too bad either. Also tons of room under the hood to work, and parts are cheap.

I don't know where you get your numbers but my google says about .80-85g for an '86 Iroc Z. My Miata R-package won't pull .92g on stock wheels and it has far more sophisticated suspension and lower center of gravity than your average redneck 80s Camaro. Same Camaro has non-independent suspension in the rear which means anything over .85g will require severe mods and wide wheels.

As for the OP I don't think you'll get much of a car today for $2K. I wouldn't recommend American cars to anyone ever but a Japanese car for that much will be a beater. Ditto for European cars. Prepare yourself to either pay mechanic to fix it or learn to wrench on it yourself.

Look at older Civics and Accords. Maybe Camry/Corollas. Don't look at Mitsubishi. Certain Subarus may work too but they require careful research. Mazda and Nissan may work as well.

 

[velocityg4]

yea ive been trying to look for a classic muscle car or like a 1980-1990 camaro. i know what you mean by it becomes a part of you because sometimes i drive my parents cars a little crazy but i know when i get a car that i bought myself im gonna be alot more cautious

I'd steer clear of cars from the 80's. The engine compartments loaded up making them difficult to work on. They were underpowered and started becoming flimsy.

I'd go for something from the 60's or 70's. They are easy to work on and carbureted. Since they don't have a computer you can also easily pull off the smog garbage for a clean and simple engine compartment. If you have it finely tuned it will run cleaner than many cars from the 90's when they were new.

The 67' Chevy Custom Camper C30 truck with an 11:1 compression 327 and no smog equipment I had. Put out 1/5th or better of the emissions (HC, CO, NOx) of the 1995 Dodge Caravan 3.6L my mother had and it was only two years old at the time.

 

[puma1552]

I don't know where you get your numbers but my google says about .80-85g for an '86 Iroc Z. My Miata R-package won't pull .92g on stock wheels and it has far more sophisticated suspension and lower center of gravity than your average redneck 80s Camaro. Same Camaro has non-independent suspension in the rear which means anything over .85g will require severe mods and wide wheels.

I get my numbers from the GM Heritage Center. Read the entry for 1985:

http://history.gmheritagecenter.com/wiki/index.php/Some_Camaro_History

And yes, that was nearly 20 years ago with a 3300 lb. "redneck Camaro" on 16"x8" rims with a live axle and the tires of that era. Guess that doesn't say much for your "more sophisticated suspension" plastic homosexual dream Miata. Slam my car, I slam yours.

But it's obvious you have a bias against anything American, so obviously I wouldn't expect you to have a clue.

EDIT: Oh, and here's a car getting .96g in bone stock trim, on a live axle. Better than the M3 with the prized IRS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOwSPccbzl4

 

[Sankersizzle]

c

 

[zioxide]

civic (or something of similar size). they run forever, cheap to buy, very good on gas, and cheap to insure.

 

[Synchromesh]

I get my numbers from the GM Heritage Center. Read the entry for 1985:

Yeah, you should definitely believe what a completely GM-biased page has on it versus several independent magazine tests. Maybe your page got the the sales numbers right but other than that you'll excuse me if I look skeptically on all of their performance numbers.

And yes, that was nearly 20 years ago with a 3300 lb. "redneck Camaro" on 16"x8" rims with a live axle and the tires of that era. Guess that doesn't say much for your "more sophisticated suspension" plastic homosexual dream Miata.

The new Camaro went to irs. If the live axle was so wonderful for handling why would they do that? The answer is simple: because live axle suspension on a sports car is ridiculous and they know it.

Slam my car, I slam yours.

I think you kicked it up a notch. I'm sure there are some gays out there that own Camaros as well. But either way I'd still rather be in a company of gay car owners than your average rednecks. But I bet your other car is a pickup truck so I can't wait for more homosexual slander.

Homosexual Miata I own is basically a factory race car. It has no power steering, windows or anything else. Only option is AC. All of these sacrifices were made in the name of lightness and nimble handling and it shows. Which is far more than I can say about your average Camaro.

But it's obvious you have a bias against anything American, so obviously I wouldn't expect you to have a clue.

Yes I am. My first car was GM car from the 80s - a Buick Skyhawk. I've passed on American cars from then on. Oh, a buddy of mine owned an '87 Camaro (non IROC). It was a typical 80s GM piece of trash. And he managed to flip it despite its amazing live rear axle that makes all these crazy gs.

 

[puma1552]

LOL, get a clue. No surprise the import fanboy doesn't believe the data staring them in the face. Expected that 1000%.

I don't think you understand the differences between a live axle and IRS, because if you did, you'd realize that an IRS is designed for handling and improved ride quality, and a live axle is designed more or less for drag racing. Two different things for two different purposes. That does not mean though, that a live axle car can't handle well which is what you were implying. The Mustang in the video above proves it. Many an '03-'04 Cobra owner has dumped their IRS for a solid axle because they can handle much more power at the drag strip, and as has been shown by the M3/Mustang comparison above, the solid axle isn't any slouch against IRS, and actually did better. You should also realize that a Camaro isn't a sports car, it's a muscle car.

I didn't say IRS was bad, but I did show you that the IRS isn't the end-all, be-all suspension pants creamer you claim it is. Look at that lowly Mustang pull .96g with a live-axle against the BMW's IRS. What does that say about IRS? It says it actually isn't that superior when you wind the cars out on a track, where IRS is supposed to shine. Where IRS does shine, is by not getting axle hop over ruts in the road compared to a live axle, which can be annoying on a daily driver. But on a smooth track, it really doesn't matter, but it can't hold the power of a solid axle on a drag strip, either.

Admit it, you didn't know what you were talking about. "Magazine tests" with Joe Blow the editor driving the cars mean nothing. You were droning on about how a lowly redneck live axle Camaro couldn't possibly get more than .85g without "severe mods and wide wheels." Too bad you were wrong and can't just swallow some pride and admit you had no clue what you were talking about. Well, those live axle Camaros can do better with '80s technology, and the live axle on today's cars in the hands of a competent driver can get nearly 1g.

Both setups are good in separate ways, but to blast one as "ridiculous" is pretty stupid.

You should also realize GM built SCCA-prepped F-bodies back then too, which were factory race cars that didn't even have the pansy AC or a radio, either.

All of these sacrifices were made in the name of lightness and nimble handling and it shows.

It shows? Shows what? That your stripped out 50/50 weight distribution independent suspension modern tin can can't beat a 3300 lb live axle steel sled on a late 1970's suspension design with the AC blasting and stereo pumping? Hey, you said yourself that your car couldn't hit those numbers. LMAO.