If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
Hi,
I am leaving in northern california and I was considering buying a used car (to use a a second commute car) around $8000 untilI found this ad for brand new 2006 PT cruisers at $13000. Of course it is $5000 more dollars but it's a new car. I do not know anything about cars and actually do not really want to know but I would appreciate having any advice about this PT cruiser. Any known issue with the 2006 edition justifying why they sell it at this price? Any major known major cons with the PT cruiser? Thanks in advance for your help, Charles |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
> wrote in message oups.com... > Hi, > > I am leaving in northern california and I was considering buying a used > car (to use a a second commute car) around $8000 untilI found this ad > for brand new 2006 PT cruisers at $13000. > Of course it is $5000 more dollars but it's a new car. > > I do not know anything about cars and actually do not really want to > know but I would appreciate having any advice about this PT cruiser. > > Any known issue with the 2006 edition justifying why they sell it at > this price? > Any major known major cons with the PT cruiser? > > Thanks in advance for your help, > Charles > The PT Cruiser is the base model in the Chrysler line and serves as the loss leader. With incentives, they can be purchased relatively inexpensively. One of the factors influencing the cost of the car is the amount of decontenting which has been done with it. In 2002 (my model year) even the base model came nicely equipped. Air conditioning, power windows and the radio/cd player were all standard. Now some of the past standard items such as a/c are extra cost options. Historically, the PT Cruiser has been fairly reliable, both my wifes and mine have been very reliable and we are pleased with them. If you are planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared for the gas cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the heavy weight and large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as aerodynamic as a brick. If you were planning for commuting and didn't want your budget eaten up by fuel costs, you might want to consider another vehicle. That said, I love mine. It has lots of room for a small car and gets reasonably good highway mileage. We just took a trip to Western NC and averaged about 28-30 mpg. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
A base PT Cruiser with air and auto is $13,000 employee cost. I know I
bought one 2 months ago before the employee price was given to everyone (my father is a retired Mopar employee). The car is great for the money- I get around 21mpg in mixed city/hwy. It is quiet and the interior is pretty upscale for a base model. They only downer for the base PT is that you cannot get cruise control for the base model. It is a fantastic car- much better than the Caliber IMHO (with the exception of mpg). It is a lot more refined. Scott "Carl Keehn" > wrote in message ... > > > wrote in message > oups.com... >> Hi, >> >> I am leaving in northern california and I was considering buying a used >> car (to use a a second commute car) around $8000 untilI found this ad >> for brand new 2006 PT cruisers at $13000. >> Of course it is $5000 more dollars but it's a new car. >> >> I do not know anything about cars and actually do not really want to >> know but I would appreciate having any advice about this PT cruiser. >> >> Any known issue with the 2006 edition justifying why they sell it at >> this price? >> Any major known major cons with the PT cruiser? >> >> Thanks in advance for your help, >> Charles >> > > The PT Cruiser is the base model in the Chrysler line and serves as the > loss leader. With incentives, they can be purchased relatively > inexpensively. > > One of the factors influencing the cost of the car is the amount of > decontenting which has been done with it. In 2002 (my model year) even > the base model came nicely equipped. Air conditioning, power windows and > the radio/cd player were all standard. Now some of the past standard > items such as a/c are extra cost options. > > Historically, the PT Cruiser has been fairly reliable, both my wifes and > mine have been very reliable and we are pleased with them. If you are > planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared for the gas > cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the heavy weight and > large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as aerodynamic as a brick. > If you were planning for commuting and didn't want your budget eaten up by > fuel costs, you might want to consider another vehicle. > > That said, I love mine. It has lots of room for a small car and gets > reasonably good highway mileage. We just took a trip to Western NC and > averaged about 28-30 mpg. > |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
In article
>, "Carl Keehn" > wrote: > If you are > planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared for the gas > cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the heavy weight and > large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as aerodynamic as a brick. > If you were planning for commuting and didn't want your budget eaten up by > fuel costs, you might want to consider another vehicle. The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. The VW new Beetle has a similar design, resulting in poor mileage for it's size. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
Just Facts wrote:
> In article > >, > "Carl Keehn" > wrote: > > >> If you are >>planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared for the gas >>cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the heavy weight and >>large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as aerodynamic as a brick. >>If you were planning for commuting and didn't want your budget eaten up by >>fuel costs, you might want to consider another vehicle. > > > The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. > The VW new Beetle has a similar design, resulting in poor mileage for > it's size. Do you have any Cd figures to back up this claim? Matt |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:35:20 UTC, Just Facts >
wrote: > In article > >, > "Carl Keehn" > wrote: > > > If you are > > planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared for the gas > > cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the heavy weight and > > large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as aerodynamic as a brick. > > If you were planning for commuting and didn't want your budget eaten up by > > fuel costs, you might want to consider another vehicle. > > The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. I have a 1940 Chrysler Royal coupe with the big fenders and I get around 20-22mpg. That is the whole point of the PT's styling. My wife has a 2005 PT Convertible and it is getting around 21 around town and has gotten 32 on the road here in South Florida using 87 regular gas, it is the 180 turbo model. -- "What do you mean there's no movie?" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message ... > Just Facts wrote: >> In article >, >> "Carl Keehn" > wrote: >> >> >>> If you are planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared >>> for the gas cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the >>> heavy weight and large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as >>> aerodynamic as a brick. If you were planning for commuting and didn't >>> want your budget eaten up by fuel costs, you might want to consider >>> another vehicle. >> >> >> The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. >> The VW new Beetle has a similar design, resulting in poor mileage for >> it's size. > > Do you have any Cd figures to back up this claim? > > Matt The CD for the PT Cruiser is .38, for comparison the CD for a Ford Focus is ..32 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
Folks, not everyone knows as much about this stuff as you guys. What is
"CD"? Bud "Carl Keehn" > wrote in message ... > > "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message > ... >> Just Facts wrote: >>> In article >, >>> "Carl Keehn" > wrote: >>> >>> >>>> If you are planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared >>>> for the gas cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the >>>> heavy weight and large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as >>>> aerodynamic as a brick. If you were planning for commuting and didn't >>>> want your budget eaten up by fuel costs, you might want to consider >>>> another vehicle. >>> >>> >>> The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. >>> The VW new Beetle has a similar design, resulting in poor mileage for >>> it's size. >> >> Do you have any Cd figures to back up this claim? >> >> Matt > > The CD for the PT Cruiser is .38, for comparison the CD for a Ford Focus > is .32 > |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
Carl Keehn wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message > ... > >>Just Facts wrote: >> >>>In article >, >>> "Carl Keehn" > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>If you are planning to use the car as a commuting vehicle, be prepared >>>>for the gas cost, mileage on the PT Cruiser is poor, a factor of the >>>>heavy weight and large frontal area of the car. The PT is about as >>>>aerodynamic as a brick. If you were planning for commuting and didn't >>>>want your budget eaten up by fuel costs, you might want to consider >>>>another vehicle. >>> >>> >>>The non smooth sides with 30s era fenders are a big aerodynamic problem. >>>The VW new Beetle has a similar design, resulting in poor mileage for >>>it's size. >> >>Do you have any Cd figures to back up this claim? >> >>Matt > > > The CD for the PT Cruiser is .38, for comparison the CD for a Ford Focus is > .32 That is hardly a huge difference. I wonder what that computes to in mileage difference? I'll bet it is small. I suspect the flat plate area difference is more significant than Cd due to fenders and "non smooth" sides. Matt Matt |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
PT cruiser buying decision help
BudE wrote:
> Folks, not everyone knows as much about this stuff as you guys. What is > "CD"? Cd (the d is a subscript on the C) represents the coefficient of drag. It is a dimensionless value that is related primarily to the shape of an object and the influence of the shape on the drag of the object. To get total drag you need a few other parameters such as the frontal area of the object, etc. For more than you'll ever probably want to know... http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/dragco.html Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PT Cruiser - Put One on My List | Marc | Chrysler | 8 | January 10th 06 12:28 AM |
Cinco de Mayo Celebration Debuts Nine Hundred-Pound Pinata... of a full-sized PT Cruiser | Hoodoo | Dodge | 0 | May 3rd 05 06:44 PM |
Battery Buying Decision Help Needed - Please! | [email protected] | VW air cooled | 1 | April 8th 05 03:54 PM |
Taking The Haggling Out Of Buying That New '05 Auto | Azam | Chrysler | 0 | January 15th 05 06:15 AM |
Decision Decision Decision... | Andrew Tsen | Honda | 15 | November 14th 04 05:50 PM |