The LH car Concorde 1995 3.3L  83k miles. Also came as the Intrepid and
Vision. My only significant problem has been the air conditioner; a well
known problem. Chrysler extended the warranty on it to 7 years and
repaired mine 3 times, totally at their expense.  Most of the problem
was the heat exchanger leaking, they finally were successful as it has
now been perfectly OK for 6 years.
The 3.3L engine is noted as being rock solid, mine is as new.  The
transmission has an expected life of about 200k miles before repair,
again mine is as new.  The body doesn't rust even with my winter driving
on salt and gravel to the ski hills and the interior wears very slowly,
in fact the always used drivers seat is as new.

The Concorde  is a tough car to leave, because I love driving it. The
handling is first class, sports car handling hidden in a family sedan.  
Few cars I have driven come close to it's handling and this with it's
original shocks and springs. I don't baby it either.
I owned several European and Japanese cars some years ago, so a car with
excellent handling is very important to me.

No I'm not lucky with my Concorde's reliability. I have a friend who has
his father's 1994 that now has 144k miles, still no significant
problems.  Another friend with a '96 that is also solid as a rock.
The 3.3L engine is still used in the Vans.
In a smaller city a few years ago I saw a '96 that was still giving good
service as a taxi. I'd love to have seen the mileage on it.

Chrysler did have serious problems with the very advanced auto
transmission in the early 90s, the first several years. By about 1994
they got it right and problems since then have probably been people
using the incorrect oil and not maintaining it frequently enough.
Other manufacturers now have similar automatics and correct maintenance
(lubrication & flushing) is also very important for them.

Chrysler has had some problem engines since 1980, but to my knowledge
all were designed by foreign manufacturers.  Some troublesome Chrysler
engines I know about are:
-The VW 4 cly in the early FWD Chrysler cars, which had the VW valve
seal problem. Chrysler honored the class action lawsuit filed on this
problem, before VW did.
-The Mitsubishi 4 cyl and V6 which burned significant oil far too soon.
-The 2.7L V6, a very high performance engine designed by Mitsubishi,
which needs synthetic oil and/or more frequent changes to counter sludge
build up. Other manufacturers of recent design high performance engines
also have had a sludge problem, one being the Toyota V6.

I'm looking for a slightly smaller, more fuel efficient car in city
driving. The 4 cyl Accord meets that objective, but the lack of full
sized spare capability kills it for me.
The CR-V could meet my needs, but it's too expensive in Canada.
See below on the Honda pricing problem.

I realize that is true now.  Hardly worth buying a used one eh.  

You reminded me of a friend of mine asking me to help her decide on
either a new Honda or Taurus way back in 1993. She preferred the Taurus,
but was concerned when the Honda salesman told her that when one year
old the Honda would be worth far more than the Taurus. That was very
true because a high percentage of Taurus's were being leased for 1 year,
flooding the market with 1 year old Taurus's.
When she asked my opinion I asked her how long she planned to keep her
new car. She said at least "10 years". My answer was "the difference
when they are both 10 years old will be very small". She bought the
Taurus and is still getting good service out of it, 15 tears later.

I'm in Canada where Honda is "tops" in keeping their Canadian prices in
the past, using a very outdated exchange rate. The USA & CDN $s are
similar now, actually the CDN$ has moved above the USA$ in the last few
weeks, yet Honda is unwilling to lower CDN prices. The CR-V in CDA is a
huge 35% above the USA price. A 10% premium over the USA prices would be
on target. Many other manufacturers have been lowering their Canadian
prices as the USA$ drops, but Honda having a low volume and selling well
has been able to rip off Canadians.
I can see the Honda sales rate here changing recently, a dealer storage
lot near me is almost full with the more expensive Honda models.

CDNs are increasingly buying cars in the USA and I notice this is
dropping the price of other vehicles and even some used Hondas faster
than previously. I know a CR-V buyer who is going buy in the USA.
I understand Honda is acting illegally, according to NAFTA,  in stating
they won't honor the warranty in Canada for new Hondas bought in the
USA. I'm sure eventually they will be forced to by our Government to
adjust their CDN prices, then the fast drop in Honda new prices will
happen.
Used Honda prices will be sure follow this downward price movement; not
nice for those who bought too high and trade frequently.
I wouldn't buy a Honda now, but would lease if the terms are reasonable.

What model of Crapsler do you have?  And how many miles on it?  Needless to
say, you have been extremely lucky with it.  Crapslers have never had a
reputation for reliability.

Also keep in mind that you will not save anywhere near 23% on a 1-year old
Honda that comes off a lease.

Buying a one year old leased car can be a very good deal.
My current '95 Chrysler was a one year lease with only 7k miles on it.
I saved 23% and that one year doesn't affect it's value at 10 yrs.
Absolutely no problems came with it and it's still running strong, but
I'm well beyond my max. 10 yr plan, but not happy with what I see out
there.

The reason I lease is because I like to get a new car every 3 years, because
I get bored easily (probably why I'm still single), and I like new things. I
don't like to have to fix things when they get old.

Buying a new car (financing) requires 15%-20% down in many cases and paying
the sales tax up front and on top of that the payments end up costing alot
more.

For instance with a 2008 accord the money down would be about $1,500.00 and
the sales tax would be worked into the lease. The payments would cost about
$360.00 per month for the 2008 ex auto.

On the other hand if I financed the 2008 accord ex auto for 3 years, I'd
have to put down $3750-$5000 dollars down and the sales tax of about $1750
and the monthly payments would still be $600.00 a month! Same insurance and
same everything else. Leasing is a no brainer. The only thing is that with a
finance you'd have a car worth about $14,000.00 at the end of the finance
and with the lease you wouldnt, but thats alot of money to shell out at the
begining and during the process.

Buying a used car i won't do, I've already done that in the past and after
owning a used Ford Taurus with only 67k miles on it all i can say is never
again to Fords and probably never again to used cars!

Al

You're obviously a person who thinks things through carefully and makes
decisions based on objective data-- so why did you lease rather than
purchase your '05? You paid a lot more than you needed to over these past
three years to drive that puppy...

Well unreliability is not something that I want either. Thats all I wanted,
information about the Jeep, although based on giving this some good thought
I am thinking more in the Civic and Accord areas. Accord will have good
comfort and Civic really good MPG. Still comfort such as what the Accord
offers is more important than the MPG since I am only averaging around
160-190 miles per week.

Basically what I am looking for is something which is roomy, comfortable,
safe and has decent performance. Snow ability and MPG are not the most
important, although good, the comfort and performance out weighs that. Plus
I tend to drive like a nut at times, drive fast and take corners fast and
stuff like that and I don't think the CRV would meet my handling and speed
requirements requirements!

If I had to choose one of the Accords it would probably be the 2008 ex 4cyl,
probably auto. My lease is up on my 2005 Accord ex in a few months, so I
will be making a desision soon.

Damn, those advertising agencies deserve a bonus!  They've done a
sterling job nurturing your insecurities!  If you're THAT worried about
driving a 'woman's car' (whatever the hell that means!) then you clearly
need a freaking Hummer.  Forget Honda altogether!

While performing a self inspection (in search of the 'set' you've been
urged to 'grow,') you might reach around and feel your back.  There
should be something hard and lumpy just under the surface.  Unless, of
course, those pesky aliens have sucked out your spine spine with that
'anal probe' thingy that gets so much press.

FWIW, I owned a late 80's Cherokee and it was a piece of junk.  Whenever
something broke and I had to replace/disassemble some bit of hardware,
I'd be AMAZED that the POS worked AT ALL.

-Moo

Hello,

I like the CRV because it has what I am looking for in a car: versatility,
comfort, space, safety, comforts and 4WD. To date I am yet to see a guy
driving one (especially the new ones) anywhere! I don't really want to be
driving a car that is labeled as a womans car. When I went to the dealer I
talked to a salesman about my interest in the CRV. The first thing he asked
was if I had kids, when I said no, he seemed surprised that I would want the
CRV and tried to get me interested in the Pilots. Unfortunately I don't have
30-36k to spend on an suv.

Now I am thinking about the possibility of getting a Jeep Patriot or Jeep
Wrangler, just don't know what the reliability is like. I know those are
considered more men's cars than the CRV. Its not that this is a big issue,
but its a little odd that only women seem to drive them. Same with the RAV4
for that matter.

I'm looking to be in the 19-24k range in the next car so I thought either of
the Jeeps would be in this range and offer some kinds of comfort and 4WD
ability.

So does anyone know anything about the Jeeps from personal experience?

Thanks,
Al