Piston Slap: ...and Behind Door Number Two
Sean writes:
I am looking to purchase either a 2002 Acura RSX automatic with 105,360 miles for $6995 from a dealer or a 2005 Scion tC manual with 86455 miles for $7986. Which car do you think is better and a better deal?
Sajeev Answers:
Yes, dear reader, I am aware this question strays deep into our “New or Used” series. But it is specific enough to merit a Piston Slap on basic used car inspection techniques. Both vehicles presented are often driven by hoons of various ages, so there’s no safe bet.
Aside from usual inspection points this is one time where getting a third party inspection ($100-ish) is a great idea. Looking for signs of previous frame damage, fender-benders are my biggest concern, since both come from otherwise bulletproof platforms with good powertrains. Checking for aftermarket upgrades of subpar quality or questionable durability is also critical. You’ll be surprised at what some people do with wiring harnesses, induction/exhaust systems and aftermarket ICE and lighting bits.
That said, my gut suspects the Acura RSX is a safer bet: even with the extra age and miles, it’s an automatic gearbox. There’s a better chance that this Scion tC was abused on transmission alone, not to mention their high insurance rates. The RSX might just be a nicer car with a more respectable owner.
Send your queries to mehta@ttac.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.
More by Sajeev Mehta
Comments
Join the conversation
Both of those cars are loser deals... stay away. First off, in that price range, you need to stay away from dealerships, they are just adding a bunch of markup to those cars. Second off, at the age of those cars, you are not going to get good financing terms. If you are not financing, then once again, why bother with the dealer. Take your cash to a private seller and you will get more for your money. But mostly, those are two of the most hoontastic cars in existence. Whoever said that yuppies drive RSX's here in the states must not know the difference between an RSX and a TSX. Both of those cars have too high mileage to even consider, especially for $7k. If you have cash, choose a car you can actually afford, something with lower miles and less likely to have been beat up by a Fast and Furious wannabe. The peanut gallery can give you tons of ideas there. If you dont have cash, either spend more money on a newer car that will finance out to a decent term, or spend less... much less on a car that will fit your budget. There is no reason to spend over $4k on a car with 100k miles. There is a guy around here with a 95 300zx in mint condition with around 80k miles for $4200. Would you seriously rather have a Scion for almost double that price??
Base automatic RSX' aren't the ride of choice for hooligans, I don't know why that's being repeated. If it was a type-S then I would urge him to be wary but this car, if it has service records and no obvious evidence of abuse, is about as low risk as it gets. It's for hairdressers, "hip" "young" female teachers and sorostitutes. OP- I would look around for an ep3 Civic Si. As the unloved Si model they can be had dirt cheap and I've seen enough of them out there to be pretty confident you can find a clean version somewhere in your area.
I'd go for a Honda Fit S instead. It won't be fast, but it won't get stolen either. Great little car.
The prices stricke me as high . . . but there are expert resources available to judge that. So, use them. Also, with a vehicle this age/mileage and, at best, the typical dealer 30-day warranty, an independent inspection is valuable. Apart from the relative merits of the two cars -- as new -- and how much they might cost to insure, understand that with a vehicle of this age/mileage, a substantial part of what you're buying is how the previous owner(s) maintained the vehicle . . . much less important, IMHO, (with one exception below) than how they might have driven it. Get the carfax on both vehicles and see how many owners each has had. Fewer owners, with longer times of ownership is better, mostly because owners who keep their cars a longer time tend to maintain them. Finally, on the autobox vs. manual question -- apart from which is more fun to drive (D'oh! The manual!) -- there are two competing considerations. With a manual, the most likely failure point is the clutch, and the failure rate is a function of its original design and how it's been driven. It's certainly possible with that amount of miles on the car that you could be looking at a clutch replacement in your near future, especially if they were "city" miles (lots of starting and stopping) and/or the driver abused the clutch. OTOH, the cost of replacing the clutch is likely substantially less than the cost of repairing or (as seems to be the case more often than not today) replacing the autobox. A good autobox should be good for over 100K miles. Unfortunately, unless failure is really imminent, it's pretty hard to diagnose the condition of either the autobox or the clutch. Much as I love a manual, with this amount of miles and if my goal was to minimize the likelihood of having to pay big repair bills, I would go with the autobox car . . . I've never personally driven either of these vehicles, so I can't offer an opinion about which one is more "fun to drive" comfortable, etc.