Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Which car should I buy? Nissan Rogue or Ford Escape?


Cat

Recommended Posts

So I've got to get a new car. We have a small family but we are pretty active with skiing and biking so I'd like a small SUV. 

 

I've narrowed it down to the 2012 Nissan Rogue because of it's reliability rating but I really like the look of the 2012 Ford Escape. It doesn't look like a jelly bean like all the other SUVs. I like the straight lines and the layout of the inside.  However it seems per consumer reports the Escape has a history of minor transmission issues and that concerns me considering the reason I'm getting  a new car is because my Toyota's transmission has gone out for the 2nd time.

 

Idk much about Fords. I'm worried I'll get it and end up in the repair shop.  Any advice? Any experience with Fords?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's irrational but since I had so many problems with my highlander I'm staying way from Toyota.

Oh really? My wife got Venza and we love it. No issues so far. My dad used to have Nissan back in the day... That puppy ran to almost 300,000 miles. I never had a good experience with Ford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ford Expedition (mine): blown/cracked head at 60k miles... right out of warranty of course. Had every maintenance record from the day I bought it and Ford would not stand behind it. Sold it as soon as it was repaired.

Ford Escape (friend's): electrical issues, transmission issues, still under warranty and a continual battle with the dealership to repair it.

Infiniti G (wife's): just a juicier version of a Nissan. 7 years old and runs like a top. Interior leather is crap and looks 20 years old, but mechanically and outside appearance are great.

 

Look at the Nissan Murano also....

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at a preowned lexus rx350. You can get one that is 2 years old for around the same price as a new escape or rogue

 

Great car.

 

I am looking at a used GX for the fiance when she wants to get rid of her Tahoe.

 

Damn thing has 225K on it and is still ticking though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great car.

 

I am looking at a used GX for the fiance when she wants to get rid of her Tahoe.

 

Damn thing has 225K on it and is still ticking though.

 

My wife has the rx 350 and we bought it preowned and it drives better than most new cars. The price was what these new lower end crossovers are fetching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...