Buying a used car (Seattle) under 10k

Quote from mr_rolla : I've heard good things about Hertz car sales. Do a search for some threads here on SD. http://www.hertzcarsales.com/ Never used them before but I will consider them the next time I'm looking for a car. Plenty of choices in the $10K range.

I know most people would be quick to tell others that buying a used car from a rental agency is very risky. I haven't done it, so I can't give personal feedback; however, I've read that rental companies are able to circumvent traditional procedures in terms of reporting accidents, damage, etc. I think that's one key aspect worth looking into.

Thank you everyone for the useful info. I've negotiated a 2004 RAV4 4WD automatic with sunroof for 10k out the door (from a toyota dealership). Seems like a good deal but I'm still thinking it over.

I heard car rental companies take really good care of their cars... maybe I'm wrong.

Quote from impact1400 : I know most people would be quick to tell others that buying a used car from a rental agency is very risky. I haven't done it, so I can't give personal feedback; however, I've read that rental companies are able to circumvent traditional procedures in terms of reporting accidents, damage, etc. I think that's one key aspect worth looking into.

I've thought about the risk factor, but considering most of the stuff Hertz has are 2011 and 2012 models and most are still around 30K miles and under factory warranty I think they should be a fairly safe buy.

You could easily get a 100K mile aftermarket extended warranty added too.

Quote from u256232 : A used subaru sounds good. I heard volvo's are high maintenance. I've never known anyone that owned one. Everyone tells me to stick with Japanese made cars.

I'd say avoid Subaru, or any other car that still uses a timing belt AND where the engine will self destruct if the timing belt breaks. I only buy American Cars (I have a 1995 Escort and 1999 Alero). Both are very reliable cars. I also maintain A 2002 Subaru Forester, a 2000 Camry and a 2000 Dodge Dakota. Of the bunch the Subaru is is the one I tell people to avoid. It's a maintenance problem. Not only does stuff break on it, but it's usually expensive and difficult to fix, AND the engine will self destruct if the timing belt breaks. Plus the 4WD causes many more maintenance problems and reduced gas mileage. The Camry is fine, but really only roughly equivalent to my 1995 Escort in terms of ease or repair, reliability, and low cost and high availability of replacement parts. The Camry is the 4 cylinder model. If it were the V6 I'd probably hate it.

Anyway, how high does unemployment have to get before you buy American? Even if you buy a Honda made here, it's still money leaving the country. And the car is not better than a Ford, it just costs more to get that Japanese nameplate.

If you are thinking about a RAV4, I know some people who have only had one a few months and they really like it. Having said that, that's after a Hyundai and Kia that were both lemons.

Quote from zzyzzx : Anyway, how high does unemployment have to get before you buy American? Even if you buy a Honda made here, it's still money leaving the country. And the car is not better than a Ford, it just costs more to get that Japanese nameplate.

As a Ford guy, you will be happy to know that I plan to buy a Ford Fiesta ST next summer as a replacement for my 98 Contour V6.

Quote from zzyzzx : I'd say avoid Subaru, or any other car that still uses a timing belt AND where the engine will self destruct if the timing belt breaks. I only buy American Cars (I have a 1995 Escort and 1999 Alero). Both are very reliable cars. I also maintain A 2002 Subaru Forester, a 2000 Camry and a 2000 Dodge Dakota. Of the bunch the Subaru is is the one I tell people to avoid. It's a maintenance problem. Not only does stuff break on it, but it's usually expensive and difficult to fix, AND the engine will self destruct if the timing belt breaks. Plus the 4WD causes many more maintenance problems and reduced gas mileage. The Camry is fine, but really only roughly equivalent to my 1995 Escort in terms of ease or repair, reliability, and low cost and high availability of replacement parts. The Camry is the 4 cylinder model. If it were the V6 I'd probably hate it.

As a former Subaru owner I have to agree that the interference engine design is unnecessary, however the timing belt is so easy to replace that I never really considered it to be an issue.
Spark plugs are a real pain the ass however.

And you are correct that AWD does require more maintenance... 4 axles, 2 diffs, etc etc.. more moving parts of course means more stuff to replace.
I consider the AWD to be a huge benefit however. In the wet there's just so much more grip than FWD, I actually enjoyed driving in the rain. I even drove in light snow on summer tires and it was fine (definitely not recommended)

If I lived somewhere that rained a lot I wouldn't think twice about AWD (or FWD with a set of good wet weather / winter tires).

Having a Subaru in Southern California is pretty pointless however, that's why I got rid of it and went RWD

Quote from mr_rolla : As a former Subaru owner I have to agree that the interference engine design is unnecessary, however the timing belt is so easy to replace that I never really considered it to be an issue.

If you have the dual cam, it is a pain. In fact all timing belts are a pain to change, but this one not only has the dual cam, but you should do the water pump, AND oil pump, and some other oil related gasket while you are there. Definitely not a car where this is going to be your first timing belt type of thing. I could probably do the ones (as in both) on the Camry and Escort in about the same amount of time Also, with any 4WD car I really hate it that if you have a problem with one tire, you have to either replace all 4, find another replacement tire that has the same amount of tread left, or just replace it with a new tire and let the uneveness grind away at your driveline. FWD is way superior in that aspect since you can put some really mismatched tires on the back and it won't matter.

If you can't drive a FWD car good in the snow, then you probably should not be driving in the snow.

Quote from zzyzzx : If you have the dual cam, it is a pain. In fact all timing belts are a pain to change, but this one not only has the dual cam, but you should do the water pump, AND oil pump, and some other oil related gasket while you are there. Definitely not a car where this is going to be your first timing belt type of thing. I could probably do the ones (as in both) on the Camry and Escort in about the same amount of time Also, with any 4WD car I really hate it that if you have a problem with one tire, you have to either replace all 4, find another replacement tire that has the same amount of tread left, or just replace it with a new tire and let the uneveness grind away at your driveline. FWD is way superior in that aspect since you can put some really mismatched tires on the back and it won't matter. If you can't drive a FWD car good in the snow, then you probably should not be driving in the snow.

Thankfully I had a SOHC Legacy 2.5i, easiest timing belt I've ever done because of the layout... to me FWD transverse engines (esp. Honda B-series interference) are the worst, there's no room between the belt and strut mounts for my big hands.

The mis-matched tire thing's been debated to death on the Subaru forums. I've run tires with around 3/32-5/32" difference front-rear for extended periods without any issue.

My OPINION (not Subaru recommended) - with manual transmissions where the front and rear are physically and continuously connected by a mechanical diff then I can understand how it's possible to wear out the diff.
However with the 4EAT transmission (MPT Multi-Plate Transfer clutch / Active AWD) the clutch mechanism was originally designed to continuously distribute torque from front to rear based on wheel slip determined by wheel speed. If the rear tires are on a slippery surface (rotating faster vs the front) then the clutch will tighten up to send more power to the rear axle.
By the same analogy, if you run a slightly smaller tire (ie. a tire with more wear) on the rear axle, then the MPT will simply think that there's just less traction on the rear axle and send more power there. This was how it was designed to work. If they claim that this wears out the MPT clutch then so would driving on slippery surfaces...