Nissan Altima Vs. Dodge Charger

[liquidglass]

Alright guys here's the short story of what's going on so you can help me decide on the car to get!

about 9 days ago I was hit on the rear right panel by some douche from out of state. Well he hit my car hard enough to total it and puncture the gas tank so it's not even worth fixing (older car, but it was paid off lol) So now I need a New car. (at least new to me)


This worked out in a way because I've had the other car for 5 years and my job with the government is going to start requiring me to travel from state to state. So I needed a more reliable and car with some zest to not have to poke along across states.

I'm wanting you to vote based on
- Reliablity (will this car have major problems)
- Which is the more "quality" car
- (related to question one) is one more expensive to maintain than the other (not counting gas)

So here's the skinny on both the cars, prices are close enough I would regret not buying the more expensive one if it was better. So Don't worry about the price

OR COLOR (both Silver)


1) [color="#ff0000"]Nissan Altima (2006)

2.5L Engine
56,000 miles
1 previous owner (northern owned car)
NO accidents, title problems, etc

MPG ratings are 24city and 31hwy (reviews say this is about right)
[/color]

2)[color="#0000ff"] Dodge Charger (2009)

3.5L engine
48,000 miles
1 previous owner (southern owned)
NO accidents, title problems, etc.

MPG ratings are 17city and 25hwy (but reviews say normal of 23-25)
[/color]

* My old car averaged 22mpg so can't really step down from that lol*


If you guys would answer, I'd really appreciate it, I think it'd help my decision.

[Travis]

CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.

[Rani]

[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1284614147' post='482293']
CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.
[/quote]

I refuse to buy imported anything any more. Even though both are previously owned, until we stop sending out dollars out of the country to foreign owned corporations, our own economy and American job security will never get any better. And having owned Chrysler/Dodge, they are indeed very good cars and in the long run end up costing you less money. Parts are cheaper, every decent mechanic can fix them and even long after the model has left the market, there will be parts houses that will stock original parts And for reasons I have yet to find any real satisfactory answer to, an import with a couple hundred thousand miles is pretty much done for. Something about the tolerances I'm told. Look around you. Of cars 10 years old and older, how many Mustangs, Chargers, Camaros, etc. do you see out there compared to imports, hmmmm?

'Rani

[liquidglass]

Thanks for the reviews guys, keep em coming, I think I have my mind made up but I want to remain as unbiased as possible when asking for help.

[liquidglass]

[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1284614147' post='482293']
CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.
[/quote]


What year did you happen to have (aka) how long has it gone without needing major repairs

[Venger]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1284616954' post='482298']
[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1284614147' post='482293']
CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.
[/quote]

I refuse to buy imported anything any more. Even though both are previously owned, until we stop sending out dollars out of the country to foreign owned corporations, our own economy and American job security will never get any better. And having owned Chrysler/Dodge, they are indeed very good cars and in the long run end up costing you less money. Parts are cheaper, every decent mechanic can fix them and even long after the model has left the market, there will be parts houses that will stock original parts And for reasons I have yet to find any real satisfactory answer to, an import with a couple hundred thousand miles is pretty much done for. Something about the tolerances I'm told. Look around you. Of cars 10 years old and older, how many Mustangs, Chargers, Camaros, etc. do you see out there compared to imports, hmmmm?

'Rani
[/quote]
both companies are foreign owned. Dodge is now a fiat company. I would get the dodge only because they are cheap to maintain.
other wise go for the better gas mileage.
Ray

[Cp44]

I vote for Altima, if your not getting the SRT8 then its no point in getting the charger. My friend has the 3.5 Charger and its weak.

[Travis]

[quote name='liquidglass' timestamp='1284621545' post='482304']
[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1284614147' post='482293']
CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.
[/quote]


What year did you happen to have (aka) how long has it gone without needing major repairs
[/quote]

I had an 2008 5.9, never needed any major maintinence, just some oil changes and a spark plug switch.
Had 140k (aprx.) when i got rid of it, and it was running great.

[Rani]

[quote name='Venger' timestamp='1284641592' post='482307']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1284616954' post='482298']
[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1284614147' post='482293']
CHARGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only because i have owned one................

just dont buy the hemi like i did, uber bad gas mileage.

Super reliable and ease of maintenence btw.
[/quote]

I refuse to buy imported anything any more. Even though both are previously owned, until we stop sending out dollars out of the country to foreign owned corporations, our own economy and American job security will never get any better. And having owned Chrysler/Dodge, they are indeed very good cars and in the long run end up costing you less money. Parts are cheaper, every decent mechanic can fix them and even long after the model has left the market, there will be parts houses that will stock original parts And for reasons I have yet to find any real satisfactory answer to, an import with a couple hundred thousand miles is pretty much done for. Something about the tolerances I'm told. Look around you. Of cars 10 years old and older, how many Mustangs, Chargers, Camaros, etc. do you see out there compared to imports, hmmmm?

'Rani
[/quote]
both companies are foreign owned. Dodge is now a fiat company. I would get the dodge only because they are cheap to maintain.
other wise go for the better gas mileage.
Ray
[/quote]

Hmmm, I'll have to check on that. My understanding is that Chrysler owns Fiat, not vice versa, but I'll do some research. If it's true, well...... Guess I can stop daydreaming about the Challenger!

'Rani

[Dr. B]

I vote Altima. non-performance Dodge engines are unreliable and Chrysler/Dodge doesn't have a good track record with durability (except for Ram trucks).

Nissans are almost as serviceable as Hondas. You have a lot more variety in aftermarket parts and a decent import mechanic is not hard to find. Gas mileage is better as well, which is a plus.

Rani: 3 words: Foreign Direct Investment. The majority of Japanese autos are manufactured here in the US. U.S. workers are employed, U.S. taxes are paid, and in some cases, U.S. raw materials are used. The foreign ownership only receives the excess of the accounting profit not dedicated to (U.S.) expansion, which, considering how big of a consumer of cars we are, is a lot - albeit less than normal due to the recession. They contribute to our GDP but detract less in the NCO aspect, which is in time reversed by their investment in domestic firms that U.S. workers create with the dollars they earned by building Japanese cars. Sentiments like yours create artificial demand for a perfect substitute; on account of which we all pay more for our autos with no additional benefit.

[Tyler]

I vote Chevy Cruze.

[Rani]

[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284665898' post='482345']
I vote Altima. non-performance Dodge engines are unreliable and Chrysler/Dodge doesn't have a good track record with durability (except for Ram trucks).

Nissans are almost as serviceable as Hondas. You have a lot more variety in aftermarket parts and a decent import mechanic is not hard to find. Gas mileage is better as well, which is a plus.

Rani: 3 words: Foreign Direct Investment. The majority of Japanese autos are manufactured here in the US. U.S. workers are employed, U.S. taxes are paid, and in some cases, U.S. raw materials are used. The foreign ownership only receives the excess of the accounting profit not dedicated to (U.S.) expansion, which, considering how big of a consumer of cars we are, is a lot - albeit less than normal due to the recession. They contribute to our GDP but detract less in the NCO aspect, which is in time reversed by their investment in domestic firms that U.S. workers create with the dollars they earned by building Japanese cars. Sentiments like yours create artificial demand for a perfect substitute; on account of which we all pay more for our autos with no additional benefit.
[/quote]

I completely disagree. Looks good on paper, but the reality is that as goods produced by foreign owned corporations have flooded our markets, American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind. And profits should not be leaving our economy if we want it to remain strong. Don't kid yourself. Foreign owned corporations manufacture on US soil as a form of tariff avoidance. They pay minimum taxes thanks to our big business tax structure, yet avoid adding to the tax structure through tariff avoidance. And the workers themselves don't contribute to local economy, but instead buy additional foreign made goods. Nobody works at Toyota USA and then goes shopping for an American made television. The money just keeps flowing overseas.

'Rani

[mustafabey]

I am a very satisfied Nissan frontier owner. My pick up is 11 years old, over 125,000 miles has done its share of real pick up truck work and has four wheeled thru miles of mountain logging roads.plus its made in Tennessee. I don't know about the Altima, but the truck is awesome

[JOE]

I vote nissan. they are both gonna cost roughly the same to service, for me it would come down to whichever has a nicer interior, options etc..

[dizzbizz]

I vote for Altima and go for the coupe, they're sick. Charger looks nice but like someone said before, if its not the srt8 its not really worth it.

[Chreees]

Lol, Nissan has a plant here in Smyrna about 10 minutes away from where I live in Murfreesboro. So the whole foreign-made car argument isn't valid for Nissan. Americans make them, that's for sure. Atleast the ones here in TN.

There's many things to consider. Charger is going to be sportier. Altima's going to save you gas most likely. You said you'll be doing a lot of traveling, so I see that working to your advantage.

Now the real question is... Why have you limited yourself to just these two options?

[Dr. B]

Dude, OP, sorry. I got way into it.
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1284666673' post='482348']
[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284665898' post='482345']
...F.D.I....
[/quote]

I completely disagree. Looks good on paper, but the reality is that as goods produced by foreign owned corporations have flooded our markets, American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind. And profits should not be leaving our economy if we want it to remain strong. Don't kid yourself. Foreign owned corporations manufacture on US soil as a form of tariff avoidance. They pay minimum taxes thanks to our big business tax structure, yet avoid adding to the tax structure through tariff avoidance. And the workers themselves don't contribute to local economy, but instead buy additional foreign made goods. Nobody works at Toyota USA and then goes shopping for an American made television. The money just keeps flowing overseas.

'Rani
[/quote]

Goods produced abroad have flooded our market because the comparative advantage of production abroad of perfect substitutes is greater. In a typical trade paradigm two dissimilar goods are exchanged; each "brought to the table" by the producer who has the lowest opportunity cost of production. Availability of total goods becomes an aggregate measure of the productivity of all producers, operating under their own comparative advantage. The productive capabilities of all producers are optimized, trade occurs, and everyone is better off (more goods, lower prices).

Now, when we talk about perfect substitutes rather than dissimilar goods we see that when a handful of producers have exactly the same opportunity cost of production (comparative advantage) the goods will be priced the same, available in the same markets (assuming transportation costs are similar, which they are), and not produced by anybody with a higher opportunity cost of production. If the perfect substitute is produced by somebody with a higher opportunity cost (not having comparative advantage) two things happen, which I will explain with an analogy. 2 people pick apples and make their own apple sauce. Person A can pick 10 apples in an hour and can make applesauce with 10 apples in 1 hour, or 5 cans of sauce. I'll use time as the constraint instead of opportunity cost, as it is easier to comprehend. Person B can also pick 10 apples in an hour but can only make 4 cans of applesauce in an hour. 1 of two things typically stop person B from continuing to make applesauce. 1: He cannot make as many cans per hour and therefor cannot earn as much as person A for the same amount of his time, or 2: He can make 5 cans of applesauce in 1 hour but must use 1 3/5 an apple per can, resulting in an inferior product which will command a lower price or not capture as many sales at the same price as person A's apples - either way, person B is not as successful. The logical progression of person B is to realize that he has a higher opportunity cost of making apple sauce and can better utilize him time picking apples, to give to person A, so that when once 9 cans of applesauce would be produced in an hour, now 10 cans are made by person A, who gets his apples from person B. Applesauce is cheaper, and person B maintains his livelihood as an apple picker.
This is like the case with auto manufacturers. Japanese cars are produced with a lower opportunity cost and therefore it is in our interest to delegate production to those firms. American cars, produced at a higher cost ought to demand a higher price in the market, but sell for similar prices. Why? American auto manufacturers are producing an inferior product in order to sell it at the same price could be one reason, but it's not the right one according to you. If I buy your assumption that quality is comparable (which I don't in reality) then somebody must be subsidizing the American manufacturers so that they can bring a more expensive good to market for a percentage of what it ought to retail for. Who? The American government. Bailouts ring a bell? You're championing a rhetoric which favors inefficient markets in a realm in which no proportionate benefit is captured and in which the costs associated with capital mobility are negligible. This might have made sense in the 1940's, but this is the age of hypercommunication and there is little to no chance that the transportation costs justify the market inefficiency. Further, knowing that the government will continue to subsidize American manufacturing, Japanese manufacturers are increasing the price of their cars beyond what they ought to retail for as long as they are marginally less expensive than American cars and promote some sort of substitution effect. It's working too! Stroll over to the port of Longbeach and see for yourself the extra dock space Nissan and Toyota purchased in 2009 to import cars beyond the domestic production capacity in order to make sure that the cars Americans want are available, as long as they are marginally cheaper. They are paying tariffs on those imports however minuscule they are in relation to domestic manufacturing, but it's not like Chrysler and GM pay tariffs.

So what's it gonna be, Rani? Overpriced cars across the board, inefficient markets, and government bailouts or the collapse of the American auto industry and a more consumer-oriented environment? There's no monetary justification for buying that PT Cruiser because it was by an Amurrican

[quote]American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind.[/quote]
My point exactly. Edited September 16, 2010 by Dr. B

[Rani]

[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284681275' post='482363']
Dude, OP, sorry. I got way into it.
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1284666673' post='482348']
[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284665898' post='482345']
...F.D.I....
[/quote]

I completely disagree. Looks good on paper, but the reality is that as goods produced by foreign owned corporations have flooded our markets, American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind. And profits should not be leaving our economy if we want it to remain strong. Don't kid yourself. Foreign owned corporations manufacture on US soil as a form of tariff avoidance. They pay minimum taxes thanks to our big business tax structure, yet avoid adding to the tax structure through tariff avoidance. And the workers themselves don't contribute to local economy, but instead buy additional foreign made goods. Nobody works at Toyota USA and then goes shopping for an American made television. The money just keeps flowing overseas.

'Rani
[/quote]

Goods produced abroad have flooded our market because the comparative advantage of production abroad of perfect substitutes is greater. In a typical trade paradigm two dissimilar goods are exchanged; each "brought to the table" by the producer who has the lowest opportunity cost of production. Availability of total goods becomes an aggregate measure of the productivity of all producers, operating under their own comparative advantage. The productive capabilities of all producers are optimized, trade occurs, and everyone is better off (more goods, lower prices).

Now, when we talk about perfect substitutes rather than dissimilar goods we see that when a handful of producers have exactly the same opportunity cost of production (comparative advantage) the goods will be priced the same, available in the same markets (assuming transportation costs are similar, which they are), and not produced by anybody with a higher opportunity cost of production. If the perfect substitute is produced by somebody with a higher opportunity cost (not having comparative advantage) two things happen, which I will explain with an analogy. 2 people pick apples and make their own apple sauce. Person A can pick 10 apples in an hour and can make applesauce with 10 apples in 1 hour, or 5 cans of sauce. I'll use time as the constraint instead of opportunity cost, as it is easier to comprehend. Person B can also pick 10 apples in an hour but can only make 4 cans of applesauce in an hour. 1 of two things typically stop person B from continuing to make applesauce. 1: He cannot make as many cans per hour and therefor cannot earn as much as person A for the same amount of his time, or 2: He can make 5 cans of applesauce in 1 hour but must use 1 3/5 an apple per can, resulting in an inferior product which will command a lower price or not capture as many sales at the same price as person A's apples - either way, person B is not as successful. The logical progression of person B is to realize that he has a higher opportunity cost of making apple sauce and can better utilize him time picking apples, to give to person A, so that when once 9 cans of applesauce would be produced in an hour, now 10 cans are made by person A, who gets his apples from person B. Applesauce is cheaper, and person B maintains his livelihood as an apple picker.
This is like the case with auto manufacturers. Japanese cars are produced with a lower opportunity cost and therefore it is in our interest to delegate production to those firms. American cars, produced at a higher cost ought to demand a higher price in the market, but sell for similar prices. Why? American auto manufacturers are producing an inferior product in order to sell it at the same price could be one reason, but it's not the right one according to you. If I buy your assumption that quality is comparable (which I don't in reality) then somebody must be subsidizing the American manufacturers so that they can bring a more expensive good to market for a percentage of what it ought to retail for. Who? The American government. Bailouts ring a bell? You're championing a rhetoric which favors inefficient markets in a realm in which no proportionate benefit is captured and in which the costs associated with capital mobility are negligible. This might have made sense in the 1940's, but this is the age of hypercommunication and there is little to no chance that the transportation costs justify the market inefficiency. Further, knowing that the government will continue to subsidize American manufacturing, Japanese manufacturers are increasing the price of their cars beyond what they ought to retail for as long as they are marginally less expensive than American cars and promote some sort of substitution effect. It's working too! Stroll over to the port of Longbeach and see for yourself the extra dock space Nissan and Toyota purchased in 2009 to import cars beyond the domestic production capacity in order to make sure that the cars Americans want are available, as long as they are marginally cheaper. They are paying tariffs on those imports however minuscule they are in relation to domestic manufacturing, but it's not like Chrysler and GM pay tariffs.

So what's it gonna be, Rani? Overpriced cars across the board, inefficient markets, and government bailouts or the collapse of the American auto industry and a more consumer-oriented environment? There's no monetary justification for buying that PT Cruiser because it was by an Amurrican

[quote]American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind.[/quote]
My point exactly.
[/quote]

We can respectfully agree to disagree or you can start a new thread to take the discussion to added levels. Because at this point, this one has been way over jacked and in all fairness, I don't think it's what the OP is looking for.

'Rani

[noodle]

I wonder how much old-fashioned muscle car spirit made it into the new Charger.

[Click]

[quote name='noodle' timestamp='1284704193' post='482384']
I wonder how much old-fashioned muscle car spirit made it into the new Charger.
[/quote]
Not much.  The challenger on the other hand.  I'm sure the srt-8 version is legit tho.

[Arcane]

i vote altima....the reliability is there....also, you have to consider the Charger has had nearly 50,000 miles put on it in a YEAR. the Altima is a little over 10,000 miles/year.

[ryno]

My brother has a Daytona Charger, and while its a nice car, I think they oversteer really bad and have horrible blind spots. I cannot see out of the back of that car. Id go Nissan.

[Hassouni]

[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284681275' post='482363']
Dude, OP, sorry. I got way into it.
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1284666673' post='482348']
[quote name='Dr. B' timestamp='1284665898' post='482345']
...F.D.I....
[/quote]

I completely disagree. Looks good on paper, but the reality is that as goods produced by foreign owned corporations have flooded our markets, American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind. And profits should not be leaving our economy if we want it to remain strong. Don't kid yourself. Foreign owned corporations manufacture on US soil as a form of tariff avoidance. They pay minimum taxes thanks to our big business tax structure, yet avoid adding to the tax structure through tariff avoidance. And the workers themselves don't contribute to local economy, but instead buy additional foreign made goods. Nobody works at Toyota USA and then goes shopping for an American made television. The money just keeps flowing overseas.

'Rani
[/quote]

Goods produced abroad have flooded our market because the comparative advantage of production abroad of perfect substitutes is greater. In a typical trade paradigm two dissimilar goods are exchanged; each "brought to the table" by the producer who has the lowest opportunity cost of production. Availability of total goods becomes an aggregate measure of the productivity of all producers, operating under their own comparative advantage. The productive capabilities of all producers are optimized, trade occurs, and everyone is better off (more goods, lower prices).

Now, when we talk about perfect substitutes rather than dissimilar goods we see that when a handful of producers have exactly the same opportunity cost of production (comparative advantage) the goods will be priced the same, available in the same markets (assuming transportation costs are similar, which they are), and not produced by anybody with a higher opportunity cost of production. If the perfect substitute is produced by somebody with a higher opportunity cost (not having comparative advantage) two things happen, which I will explain with an analogy. 2 people pick apples and make their own apple sauce. Person A can pick 10 apples in an hour and can make applesauce with 10 apples in 1 hour, or 5 cans of sauce. I'll use time as the constraint instead of opportunity cost, as it is easier to comprehend. Person B can also pick 10 apples in an hour but can only make 4 cans of applesauce in an hour. 1 of two things typically stop person B from continuing to make applesauce. 1: He cannot make as many cans per hour and therefor cannot earn as much as person A for the same amount of his time, or 2: He can make 5 cans of applesauce in 1 hour but must use 1 3/5 an apple per can, resulting in an inferior product which will command a lower price or not capture as many sales at the same price as person A's apples - either way, person B is not as successful. The logical progression of person B is to realize that he has a higher opportunity cost of making apple sauce and can better utilize him time picking apples, to give to person A, so that when once 9 cans of applesauce would be produced in an hour, now 10 cans are made by person A, who gets his apples from person B. Applesauce is cheaper, and person B maintains his livelihood as an apple picker.
This is like the case with auto manufacturers. Japanese cars are produced with a lower opportunity cost and therefore it is in our interest to delegate production to those firms. American cars, produced at a higher cost ought to demand a higher price in the market, but sell for similar prices. Why? American auto manufacturers are producing an inferior product in order to sell it at the same price could be one reason, but it's not the right one according to you. If I buy your assumption that quality is comparable (which I don't in reality) then somebody must be subsidizing the American manufacturers so that they can bring a more expensive good to market for a percentage of what it ought to retail for. Who? The American government. Bailouts ring a bell? You're championing a rhetoric which favors inefficient markets in a realm in which no proportionate benefit is captured and in which the costs associated with capital mobility are negligible. This might have made sense in the 1940's, but this is the age of hypercommunication and there is little to no chance that the transportation costs justify the market inefficiency. Further, knowing that the government will continue to subsidize American manufacturing, Japanese manufacturers are increasing the price of their cars beyond what they ought to retail for as long as they are marginally less expensive than American cars and promote some sort of substitution effect. It's working too! Stroll over to the port of Longbeach and see for yourself the extra dock space Nissan and Toyota purchased in 2009 to import cars beyond the domestic production capacity in order to make sure that the cars Americans want are available, as long as they are marginally cheaper. They are paying tariffs on those imports however minuscule they are in relation to domestic manufacturing, but it's not like Chrysler and GM pay tariffs.

So what's it gonna be, Rani? Overpriced cars across the board, inefficient markets, and government bailouts or the collapse of the American auto industry and a more consumer-oriented environment? There's no monetary justification for buying that PT Cruiser because it was by an Amurrican

[quote]American innovation and manufacturing has fallen dramatically behind.[/quote]
My point exactly.
[/quote]


Two thumbs up, econ brother!

And yes, for all the reasons mentioned - Altima

[liquidglass]

Well guys I got a lot of votes for the Altima and good reasons to back it up. But I ultimately decided on the 2009 Charger!!!

Besides the off-topic, un-necessary political debate. I really appreciate the opinions everyone gave.

Here are my reasons for choosing the charger in case you were wondering
- I did some research, the 2006 altima vs. the 2009 charger on average over the first year the altima had MORE complaints and repairs that needed to be done than the charger (of course I tried not to look at the numbers for years after that, it wouldn't be fair)

- in 2009 Dodge stepped up their game in the charger and took care of a majority of the "lemon" issues, and since it's past 40k miles it's been broken in and no factory problems have occurred which means less chance of future problems. (I wouldn't go with an earlier model based on the problems reported)

- Surprisingly enough as far as MPG goes the in real world tests over a sampled average the charger is only 3 miles less per gallon than the altima (even though it has a much bigger engine and weight)

- After speaking to altima owners and charger owners, they seemed to need the same type of maintenance, but nissans require more expensive maintenance at shops than chargers as they are foreign. Plus more local places can handle the charger at lower cost.

- I test drove both for two days a piece. Altima first then the Charger. Altima does have a lot of "get up and go" and can just glide down the highway. But the charger ride is smoother than anything I've ever ridden in and you can feel the engine as you drive.
along with a tighter turn radius and "add ons" such as power seats, fog lights, key fob start, and just better equipment after me and my mechanic looked over the engine.

- Plus the Charger is not only something to get from A to B but it's fun to drive and I'll enjoy getting there. The altima felt like my old nissan: bland, common, and just a whole world of un-enjoyment. (personal preference applies of course)

- The interior quality of the charger is about 200% above the altima as the altima uses a lot of cheap then fabric to cover certain items, which would tear and wear terribly.


*bonus* I already have lanes of people moving out of my way as I cruise down the street, not because of speeding.....but because they think I'm a cop lol.


Pics soon!!!

[Chreees]

Good choice on the Charger, even though I voted Altima. Based on your research, I would've probably gone Charger as well. Congrats and hope you enjoy it! Welcome to car payments again, lol.