If you had to drive a Ford Mustang, or a Nissan Maxima, which would you pick?

[Lucky]

since i'd like a car that's reliable, I'd go with the maxima.

 

[Muadib]

If you are single and free, get the Mustang. If not, Maxima all the way.

 

[BigJohnKC]

If I got to pretend for a minute that I was only 5'10" and could fit in a Mustang, I'd take it over a Max. But at 6'7", the Maxima is the one of the two that I can actually get behind the wheel.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Lucky
since i'd like a car that's reliable, I'd go with the maxima.

mustang is reliable... v8 and rear drive has been done so much that everyone knows how it works...

 

[alexruiz]

As someone who works in the auto industry and have worked for BOTH systems, I think I can be realiable..... f0rd makes big time crap, the Japanese are even fanatical about the quality of final product......

In you don't mind having a "bionic" car (yes, after all the recalls and repairs you will basically have a new car every year ) get the mustang.....

Even drunk I would pick the maxima......

 

[Chaotic42]

Mustang. Blue. No question.

 

[psteng19]

Since they both cost basically the same, what difference does it make? I really don't understand this answer....

Let me rephrase this:
"Why the frick are all you people choosing the Maxima??!?!?!!"

 

[MomAndSkoorbaby]

MAX-EEEEE-MA!

 

[poopaskoopa]

I'd go with a Mustang, of course. Though I'd prefer a Z28 over it....

 

[Shantanu]

Mustang.

Ford cars are more reliable than Nissan junk as well.

 

[StageLeft]

Mustang.

Ford cars are more reliable than Nissan junk as well.

Based on that over the last 3 years ford and nissan averaged are neck and neck. Still, I wonder if there is a difference between "new car reliability", vs how well it actually works 5 years from now. If your new mustang is great for the first couple years and then falls apart that's not so great.

Really though there is more to reliability and the ford does still lose in resale value.

 

[Shantanu]

ford does still lose in resale value.

Resale values on Ford Tauruses are bad because the market is flooded with ones 3-4 year olds that are coming off service from rental companies and such. The resale value on Mustangs are significantly better, better than Nissan's comprable sports car of the time.

Nissan might have had better reliability than Ford back in the 1980's, but that does not interest me. Today, Nissan is clearly the dregs of the automotive industry in terms of quality, which their last place finish in the JD Power study clearly affirms.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Shantanu
Mustang. Ford cars are more reliable than Nissan junk as well.

How did I know you would show up?

CAn you not read? If you look at the top of the page on the link you provided, it says QUALITY. QUALITY and REALIABILITY are two different things.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Shantanu

ford does still lose in resale value.

Resale values on Ford Tauruses are bad because the market is flooded with ones 3-4 year olds that are coming off service from rental companies and such. The resale value on Mustangs are significantly better, better than Nissan's comprable sports car of the time. Nissan might have had better reliability than Ford back in the 1980's, but that does not interest me. Today, Nissan is clearly the dregs of the automotive industry in terms of quality, which their last place finish in the JD Power study clearly affirms.

Are you dense also? A 1997 BASE mustang retails for $8,555, a 1997 BASE maxima retails for $9,486

 

[StageLeft]

Resale values on Ford Tauruses are bad because the market is flooded with ones 3-4 year olds that are coming off service from rental companies and such. The resale value on Mustangs are significantly better, better than Nissan's comprable sports car of the time.

Perhaps that's the problem - we're comparing a "sports car" to a family sedan. The maxima will hold better resale though.

 

[Shantanu]

Are you dense also? A 1997 BASE mustang retails for $8,555, a 1997 BASE maxima retails for $9,486

A Mustang is a sports car. A Maxima is a family car. I said the Mustang sells better than the comprable Nissan sports car of the time, you dumb@ss. The 240SX retails for $5-$7K.

 

[bolido2000]

Maximas are nice but I would not fork 30K for one. There are people getting them for 23K after discount and rebates (ok they probably have less opt equipment but still). For 30K I'll buy an Acura TL or G35.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Shantanu

Are you dense also? A 1997 BASE mustang retails for $8,555, a 1997 BASE maxima retails for $9,486

A Mustang is a sports car. A Maxima is a family car. I said the Mustang sells better than the comprable Nissan sports car of the time, you dumb@ss. The 240SX retails for $5-$7K.

I'd like to see some original sticker prices. I'm guess that the 240SX was originally cheaper to begin with.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Shantanu

Are you dense also? A 1997 BASE mustang retails for $8,555, a 1997 BASE maxima retails for $9,486

A Mustang is a sports car. A Maxima is a family car. I said the Mustang sells better than the comprable Nissan sports car of the time, you dumb@ss. The 240SX retails for $5-$7K.

WEll then. It's funny that you chose 1997 as the year for you comparison. How about going to 1996: 1996 Nissan 300zx, base - $16,331 vs. 1996 Ford Base Mustang - $6,708. Wow - almost a 10k difference! Not even the 1996 Ford mustang cobra sells for as much as a BASE 300zx, nor does a 2001 BASE mustang.

So what were you saying about resale value?

 

[joe678]

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: Shantanu

Are you dense also? A 1997 BASE mustang retails for $8,555, a 1997 BASE maxima retails for $9,486

A Mustang is a sports car. A Maxima is a family car. I said the Mustang sells better than the comprable Nissan sports car of the time, you dumb@ss. The 240SX retails for $5-$7K.

WEll then. It's funny that you chose 1997 as the year for you comparison. How about going to 1996: <a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.edmunds.com/used/1996/nissan/300zx/index.html" target=blank>1996 Nissan 300zx, base - $16,331</A> vs. <a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.edmunds.com/used/1996/ford/mustang/index.html" target=blank>1996 Ford Base Mustang - $6,708</A>. Wow - almost a 10k difference! Not even the <a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.edmunds.com/used/1996/ford/mustang/2drcobracoupe/prices.html" target=blank>1996 Ford mustang cobra</A> sells for as much as a BASE 300zx, nor does a<a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.edmunds.com/used/2001/ford/mustang/index.html" target=blank> 2001 BASE mustang</A>.

So what were you saying about resale value?

0wned

 

[Shantanu]

The 300ZX might have cost more than the Ford Mustang at that time. Also, since the car is no longer in production, that might also be responsible for driving the price up ("Must... Have... Rice!")

Also, you have to remember that Nissan's quality and reliability weren't the worst in the auto industry back in 1996. In fact, as I recall they were about average. But today they are dead last. That is a sad and painful reality. I don't think resale values of current Nissans will hold up as well 5 years from now as 5 year old Nissans do today, unless Nissan's quality problems are self-fixing. LOL.

 

[Ryan]

I would like to give this thread another bump, since the poll is now reflecting 60%+ for the Maxima.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Shantanu
The 300ZX might have cost more than the Ford Mustang at that time. Also, since the car is no longer in production, that might also be responsible for driving the price up ("Must... Have... Rice!") Also, you have to remember that Nissan's quality and reliability weren't the worst in the auto industry back in 1996. In fact, as I recall they were about average. But today they are dead last. That is a sad and painful reality. I don't think resale values of current Nissans will hold up as well 5 years from now as 5 year old Nissans do today, unless Nissan's quality problems are self-fixing.

Hey - you're the one who wanted to compare comparable Nissan and Ford sportscars, prick. You just had to find more crap to pull out of you ass, didn't you?

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Shantanu
The 300ZX might have cost more than the Ford Mustang at that time. Also, since the car is no longer in production, that might also be responsible for driving the price up ("Must... Have... Rice!")

Also, you have to remember that Nissan's quality and reliability weren't the worst in the auto industry back in 1996. In fact, as I recall they were about average. But today they are dead last. That is a sad and painful reality. I don't think resale values of current Nissans will hold up as well 5 years from now as 5 year old Nissans do today, unless Nissan's quality problems are self-fixing. LOL.

Initial quality survey is a bogus thing. Things like CEL coming on from gas caps not being screwed on tight enought, and rattling interiors count twords the problems. I take that thing with a HUUUUUGE grain of salt.

What I look at is this - what company has roughly 9 recalls on their focus, around 5 on the Escape, around 4 or 5 on the Explorer, and about 10 on the Contour??? Quality is Job 1 MY ASS!

 

[Ryan]

Shantanu - that's it? I didn't think you'de give up that easily......