Which one..?
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
they both appear to be good deals the main differences i see are the first has some sort of extended warranty which is a plus and it only rear wheel drive
while the second is all wheel drive and you being in Chicago this is a plus for the winter and it is a year newer just my :m2:
while the second is all wheel drive and you being in Chicago this is a plus for the winter and it is a year newer just my :m2:
Really?
The first one has a warranty. With the way trailblazers are sometimes I would think it wouldn't even be a choice between a warranty and one without one. AWD is good to have i know but there are so many things that can happen. There are problems with the tranny you always hear SS guys complain about and without a warranty that could become an expensive fix. :m2:
The first one has a warranty. With the way trailblazers are sometimes I would think it wouldn't even be a choice between a warranty and one without one. AWD is good to have i know but there are so many things that can happen. There are problems with the tranny you always hear SS guys complain about and without a warranty that could become an expensive fix. :m2:
In the newer one, look at the pics, see how the rims are rusted? Should I be worried about that, or can that come off?
Does having rear wheel or awd effect mpg by any chance?
lol... yeah, it would come out, but always nice to have!I would thing that the second one would be a better choice also basec on the AWD in that you are in Chicago; plus it has Nav; of course with your awesome system you probably would not leave that in anyway:bonk:
Well, i'm not too worried about warranty, my dad has a mechanic shop. So all my work gets done by him.
The 2006 also has had 3 owners, all of them had been leased.. Don't they beat the crap out of the cars?
Right now i'm leaning towards the 2007, but I don't like the fact that the rims are rusted.
And just to recap, awd vs rwd, does it effect mpg?
the rust on the rims is likely just surface rust and brake dust i would not be worried about it. and for MPG, RWD tend to have a slight advantage over AWD but only a slight difference like 1 mile more per gallon if that. i would go with choice 2(2007) myself.
plus you could use the surface rust to try to get them to drop a couple hundred off the price or convince them clean it off before you will buy it
Alright, I guess 1 mile is fine since this will be my DD and it will come in handy in the winter!
I'm going to low ball them a bit, to see how much they'll drop.
Going to trade-in my car, and have my dad pay the rest.. (hopefully)
Graduation present maybe? :woot:
I'm pretty sure i'm going to go with the 2007. Just spoke to someone over the phone, and the 2007 has ONE owner, compared to 3 for the 2006, so probably not beat on as much.
Do you know how much these cars get in the city? My 2002 is junk in the city, probably around 13-14..
Son of a ****ing bitches man..
I called the guy twice before I head out to go check out this 2007 SS, I get there.. Mother ****er says he sold it earlier.. Then he has the nerve to ask me if I'm interested in another car.. Notice this was a ****ing Honda dealer..
I called the guy twice before I head out to go check out this 2007 SS, I get there.. Mother ****er says he sold it earlier.. Then he has the nerve to ask me if I'm interested in another car.. Notice this was a ****ing Honda dealer..
that sucks he sold it
What year? Offer 15,000 and go from there
:iagree::iagree:
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Join the discussion
