What is more reliable - a 2004 Dodge Neon or a 2001 Honda Civic?

Question

What do you guys think is a better deal/more reliable if i spend between $8000-$8500:

an 04 neon with 35,000 miles
or
an 01 civic with 85,000 miles

they seem to be in the same ballpark price range. ideally i'm hoping for a car that will last me 100,000 miles (over what it already has)... maybe i'm dreaming?

Answer 1

Hondas have a great reputation, but I think that I would go with the newer car with less mileage. 35,000 kms is barely even broken in, and I think that you would have less trouble with it for a greater amount of time. Check online consumer reports on both of them and see what the common problems are.

Answer 2

Nowadays, cars are much more reliable. Modern cars should have no trouble hitting 150,000 miles or even 200k... provided you do basic maintenance. Oil changes, TIMING BELT.

Honda's reputation for quality is becasue in the 80's, Hondas were excellent and domestic brands were terrible. Those days are long gone, and the Chrysler is quite excellent as well. The Honda has more than twice the age and mileage of the first, and that's a big deal.

Here's another thing: The Honda is out of warranty. Never owe money on a car that's out of warranty, because if there's a mechanical breakdown, you're in a really bad position... owing money on a dead car.

It doesn't matter how often you use it... cars age through time as well as miles. And, constant freeway cruising is very gentle on cars. (city stop-and-go is very harsh on them.)

The previous owner's maintenance matters too - but poor maintenance will have accumulated a lot more hurt to an 85,000 mile car.

Here's the only thing. "Nobody got fired for buying IBM" is what they said in the old days, i.e. nobody doubts themselves if they bought the most reputable thing. If the Honda breaks down, you won't blame yourself for buying the wrong car.

So I think the Neon is the right choice, but you should get the Honda if you actually think it's better.

Answer 3

I own a 2001NEON and it has not had any problems until today. But that's considering the fact that my husband has been putting major mileage on the car to drive to and from work.
I suggest you have a mechanic check out both vehicles and determine how much wear and tear you will be adding to whats already been done to the car. If your going to be driving hard I suggest the civic (my mom had one for 10 years). If you choose the neon and want to drive forever without fail your dreaming. We take very good care of our car and the tranny went yesterday the car only has 87k miles on it so to think you can get 100k with no problems on any vehicle is ludicrous.LOL

Answer 4

The Honda is due for a service at 90000, and it is several hundred dollars. With the Neon having a 50000 mile advantage, it is tempting to choose the Neon. I still would not do it. There are several factors to look at here.

Resale - Neons depreciate quickly, and will be worthless with 135000 on them

Refinement - you will drive this car for a long time, and the Neon is cheaply put together, loud and uncomfortable.

Roadtests - Neons consistently at bottom of test results

Owner satisfaction - Neons low, Honda high

The Neon is in nearly every way an inferior car (and it is no longer made). Reliability is not bad, but you are giving away too much in other areas. If these two cars are your only choices, I would still do the Honda. That being said, I would look for an older one with less miles on it. I would also look at a Corolla or a Protege. The Neon ranks with Cavalier in terms of desirability, in other words I am not even remotely interested.

Let me throw a wild card in the mix too, why not a Lexus ES300, say a 1997 or so. Or even a 1995 LS400. The most reliable vehicles out there, and much nicer than any small car out there.

Answer 5

I agree with wolf mostly...either car should last another 100k without major problems...but maintenance is critical if you want a vehicle to last...he's also right about the timing belt...especially the civic as it's an "interference" engine which means if you don't change it and it breaks...you just ruined your heads and often the engine. Honda has a great reputation for reliability that was garnered years ago and IMHO they have slipped over the years while Chrysler has gotten much better. I suggest you test drive them both and see which fits and feels best.

Answer 6

Well it depends on what you use the car for and how far you drive a day, etc. If you drive long distances constanly, both cars can break down before 100,000 miles because it's being used often, but if you drive less often or even just less of a distance, both can prob give you that out of them. I hear civics are one of the most reliable cars out there, so my bet is with that car to last longer, even if it has 85,000 miles on it. Unless of course the driver has some damage on it already.

Answer 7

Definitely the civic, they usually last up and over 200K. Neons have so many problems, but the newer ones like the 04 are much better than the older ones. Civics usually have more options and a more powerful engine than neons. Even with the 50K difference, the civic should last longer.

Answer 8

the civic if it didn't have so many miles. it really depends on the previous owner and what kind of care they took of the car. bring it into an auto shop and have them check it out for you. i would go with the civic honda is a little more reliable.