My friend is looking to buy one. What is wrong with this car? What else is comparable but better? Keep it under 25K.

 

Better check out the current Autoweek. (11/26/01) It's the only car, truck, or SUV they've ever rolled in their 490 foot slalom. It rolled over twice.

That said, it's kind of grown on me but I would be afraid to have one the way I drive.

How bout the WRX wagon?

 

If it's for a guy I would say no, don't buy it. I think it's too gurly looking. Unless thats what he's into.

 

I'm biased. Nissan Xterra. Not a ton of horsepower but you can get the factory-supercharged model in a 2002 model I believe.
Nissan trucks have been very good to me!
My first (1986.5) SE-V6 4x4 KingCab is still roaming the streets in the hands of the guy who bought it from me at 180,000 miles, he now has 268,000 on the darn thing, and yes up here in the land of the salt, there is almost no body left but the 4x4 system still works like a charm. My current Nissan XE-V6 4x4 KingCab is just a teenager at 91,000 miles.
I saw the AutoWeek article and I was extremely surprised by the double roll-over.

 

dont like it. I think its quite fugly, which is one reason I like their marketing slogans:

There is only one.

And thank gawd there is only one.

 

I am biased, but I say run away. Beyond the Autoweek article (which is very bothersome to me) I have a ton of reasons.

If you aren't really going to do some heavyduty off roading, it's not worth it. Granted, the Liberty is much more off road worthy than a CRV, RAV4, or most anything in the small to mid ute category, but it's price is the ride, handling, and gas mileage on road. The Liberty is leaps and bounds ahead of the Cherokee it replaces, but still nowhere near as good as even the Xterra.

A couple of the write ups I've read have seen mileage in the 13-15 mpg range. If you're going to accept mileage that crappy, get a full size SUV.

Also, the design is poor from a space utilization stand point. The back seat is tiny. The cargo space is small. Compare it to a last generation CRV (let alone a current one) and see what I mean.

Again, I'm biased but I say take a look at the CRV. We love our 2001. We use it as a station wagon with some ground clearance more than a truck and don't ever put it into anything more scary than snow in the local mountains or the occassional CA rain storm. It performs magnificently.

I've driven the new and dramaticaly improved 2002 and I am super impressed and thinking about trading in my '01 for an '02.

Honda reliability, practical design, comfort, great mileage and good looks.

 

Collision tests indicated VERY expensive repairs would result.

 

When my girlfriend bought a Jeep Grand Cherokee I took a long look at the Liberty. Problem I see is the price is too close to a base model Grand C. Why not spend an extra few thou and get the Grand? Am I missing something about the Liberty other than a little better off-road performance?

 

There was a story on the news a few days ago about this. They did some 5mph bumper crashes into poles and the Liberty was either the worst or the second to the worst score. It would cost a lot of money to fix the damage caused by a very minor accident.

 

Would you buy anything made by AMC, oops I mean Chrysler.

Actually I agree with Da Hapa, we have a "97 CRV and I have to say I am very
impressed with it. We get about 24 mpg. The thing can handle pretty deep snow
and rides like a car. It has a very small turning radius and is very east to drive.
Just don't take it off-road to much because it is really just a big 4wd Civic. The only
thing my CRV needs is a bit more HP for when we have it loaded down
with five peeps. The new ones are more pepy so I hear.


If I had to I would buy one again.