2000 Celica or 2003 Eclipse?

Question

Does the year really matter? Celica's are supposed to be better cars, but only the older ones are in my price range. I can get a newer Eclipse with a little less mileage, but I've heard some bad reviews.

What do ya think?

Answer 1

both of those cars suck to be honest.. especially the eclipse. i assume ur budget is around $10,000 right? look at this car

http://www.familycar.com/roadtests/Toyot...

that's a 2004 toyota solara coupe (2-door)... the kelly blue book value is around $11,000 dollars, and im sure u can find it for less. It is a great car, and looks way better than the celica or eclipse.

Answer 2

Its not that old of a car. I've seen toyotas that are 15 years old and still running strong.

Go with the Celica. Its more reliable, and styling is unattractive.

The mitsubishi is unreliable, overpriced, and has bad resale value.  

Answer 3

Go with the Celica. It will be more reliable in the end. As far as the 2000's that are 99's--that's only due to production times. Check the VIN on the drivers side door. All the numbers have a meaning. The first letter or number is where the car was manufactured (J is Japan. 1, 4 and 5 are US).

And NO, 99 is NOT old. It's only 9 years old.