2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

[tacotim]

I'm looking at getting a gx and it looks like in my price range it's gonna be a 2000 or a 2001. Were there any great leaps between those two models? Right now there's a 2000 with about 20k miles on it or a 2001 with about 82k miles on it. What do you guys think?

Gracias, tim

[moore101]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

The 2001 gets a little better mileage and range. It has a CVT transmission that is known to have problems and has a extended warranty because of that.

The 2000 has a standard 4 speed automatic transmission. I had a 99 and it was a good car.
If the price was the same between the two models I would take the 2000 with the much lower miles.

[Curtis]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

Ditto, I'll second that one.

[tacotim]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

Thanks for the quick replies. The prices were the same, I spoke with the owner of the the 2000, and it sounds like that will be the one for me. I'm off to the bank today to see what I can work out.

-tim

[CNGfamily]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

I'd go with the 2000 as well. My wife has a 2000 that we've owned since new. It now has over 104K miles and has only required routine maintenance. I wanted to upgrade her to the new body style, but I just can't justify the cost, especially in today's market with higher than MSRP offerings.

[John Mitton]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

I agree with the others... the 2001 GX can be a nightmare when it comes to the CVT transmission going bad.

[Green GX]

Re: 2000 lo miles or 2001 higher miles

I agree with the others... the 2001 GX can be a nightmare when it comes to the CVT transmission going bad.

I'd agree with John; I'd go with the '00. You'd probably have less Oh, Oh's with the '00 than the '01 with the CVT.

Bill