|
I've been thinking about this post for the past few days and if I had a choice, I would probably go with the non-turbo, though overall I am very happy with my turbo.
My '93 945T was cheap ($1,800 from my brother-in-law, with 130,000 miles when I bought it two months ago, though it had been totalled due to a bad passenger side impact 9 years and 100,000 miles before, it has no problems, it was rebuilt very well). I just got back from a 400 mile round trip, mainly interstate @ 70 to 75 mph, I only got 24.2 mpg on 93 octane fuel. The tires were inflated correctely and I've recently changed the oil with Mobil 1. For the same trip I would have gotten ~ 33 mpg on 87 octane fuel in my '99 Honda Accord (5-speed manual).
It also depends on where you live. If you live in a flat region like I do (central Illinois) and will mainly be using it for highway traffic, then you will like the mileage on the non-Turbo. If you are in a hilly area or need to make some fast starts due to your traffic conditions, or if you don't mind 20 mpg to 24 mpg, then go with the Turbo.
So... take into account where you live (flat or hilly), your driving habits and the conditions where you will be driving (start / stop, mainly highway, etc), but the overriding factor would be the condition of the used car. I'd take a good non-turbo over a beat-up turbo, and vice versa.
|
