Age Vs Mileage, where is the sweet spot?

Prepare for a ramble, but hey, I'm out of work so I can ramble.  The upside of having lost my job is I had to return my company cars.  Why is that an upside? because I get to go car shopping.  Over the next twelve months I will most likely buying three new (to us) cars.  Each purchase will to an extent influence the later one(s).  First I'm looking for a cheap first car for the youngest, next something for my wife.  If she get's something that can tow, then in a year I'll get a sports car.  If she gets a smaller car, I'll get an SUV.  Now, the specifics of what each purchase will/wont be will be covered in other threads, but people have seen conversations about Jeeps, Pepper wagons, Prii (Priuses, WTF is the plural of Prius anyway) etc.  Forget the specifics for now.  Let's talk age Vs mileage.

Now I realize for many here, hearing three car purchases in one year will send you into a cold sweat of withdrawal as some of you turn your whole fleet over in half that time, but other than the fact we got a new company car every year, when it comes to personal cars we tend to be the buy and keep.  My Volvo was the last new purchase 11 years and 120K miles ago.  The Boxster was a killer deal I found three years ago and until this job situation it never occurred to me I might be swapping it any time in the foreseable future, like 5-10 years.  So, no matter what we buy I'm expecting a minimum of five years use, and that's an absolute minimum, I'd say 10 years is the low side of the family average.

I have always said that I'll take a high mileage newer car over a low mileage older car.  But is that really true, and where is the sweet spot?  I can, and obviously do all my own work, frequently with much assistance from here, especially from AAZCD of late!  But, I'll have a fleet of at least three cars and three houses to maintain along with (hopefully soon) full time employment and being a dad and grand father as well as down time.   So I don't want to take on frequent major work.  

For my wife's car I'm thinking newish.  One to five years old, less than 50K miles.  This will be a Jeep of some kind, Subaru, large MINI variant etc.  Possibly CPO.  Would you rather have a 2 year old 60K version or a 5 year old 20K version.  Exaggerations but both exist.

For me I'm toying with Pepper wagons, Land Rovers, Range Rovers, or if I can get a sports car another Boxster, Cayman, 370Z or XK8/XKR.  Those would be older cars.  So would you go for a 5 year 100K car or a 10 year 50K car?

What is the collectives views?

Up by you there are advantages to finding lower mile older cars so long as you think they've been kept out of the salt. I'm much less worried about rubber and seals aging out up north. Down here in Texas the heat takes a toll on rubber and plastic with the advantage of metal things looking like new 20 years into life. 

For an SUV just bite the bullet and get the best land cruiser/lexus gx/lx  you can buy in your price range. Any 100 series should be 6500lbs towing and any 200 should be 8500lbs. My 99 Land cruiser has 428k miles on it. The only things wrong with it are the horn doesn't work and the passenger rear window switch needs to be replaced. 

My quick answer is older with less mileage. However, I look at mileage less and less these days and just look at condition and maintenance. Vehicle specific, obviously, but I'll take a 300k mile Toyota with recent timing belt and full records over a newer one with 150k miles and no records. I know that a 300k mile vehicle has likely been mechanically maintained. I don't know that with 150k; I think you could probably get to 150k with just 3 oil changes in its life these days. 

I also generally try to figure out what I want, then what generation, then what options (including engine). That typically will have me down to a 3-6 year range. At that point, all else being equal, I'll go older with less mileage just because age seems to have more impact on price than mileage these days. 

Also all the electronics still work in my land cruiser. Sunroof, heated seats, power seats, etc.  The only thing it has needed has been a starter at 199k miles and valve cover gaskets at 420k. Not counting timing belts at the factory intervals and coil packs.

Give me the newer, higher mileage car. Less time to be exposed to the elements, newer tech, newer safety, more options available. And the stuff that wears out is generally stuff that can be replaced without too much trouble, like brakes and wheel bearings and clutches. Besides, newer vehicles just last a lot longer than they used to. 100k is nothing anymore. IMO, the older car with fewer miles is just as likely to give you problems, they will just be different problems, so you might as well have the new hotness.

Salt/rust has a large bearing on the answers here.  A 200k mile '99 Accord from Nashville means something completely different than a 200k mile '99 Accord from Detroit.  

I tend to buy "value."  And. what I try to buy is "how can I loose the least amount of money on this vehicles ownership?"  One example would be to buy this exceptional bad-weather car from North Carolina that doesn't see bad weather.  You could drive this Subaru for 3yr and 40k miles and still sell it for what you paid for it in Michigan.

For your wife, I am still impressed with the Nissan Armada purchase.  This gives you the same $50k vehicle of all  the "cool kids" for $27k.  Your local dealers will have them listed higher but this thread should give you an idea of where to negotiate from.  

Prius #3 is still available.  I need to update the tread a little but it is a very good running car.  I checked the brakes since and they are very good, as are the tires.  

mazdeuce - Seth said:

Up by you there are advantages to finding lower mile older cars so long as you think they've been kept out of the salt. I'm much less worried about rubber and seals aging out up north. Down here in Texas the heat takes a toll on rubber and plastic with the advantage of metal things looking like new 20 years into life. 

And that is an excellent point.  No doubt it has a bearing on the decision to an extent, but not as much as it used to do.  While some companies that I like, Mazda, I'm looking at you here, haven't figured out rust prevention yet, many have.  My 10 Michigan winter Volvo still looks new underneath, so rust isn't what it once was.  It still is an issue though.  At what point do Southern cars really start showing the age of rubber, clearcoat, interior plastics and leather from UV?

Rust is the killer. 

Would you like my B16-engined CRX?

MrChaos said:

For an SUV just bite the bullet and get the best land cruiser/lexus gx/lx  you can buy in your price range. Any 100 series should be 6500lbs towing and any 200 should be 8500lbs. My 99 Land cruiser has 428k miles on it. The only things wrong with it are the horn doesn't work and the passenger rear window switch needs to be replaced. 

Got, and I understand, but call me a pimpy Euro fag, Latte sipping Champaign drinking liberal elitist if you like, but the car decision for all except the daughter has to be something both myself and my wife WANT to be in.  That means it must have that je ne se qua, and Lexus at the least just doesn't have it.  I've been a long time anti Toyota person because, quite frankly, the one and only Toyota we've owned, bought new at that, was simply one of the most poorly built, poorly made, unreliable, uninspiring POS I've ever had the misfortune to own.  Now, for the kid I'm looking at a Prius because they are berkeleying cockroaches.  They will still be running with no maintenance long after the apocalypse has wiped out the human race.  Toyota have been getting their MoJo back of late though and they are making some really good stuff again.  I like the new Corolla, even though it doesn't meet any of the needs for any of the cars.  I've always liked the 4Runner and it will at least get a look over.  Lexus though, I still view as vehicles for people who have given up on life.  Nothing in their line up says anything except yawwwnnnnnnnn to me.  Practicality be damned, I want to get the shop without dying of terminal boredem before the end of my street.

mtn said:

I also generally try to figure out what I want, then what generation, then what options (including engine). That typically will have me down to a 3-6 year range. At that point, all else being equal, I'll go older with less mileage just because age seems to have more impact on price than mileage these days. 

Great point, but here is where that breaks down.  I love the Boxster/Cayman.  Right since day one.  Back in 96 I was one of the few who looked at the original 986 and siad 'That's it, they've nailed it' on the design.  I honestly like all versions.  But then lets look at the reality of those cars.  We all know about the IMS bearing issue.  Now, having read up everything I can everywhere over the last 10 years on the subject is, and this is my honest opinion, it's a real issue that has been blown out of all proportion, even by Internet rumor standards.  I put part of the blame, or is it credit? for that at the feet of JAck Raby, Flat Six innovations, LN engineering etc.  While they undoubtedly did an outstanding job of investigating the issue and coming up with a decent fix, they spent years hammering every single Porsche forum and message board with propaganda to make people think every single M96/97 engine is a ticking time bomb.  I don't believe it.  First I've seen nothing to suggest the real failure rate is more than 5% after infant mortality and maybe 1-2% for the M97 engines with 'not' serviceable IMS bearing.  YEs, it's a real issue, but it way better odds than the Russian roulette they like you to believe.

The 'IMS' issue, along with plentiful supply means the early cars are way undervalued for what they are.  That means even late M96 986 cars are a bargain.

But, there is no doubt the 987 cars, especially in Cayman S trim really are stunning cars, better cars certainly, but they have the more reliable, but non serviceable bearing, so instead of being an easy PM move when doing the clutch, you either need to throw the dice on that 2% or pay (because I'm not going this far into a Porsche engine) to have the case split for replacement.  So, are those cars worth the extra over the 986?

Easy you say, get a 987.2 car with the MA1 series engines, especially as they have moved from Tiptronic to PDK which is certainly the trans I'd want in one of those cars.  Now the camshaft is driven directly off the crank with no IMS bearing.  Perfect right, go for that.  Except now they've added Direct Injection to the flat six and there seems to be some issues with that.  On top of that, the 987.2 cars seem to have a hefty price bump over the 987.1 cars.  So much so that you really need to start looking at a higher price point.....

....Which means you're suddenly very close to 981 territory and a whole lot better, larger, lighter car for only >< much more.

See what I mean?  I like the cars.  They all have their high and low points and all are at different points on the depreciation curve as well as features and performance along with different potential issues.  If I were to be looking for a car like this right now I'd be in analysis paralysis over a mint low mileage 987.1 manual trans Cayman S and a high mileage PDK non S 981 Boxster non S.

Hell, did any of that make sense?

Hmm. On the truck -  can you wait until you're working again to get one? You might be working for another OEM and get a megadiscount.

Tom_Spangler said:

Give me the newer, higher mileage car. Less time to be exposed to the elements, newer tech, newer safety, more options available. And the stuff that wears out is generally stuff that can be replaced without too much trouble, like brakes and wheel bearings and clutches. Besides, newer vehicles just last a lot longer than they used to. 100k is nothing anymore. IMO, the older car with fewer miles is just as likely to give you problems, they will just be different problems, so you might as well have the new hotness.

Did I ask you to walk in here talking sense again?  I got your well reasoned, fact supported view point the other day.  I'm looking to confuse myself more with the borg here!

chaparral said:

Hmm. On the truck -  can you wait until you're working again to get one? You might be working for another OEM and get a megadiscount.

Trust me, this has occurred.  But right now Ford just downsized me.  GM is laying people off hand over fist, in fact I have friends from there in the same situation as me, and FCA have halted all non essential outside hiring.  There is still VAG, Nissan, Toyota with a large footprint around here plus many other smaller, start up and Chinese OEMs in the area.

One purchase, the final one, will 100% be after I get a job and may well be influenced by that.  But right now I don't know if that will be in the 'tow' or the 'sports car' category.  That's all down to SWMBO.  We were at the Jeep dealer on Friday.  No matter what though I'm leaning used, min three years old off lease.  LEt someone else eat the first 30+%

The Tahoes are crazy nice places to be.  Wait for the Y1 to launch shortly which should depreciate the current generation a bit more.  Then find one somewhere south and undercoat it.  I'm likely going to solve a similar problem with a 2014-2017 Chevy/GMC 4 door 4x4 truck.  They can be bought ~22k today which i expect should drop a bit as the new ones launch.  I'd probably upgrade it to leather after the fact and have it for ~10 years.  Theoretically this gets mid a healthy depreciation to newness balance and solves my current issues.

I'd really like to trust an X5 as they check a lot of boxes on usability and sex appeal, especially the M package version.  V8 euro cars scare me as  general rule though.

In reply to John Welsh :

Cheers John, I'll email you for updates soon.

In reply to 84FSP :

I was just driving my wife's cousins Tahoe this weekend and drove her old 07 one on dozens of occasions.  While a really nice truck in some respects it's just too damn big for us.  Other than the physical size, the load floor etc. is way way too high off the ground.  Also, it doesn't hit that je ne sais qua quality of something I want.  Note, im not just interested in high end brands.  Jeep, Subaru, Mini are all in consideration.  

having been around the industry for 26 years now, i am no longer afraid of high mileage.   i know what durability test schedules look like, and they are friggin' brutal.

I'm sorry to hear that you were let go. I've been there, it sucks.

I've tended towards mileage over age, but both matter. With age, body rust is only one part of the equation, cheap component rust, plastic, rubber fatigue is another. That said most stuff is built to a pretty high standard these days.

99% of used cars are sold without any kind of maintenance records. It's a bit of a hail mary that generally works out for most people. The lower the use, the less it matters if there's little documentation.

To play devils advocate, I don't know that your criticisms of Lexus/Toyota is fair compared to a run of the mill Ford world you came from. Do most Ford's have a lot of character? :) I get that you had a bad personal experience, but the imperfect available aggregate data suggests they're a lot more reliable too. Some time ago, in a past life I worked at a Ford dealership for a bit and I remember when an ES showed up on the lot. I thought, why would anyone pay that price for that car? It had ~70-80k miles. Then I drove it and realized why it was worth the money. It drove like a new car and was by far the best condition used car on the lot. I didn't have any passion for the ES, but there's something to be said for a vehicle where everything from trim, to buttons, to suspension is durable and remains in a near-new state.

Adrian_Thompson said:

MrChaos said:

For an SUV just bite the bullet and get the best land cruiser/lexus gx/lx  you can buy in your price range. Any 100 series should be 6500lbs towing and any 200 should be 8500lbs. My 99 Land cruiser has 428k miles on it. The only things wrong with it are the horn doesn't work and the passenger rear window switch needs to be replaced. 

... I've been a long time anti Toyota person because, quite frankly, the one and only Toyota we've owned, bought new at that, was simply one of the most poorly built, poorly made, unreliable, uninspiring POS I've ever had the misfortune to own.  Now, for the kid I'm looking at a Prius because they are berkeleying cockroaches.  They will still be running with no maintenance long after the apocalypse has wiped out the human race.  Toyota have been getting their MoJo back of late though and they are making some really good stuff again.  I like the new Corolla, even though it doesn't meet any of the needs for any of the cars.  I've always liked the 4Runner and it will at least get a look over. ...

Although I've been pushing the Peppers, I agree that a Land Cruiser is worth a look. My parents had Toyotas when I learned to drive (Dad's Celica, Mom's Corona Wagon). I loved Toyotas, then got a used Tercel. After that experience we parted ways. I just went over my son's '05 Corolla changing a wheel bearing and prepping it for sale. At 275k miles it has had a rough life with spotty maintenance, but I was really impressed with the overall mechanical condition and long term reliability. Electronics and interior have held up great too.

Snrub said:

I don't know that your criticisms of Lexus/Toyota is fair compared to a run of the mill Ford world you came from. 

YOu are 100% right, but please note there are no Ford products on my list eith.  Ford make great products, I hold no ill will towards them or the people that work there.  But there are (almost) no products in production today that hit my want buttons.  The ones that do are:

Mustang, always have been great cars and are only getting better.  But, well let's be honest, they just let me go so I'm not buying one.  But also, the Mustang as great as it is, isn't what I want.  Assuming I end up with the sports car not the SUV, I either want a sports car (Boxster, Cayman or 370Z) or a real GT such as an XK8, I've BTDT with three Mustangs over the years and pony cars aren't hitting my want button these days.

Lincoln Continental.  Really really good car.  Stunning to look at, wonderful interior etc.  But at the end of the day, I just can't be a 50 year old white guy driving a Lincoln Continental, I can't live that stereotype.

Navigator.  Let's face it, with the new Navigator Lincoln went from 'Oh, Lincoln make a full size SUV to oh, Lincoln make THE full size SUV'  And even then it's way way too big for what we want.  Additionally even though depreciation is on my side, there is still a long long way to fall from $100K for a Black Label to what I would ever want to spend.

So right now Ford/Lincoln are falling into the same trap as Toyota/Lexus, sure they make great products, but they just don't do it for me.  As everyone knows, I was waiting for the new Bronco.  Trust me, it's going to be really really good and just what I want, but at the end of the day, being unemployed for a while means I'm not planning on spending that much money on a single vehicle for a long long time to come.  Oh yes, they let me go too so I'm disinclined to give them any more of my money TBH.

In reply to AAZCD :

J200 LAnd Cruisers are big big vehicles.  Larger than PEpper Wagons.  N280 4Runners are more my size.  I like the styling, although my wife doesn't.  And if it's for me there is such a strong, possibly irrational, desire for a pepper wagon or a Landy.

People who tend to keep cars for 1-3 years can live with an OK appliance knowing something different is only a short time away.  I buy cars planning on a minimum of 5 years, and more likely 10 years of ownership.  I will not settle for the sensible decision.  I insist on a great decision combined with something that will still have me turning round to admire it in the parking lot 10 years later.  The Volvo has done that, in spades, the Boxster would have, may have, but may get caught up in the change of situation.  Don't forget we're down two company cars as a family over a week ago.

mazdeuce - Seth said:

Up by you there are advantages to finding lower mile older cars so long as you think they've been kept out of the salt. I'm much less worried about rubber and seals aging out up north. Down here in Texas the heat takes a toll on rubber and plastic with the advantage of metal things looking like new 20 years into life. 

I am very happy with the then-185k, 12 year old car I bought from his neck of the woods.  Zero rust anywhere, the ball joint and stabilizer link nuts zipped right off without having to heat them or even use a Torx in the studs!

You're buying the PO more than a used car.  That said I have had very good luck with cars in the 150kmi range, of any age.

Adrian_Thompson said:

In reply to AAZCD :

J200 LAnd Cruisers are big big vehicles.  Larger than PEpper Wagons.  N280 4Runners are more my size.  I like the styling, although my wife doesn't.  And if it's for me there is such a strong, possibly irrational, desire for a pepper wagon or a Landy.

All those cars mentioned are all about the same size, but they are sculpted differently and that can be deceptive to the eye.

LC is the tallest and marginally longest, Porsche is the widest with the longest wheelbase, and the 4 Runner is a hair smaller than all of them.  Having spent decent time in both the Toyota offerings, the LC200 feels the same on the road as the 4Runner, just rides a lot nicer.  

LC200 is 74 High x 77 Wide x 194.9 Lg with a 112 wheelbase

2019 Cayenne is 67 High x 78 Wide x 194 Lg with a 114 wheelbase.

2019 4 Runner is 72 High x 76 Wide x 190-191 Lg with a 109" Wheelbase.