dean1484 wrote: I actually did a big spread sheet a while back and figured the best by in to a car is at 6 years and millage between 60 & 80 k.
Its not easy to find car that old with that few miles on them. Not impossible, just not easy.
dean1484 wrote: I actually did a big spread sheet a while back and figured the best by in to a car is at 6 years and millage between 60 & 80 k.
Its not easy to find car that old with that few miles on them. Not impossible, just not easy.
spitfirebill wrote:dean1484 wrote: I actually did a big spread sheet a while back and figured the best by in to a car is at 6 years and millage between 60 & 80 k.Its not easy to find car that old with that few miles on them. Not impossible, just not easy.
Really? 12k miles per year is average. At 6 years old, that puts a car at 72k miles, right in the center of that range. That seems to be reflected in my recent searches.
There is obviously no best age/mileage to buy a car. Its a tradeoff - do you have the ability to work on it, what are the consequences of a failure, how many miles per year do you drive, etc. I buy further down the depreciate curve than that, but for the wifecar/family car 6-8 years and <100k seems to be a reasonable target for our next car.
In reply to ProDarwin:
By that rational, no one should by a new car.
Appleseed wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: By that rational, no one should by a new car.
And he's right. It never makes financial sense to buy a new car. I can understand buying a new car for emotional reasons, but there's no way to justify the numbers.
Also I'd like to thank all the new car buyers out there for taking a bath for those of us who don't have the luxury of new car ownership 
In reply to GameboyRMH:
It's very easy to justify on a Jeep Wrangler, especially the cheaper trim lines. A new one can be bought for $30k, driven for 3 years and sold for $28k. I bought a new 2012 Toyota FJ for $27K and sold it to Carmax 4 months ago with 74k miles for $26,800.
^True, but that's very much an outlier. Same with oddball cars like Morgans and Lotii that have very slow depreciation, and the high-end supercars that appreciate. Most cars new will shed a new sportbike's worth of value in 5~8 years.
GameboyRMH wrote:Appleseed wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: By that rational, no one should by a new car.And he's right. It never makes financial sense to buy a new car. I can understand buying a new car for emotional reasons, but there's no way to justify the numbers. Also I'd like to thank all the new car buyers out there for taking a bath for those of us who don't have the luxury of new car ownership
Agreed on all points. When I can find a 2 year old car with under $20k for damn near half price and it still has 3 years and 40k miles of warranty left, why would I even consider purchasing new?
GameboyRMH wrote: ^True, but that's very much an outlier. Same with oddball cars like Morgans and Lotii that have very slow depreciation, and the high-end supercars that appreciate. Most cars new will shed a new sportbike's worth of value in 5~8 years.
My Forte had a new sticker of $22,400. Bought it 2 years old for $12,000 (before trade in) and 18k miles. That's damn near 47% in 2 years. And that, my friends, is why I buy Korean cars! Sadly they aren't depreciating as quickly as they once did.
Or, look at the majority of the clientele that are attracted to an FR-S. Then think of how many clean, stock ones there will be in 10 years. What's a clean un-fubar EVO VIII going for today? When's the last time you've seen one?
If Tom Spangler chimes in he has a good example of new being better than used. BAck in 08 I think he was shopping for a 2 year old Ford Freestyle, but found he could buy a new Taurus X for the same price, but with better interest rate so came out ahead for a new car with the 3.5L Vs 3.0L engine plus the new six speed auto rather than the old CVT.
I've bought quite a few new cars and it is usually because the used derivative I would be interested in is only a slight amount cheaper than new and if financing can be "cheaper". Add the warranty discussion in and it is a no brainer on those cars at that price point.
Price you are looking to pay and the type of car you are looking for play a huge part in this discussion; the Jeep example given above highlights it.
My "new/bought new" 2012 Mazda5 has 161k on it now and hasn't needed anything really. If I had bought the 2008-2010 version in 2011 instead with decent miles it would have been 12-15k and new was only $17k with discounts plus not knowing the used vehicles history. Same story with my Dodge but up another couple price points.
Edit; we sure know how to go off topic here in Off Topic.
Bobzilla wrote:GameboyRMH wrote: ^True, but that's very much an outlier. Same with oddball cars like Morgans and Lotii that have very slow depreciation, and the high-end supercars that appreciate. Most cars new will shed a new sportbike's worth of value in 5~8 years.My Forte had a new sticker of $22,400. Bought it 2 years old for $12,000 (before trade in) and 18k miles. That's damn near 47% in 2 years. And that, my friends, is why I buy Korean cars! Sadly they aren't depreciating as quickly as they once did.
I love how people use MSRP when they talk about how great of a deal they got on a used car. that $22k one could be bought for $17K new. It still lost a good amount, but not 47%. If you want to use that math, it lost 25% just sitting on the dealer lot since you could buy it for 25% off of MSRP....
It didn't drop from $22K to $12K, it dropped from $17k to $12k
ProDarwin wrote: True. But for both the FRS and the TSX, the value *will* continue to decrease. The bottom of the depreciation curve is years down the road, for sure. I get it, you're willing to eat the depreciation on a vehicle, and see it as minimal by stretching the life of the vehicle as far as possible. But claiming it is irrelevant is just poor financial reasoning.
Everything (normal) depreciates. We'll leave potentially collectible cars out of the discussion for now.
So... your response to that is what, exactly? You keep cars a short time so each individual car only depreciates a little? Say you do that with a car per year. You cycle through those little depreciation hits 12x as frequently as I have been through 1 big depreciation hit. So to use your example, you need to hope that each car depreciates less than $1666 in your year of ownership to match my $20,000 / 12 year hit.
I'm confused about what you are saying. I'm just saying depreciation is relevant.
I buy inexpensive cars near the bottom of the curve to minimize the impact. My car has depreciated between $1000 and $1500 in the last 5 years and one month. I bought it for $3k, and I estimate I could get $1500-2000 for it right now.
OK, I misunderstood what you were saying, I guess. I thought you were saying that hanging on to cars a shorter time somehow made a difference.
Maybe I misspoke when I called depreciation 'irrelevant'. It was in response to the guy who said he was upset that his new-ish used car had still depreciated notably after he bought it. But the relevance and impact is reduced the longer you hold a car, especially when starting at the steep end of the curve.
Of course you are correct that buying $3,000 cars is a great way to stay on the shallow end. But that makes some assumptions about maintenance and repair that only make sense if you can do it yourself cheaply. And it makes sense only if raw dollar cost is far and away your most important metric.
The way jeeps, and Toyota trucks don't really depreciate is amazing, we had a 3year old taco on the lot, 4 banger 5 speed base 4x4 that had 52k on it, and they were selling it for 2k off sticker price, that was in glove box. now I don't now what the first owner paid but dang is all I can say. same goes for wranglers.
It's been my experience in the past when I got caught up in the car buying game that when I try to sell something it depreciates like a motherberkeleyer but, when I try to buy something it holds its value, appreciates, or has an egregious "market value adjustment". berkeley that game.
Is there overtime available at your current job? I would go that route before getting a second job. Time-and-a-half beats straight time every time.
In reply to The_Jed :
He posted 6 years ago, I assume he figured it out
In reply to Steve_Jones :
I wouldnt be certain of that. With 10 year car loans now he may still be upside down. lol
That's what I get for GRMing while sleepy.
You'll need to log in to post.
