Last post on Mar 16, 2013 at 9:24 AM
You are in the Smart Shopper
What is this discussion about?
#1340 of 1392 Re: Value is more important than cost to me [qbrozen]
Oct 03, 2011 (12:51 pm)
I'm sorry, I'm a little confused by your response. I know absoultly nothing about cars haveing not paid any attention to them whatsoever for 11 years.
All I was saying was that the particular 5K cars that we looked at (not just Accords but *anything* we looked at in the 5K rage) were in really rough shape (hail damage, needing a new clutch, rusted through exterior, or missing interior for example). That does not seem like something I want to pay five thousand dollars for. When I searched through avalible cars at the higher price range (which was 8-10K) these were the some of the cars that were coming up that also seemed to be in acceptable condition. I think these particualr cars were more towards the 8K area.
I was *asking* if any of these would be a good value, not stating that they were. I am in absolutly no possition to judge. You seem to be suggesting that a rusted out Accord for 5K is still a better value than a good condition Aveo, Rio, Accent, or Yaris for 8K. Prehaps that is the case. I don't know. That's why I asked the question.
I have not seen any of these cars in person. We have to rent a car to go car shopping. My husband has to take off work and we have to drag our three year old with us. I'm trying to get as much information as I can before we go to test drive cars. I need to have a few types of cars to look at so that I don't get overwhelmed by choices. Thanks to other responses I have received on this forum I have already removed the cars that you addresss out of consideration. If you have any useful sugestions or recomendation I would welcome them. However, please don't belittle me for my lack of knowledge. That is what I am trying to rectify and in a very short time frame.
#1341 of 1392 Re: Ride a motorcycle most of the time -- need a cheap, reliable car [billybob00]
Oct 03, 2011 (4:59 pm)
I have the perfect car for you. It's the least expensive to run and maintain Toyota made in the last 10 years as well, based upon parts cost and labor/complexity.
Look at a last generation Toyota Celica with a manual transmission. It's "different", handles great (fast, too) , is cheap as dirt to run, gets good fuel economy, and is perfect for getting around on rainy days and so on since you are only carrying 1-2 people at most. Toyota was *so* stupid to replace it with the much worse in every category Scion TC. Heavier, worse steering feel, worse suspension, worse fuel economy... sigh. (minor rant mode off)
A typical example. Not your typical jellybean-mobile.
The other option would be an old truck. Anything with manual and 4 cylinders. A mid 90s Tacoma 4X4 is a perfect example (4 cylinder, short bed, standard cab). Depreciation on it should be nearly non-existent as well, due to the demand with the off-roading crowd for these.
This is a typical example. Very little to go wrong.
Why manual? better performance out of a smaller engine, more fun to drive, potentially ~2K less to fix if the transmission dies (ouch?), can be manually started if the starter dies, can be shifted without a clutch in a pinch (good enough at least to get you to the shop) and many other reasons. If cheap and functional is a key requirement, manuals are your best bet. Doubly so with 4WD, since automatics tend to go brain-dead in mud, snow, and in dirt/rocks.
Note - my last truck that I had (4Runner, same exact platform/chassis) had nearly 400K on it when I sold it. The original transmission lasted roughly 320K. A heavy duty replacement was ~$1200. Dropped the old one and put in the new one. (all new internals, had to break it in as if it was factory fresh). The truck is still running around in N. Cal last I heard.
I'd personally buy one of these with 150K on it without a second thought.
#1342 of 1392 Re: Value is more important than cost to me [placeboeffect]
Oct 03, 2011 (5:41 pm)
Did you get to go see any of the cars I posted by any chance? I'm not sure what it is you have gone to see at this point. You SHOULD be able to find a nice reliable car for under $5k.
If you raise your pricepoint, that's fine, too, of course, but I wouldn't scrape the bottom of the barrel and look at these entry level econoboxes. They are the cheapest cars new for a reason (cheaply built). Step up just a tad, at least. Rather than the Versa, look at the Sentra. Rather than a Yaris, a Corolla. Etc.
#1343 of 1392 Re: Value is more important than cost to me [placeboeffect]
Oct 04, 2011 (7:29 am)
Have you considered using Zipcar instead of buying a car? If that is all you really plan to do, then Zipcar may work and be less expensive than owning a car.
#1345 of 1392 trading years for mileage
Oct 12, 2011 (11:56 am)
hello all, I inherited a 03 bmw 325 from my family. It's a good car but I got it with a little over 100k miles on it which is a little much for me to make a long term commitment, even though I know bmws are usually very reliable.
I'd like to take advantage of it's value while I can and so possibly trade it in for a similar type of car with less miles on it, one choice I found was a 99 mercedes kompressor with only 33000 miles on it, 99 is a little older than I would want to go but that mileage number really stood out to me; that's like a new car to me pratcically, another choice is a 2001 330 bmw with about 66000 miles on it; this also has the bigger engine that I like
both of these cars are under 10,000 so I should be able to make a pretty clean trade with maybe a thousand or two thousand more spent on my part, this might appear to be a little strange to spend more money for an older car so I wanted to get opinoins on it, I've always thought mileage was the dominant factor in car life so this would make sense to me, however I'm a little jaded because i had an 86 mercedes that just recently really started to fall apart on me; it still had under 150,000 miles on it so I would have expected it to last longer but I have a feeling it is not going to last much longer (the engine is still as smooth as ever but I think I can feel the transmission start to slip and it's broken down on two other issues which needed replacements recently)
my main issue is I just want a car that will last another good 10 yrs for sure, hopefully more; I only drive about 7-8 k a yr anyway so the car I have right now might have a shot, I'd also like opinions on the selections, thanks
#1346 of 1392 Re: trading years for mileage [jprince11]
Oct 12, 2011 (1:39 pm)
well, my completely personal and biased opinion would be to get the 330 if it truly is a straight trade (which I doubt). I'm not sure I'd throw any money into the mix if it were me. Unless you could sell your Benz for $2k and use that and the 03 bmw to get the deal done.
Without knowing all of the specifics of every car, I can't help with the numbers, but you didn't ask about that, so I assume you've got that all under control.
There is nothing wrong with a slightly older car with lower miles. Just as long as its "slightly." As your '86 Benz shows you, there is a limit to how old of a car you should be relying on for your daily transportation.
#1347 of 1392 Re: trading years for mileage [jprince11]
Oct 13, 2011 (7:53 am)
If I was in your position I would stick with the 325i assuming it has been maintained. Better than the unknown that comes with buying a used car.
#1348 of 1392 Re: trading years for mileage [robbieg]
Oct 13, 2011 (9:36 am)
Agree with Rob. Making any of your choices last 10 more years could be a difficult proposition regardless of miles. Knowing what you've got to work with is a huge advantage.
#1349 of 1392 Re: trading years for mileage [sebring95]
Oct 13, 2011 (1:08 pm)