I’m cheap and when i graduate was wanting to trade my truck in for a toyota corolla.
An 01ish with 40k miles is as low as 7k
a 98ish with 80k miles is as low as 4k
a 93ish with 130k miles is as low as 2k
Which one would be the best investment assuming all you care about is cost? I would assume the 98 model however i’d worry about it falling apart in 4 years. How do you determine which age is ‘too old’ and too prone to expensive repairs to make the lowered cost worth it? I could get two 98 corollas for the prices of one 01 corolla. However what if i end up spending thousands on repairs? is there a formula for this kind of calculation? I assume not as it varies greatly by car and there is no telling if the car you pick will need expensive repairs.
I’d go for the '98, presuming it’s had all of the proper maintainence done. The '01 would be looking at a major maintainence in about 20k~30k more miles, while the '98 should have had it already done. So, it would be longer (hopefully!) before the '98 needed anything major done. If the '98 hadn’t had that 60k-80k maintenance done, the price difference between the '01 and the '98 is enough to handle that.
The '93 would be at the bottom of the list, but if there isn’t any signs of neglect it wouldn’t be too far away from the '98 and '01 in terms of desireability.
When I was car hunting, my cost-to-age ratio was determined by how well the car was maintained. I’d rather go for an older (and presumably less expensive) car that was well maintained, then a newer one that was run into the ground (or has questionable maintinance).
However, you can’t always tell about the maintenance. One thing I would use to help weed out cars was the cosmetics: but I’m not talking about normal wear and tear here. I’m talking wear and tear that points to the owner either not caring about the car (which makes me wonder if they care about maintenance) or the owner not being able to afford the upkeep. Things like: mismatched tires (two different types is generally fine, three or four is a cause for concern), mismatched body panels (could signal the car has been in an accident), wear and tear in odd locations, etc. It’s definately not fool-proof (you’ll have people who couldn’t care less about what the car looks like but they are fanatics about keeping the mechanical parts sound and vice versa), but it helps.
<< Light Side, Dark Side–I’m the one with the blaster. >>
Hombre, it all depends on your pucker factor. If you want to be absolutely sure you’re not in for nasty surprises, you have to get into a brand new car or a “certified” used one that the dealer is willing to put a good warranty on. You’ll pay a good price for this car, and your insurance will be higher than if you buy the same thing only older.
As you pointed out, an old car will cost a fraction of a new one, but expesive repairs may be lurking. If you’re looking at a Corolla, you’re probably not courting this kind of trouble because they are generally reliable cars.
If all you’re concerned about is a Scots car, I’d say keep your truck (especially if it’s paid for). You’ll likely get a mulitple car discount on your insurance. Pay cash for an old car from an old person. You then will not have to pay for Collision insurance (which is 'spensive for you young foax) unless you want to. If the car croaks prematurely or deelops an expensive problem, walk away from it and buy another cheapo.