|
KarmaCandy posted:CH's OP is great, but obviously, additional opinions are great. Personally, I would love to see more people talk about which cars they think are the best value, which cars people have really good experiences with, which cars suck, and so on. The 90s-era Geo Prizm is functionally equivalent to the Toyota Corolla (same factory, most of the same parts), but because it's badged a Geo it doesn't have the same automatic price markup. We're at 150k on a '97 and the only major repair so far was replacing the starter.
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2009 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
traveling midget posted:Reposting this from the zuarg thread because it belongs here. This is why I dislike Dave Ramsey. He makes uniform statements about various debt without illustrating when it's a useful tool. In the case of leasing a car, leasing is a lot like renting an apartment. You pay a premium for doing so, and as he illustrates it's not a clearly defined premium. However, you are able to get a new car every couple of years and have it always be under warranty. There's probably a breakpoint where it's cheaper to lease than to do a buy/tradein cycle, if you want the same ease of just dealing with the dealership. The auto companies make money on average with leasing, but that doesn't mean they correctly predict residual value on every individual lease. If you lease a car that turns out to have major problems outside of the warranty period, it doesn't matter - you didn't take that risk upon yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2009 21:52
|
|
|
Zhentar posted:Regardless of which one ends up being cheaper they are both financially retarded. The opportunity to endlessly pay the worst stage of a vehicle's depreciation? Oh, that I could be so lucky... I can easily see it being a good option for a fleet of company cars, and I don't begrudge people making luxury choices who can afford those luxuries and get enjoyment out of them. You could make the same case for only buying store brands, or buying secondhand clothing or furniture. You pay a premium for new things, and it's a subjective point of view as to whether that premium is worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2009 05:53
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:An additional cost of buying and selling a vehicle is that it'll take away free time outside your job when you factor in the posting of ads, the repeated interruptions to your day from phone calls, and so forth. This just doesn't fly for me when I'm so busy and my work performance suffers at some point. With a lease, I'll go in and come out with a different car with a pretty regimented process on paper. I'm not much of a negotiator and would probably screw myself, so it's part of the price of living for me, whatever. That's why I want to see it compared to a cycle of buying and doing a trade-in from the same dealer, since there's not a significant difference in time invested in the process. Trade-in values are typically a good bit lower than you'd get going private-party.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2009 17:36
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:I usually recommend to family and friends to buy a car for the best years of it's life. Usually years 2 - 4. Any major flaws have already been addressed under warranty, they're not trashed, and the initial depreciation hit is usually over. You have to watch out for a survivorship bias on this setup, though. Most people who are not having any problems with their car won't sell it at the 24/30 month mark.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2009 05:28
|
|
|
cmears posted:My money pit of a car is going to die any day now and I'm looking for advice. What kind of car do you have right now? If I was in your situation I might start looking at high-mileage cars with high-level reliability that you could get for <$5k. Then you'd have to put more than $4k on repairs in the car for it to be a wash financially, and with that sort of high mileage car, only putting ~10k/year on it you can sell it private party for about the same price when you're ready to move up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2010 20:49
|
|
|
tuckfard posted:I'm thinking C is the best option, but what are the odds that I'll just end up with a similar situation? I bought my Kia from a private dealer on Craigslist. Can I find a semi-reliable car for $2500 or less? 90s Geo Prizm. Do the maintenance this time. E: Aren't there some reliability issues with the early 00-model Civics? Engineer Lenk fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Mar 16, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 19:44
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:Mathematically speaking, of course. It's a bit of a trick question. If you start talking about physical items rather than abstract numbers it changes the problem a bit; significance isn't just amount of change anymore. It's more of an amount of change relative to zero. Even talking relative to zero you make an assumption of additive change. When we're talking about rates, it makes more sense to talk about rate ratios and compare them to one.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2010 21:22
|
|
|
Is there anyplace reliable that'll help figure out what the estimated usable life is on different makes and models? We have a '97 Geo Prizm with ~180k miles - I found a number of anecdotes about Prizms and Corollas making it to 400k+ with regular maintenance, but I feel like we should be saving for a replacement car just in case.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 09:27
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Just as a heads up, I live in Seattle which is pretty similar climate and spend a decent amount of time in the mountains. Currently I drive a 1999 Corolla and make it up in the mountains a fair bit. I find that I rarely, if ever, am wishing for AWD, but am quite often wishing for more ground clearance. I mention this because it's what disqualified the RAV4 a CRV from my search for a new car since they only clear the standard 5.5 inches in their latest models. CX-5, Forester, Outback, and Crosstrek are all a few inches higher which makes a big difference. You can really do a lot in a small sedan. My parents hike constantly all over the Cascades and I think they have usually taken their 2001 Corolla and now their newer Civic up all those trailheads and I've never heard a complaint. Echoing this - my wife has a 97 Geo Prizm that's seen a lot of trailheads in western WA, and when it dies (~180k now, probably has a few years left) we'll probably go for something with more clearance but the size is surprisingly good - you max out at about three people on a week-long backpack. If it's your trailhead car, I would recommend going for something at least slightly used, so you don't end up a break-in magnet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:For all your guys who said that you are going to "buy a car and keep it for 10 years and drive it into the ground" or some variation of such. Unless you're 65+ years old and already driving a 1997 Buick Lesabre, the chances of this happening are vanishingly remote. People's lives change, they get married, divorced, move to different towns with different climates/commutes, have kids, get jobs in other countries, get better jobs that allow them to buy newer/nicer cars, lose jobs, any number of a million different things that might result in changing cars. The younger you are, the more likely that this will happen to you and the demographic of the SA forums are probably younger than the national average. 25 year old kids are NOT going to be buying a car and keeping it for 10 years and 100k miles. Even if that's you *want* to do, I really wouldn't base my decisions on the assumption that it's going to work out that way. Is this really that rare? I'm 32 and still driving my 99 Camry from college - and it'll probably go for another 5+ years. My wife's still driving her 97 Prizm from high school. It seems like everyone in my family keeps cars for 10 years or >200k miles.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 07:56
|
|
|
If you know you'll drive a car into the ground and want a car with a known history, there are worse things than buying new, particularly with a relatively slowly-depreciating car like a Camry. I can't speak to the price, but I'd take the 0% financing if there's not a big difference from the 3%. Don't go out more than a 5-year loan. What I would recommend is putting aside an additional amount in savings that's earmarked for the car (at least $100/month). I would not pay early on a 0% loan. This additional savings will be there for maintenance once your car goes out of warranty.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
Oh, my BFC response would be more like this: pick a dollar repair value and/or number of days in the shop that is 'unreliable'. Drive your current car until it hits one of those markers, paying a comfortable car payment into a savings account each month in the meantime. While you are waiting for your car to hit unreliable status, research reliability and features of late-model cars. Find a few good options with features you like, and look for value over the expected mileage of the car to decide on new vs used and narrow it down further. It becomes a word problem: you expect to put x miles/year on a car, you expect it to run to y miles, repair costs average z/year out of warranty. Find the price point/mileage that minimizes expected cost over the life of the car subject to the constraint that buying a car is a pain in the rear end and you want it to last at least 8 years.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
It seems like you're comparing a 3-year term on the lease to a roughly 6-year turn-around time on buying the 2009 (full 60 months of payments, comparing to 2002/2003 for car value). If you want apples to apples, price out what the owned car would be worth at the end of 3 years if you were to sell it or trade it in.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Kenny Rogers posted:Fair enough. I was comparing planned disposition vs. planned disposition, but apples to apples is worth looking at. You never included the 2450 in the cost of the lease, so don't double-count it. Also, a true equivalence test would have you put the same amount out of pocket upfront, which tips it mathematically in favor of the used car slightly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
If the payments are smaller that should factor into it as the tradeoff you make for possibly being upside-down, since you could always pay the same amount and speed your payoff.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Kenny Rogers posted:With no warranty comfort zone, any difference between the two payments ($54) would go into the Car Emergency Maintenance Fund. On the other hand, it also shows how bad a choice purchasing the car at the end of the lease would be, because if you apply the same 0.6 multiplier to the cost of the used car you get residual value of $11,219 - at a point where the depreciation curve should actually be shallower than that of a new car. The other possibility is that your estimates of trade-in value are quite low, or the 2009 was significantly overpriced.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
disheveled posted:Skip AWD/4WD and you'll save yourself money, because you sure don't need it to drive to a PNW trailhead. Seconding this - our 97 Geo Prizm has worked just fine getting to trailheads (and not getting broken into) for years.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
I'm looking to replace the '99 Camry with something safer for the dogs (I usually have at least one in the car for ~200 miles each week, mostly highway driving). Proposed Budget: Up to mid-20s New or Used: Either Body Style: Prefer wagon, willing to settle for SUV/CUV. How will you be using the car?: Dog hauler and daily driver What aspects are most important to you? I'm looking for a car that will fit a L double Variocage in the cargo area, preferably one that has a little room for increased length. Beyond that, fuel efficiency is the highest priority. Must have cruise control, nice to have a back-up camera. On my list now is the 2014 Prius v and the 2015 Outback 2.5i. I was looking at the Forester, but the cargo length is an issue. Anything I should add to my list?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 17:25
|
|