Used Cars = Someone else's lemon

[Snidely Whiplash]

In the way of background, my wife's vehicle is getting a bit long in the tooth: near the 100k mile mark and starting to have some problems. Nothing major yet but I get seriously stressed by unreliable vehicles. As is my normal routine I have started considering a new car for her. I usually buy new GM products and keep them for approximately 5 years / 100k miles, although this time for a variety of reasons the brand will probably change.

I see many here buy slightly used vehicles and keep them "til the wheels fall off" and I'm wondering how you are finding reliable used vehicles? The few used cars I have bought in my lifetime have invariably been lemons that the previous owners were happy to unload on someone else so I am very gun-shy about buying used.

 

[Live And Learn]

Hi. I purchased a 2010 vechicle last year. As part of the deal I presented the dealer with the amount I was willing to pay and stipulated that I wanted a bumper to bumper warantee to 2020 as part of the price. I have nothing to worry about. If anything goes wrong I pay a $100 deductible and it gets fixed.

 

[rbmrtn]

I bought one from Carmax and have been very pleased with it. No problems in 2 years and the purchase process was very stress free. I took it to a shop for a pre-purchase inspection before completing the purchase.

Check out pre-purchase inspections, I think it's worth it buying used.

https://www.google.com/search?q=veh...98,d.eWU&fp=84a65a5eb704e165&biw=1352&bih=719

 

[PatSea]

I've only bought two new cars in 45 years of car ownership. And I've also bought three additional used cars for my kids when they began their Junior year in college. For a primary vehicle I buy about a 3 year old Honda or Toyota. I can't stand enduring the depreciation of a new car. I bought most of the used cars from individuals and never had a lemon. The only used car with more than it's share of trouble was a Ford that I bought from a dealer in the 70's. I think I'm a pretty good judge of people (sellers) and have a good mechanical eye to judge cars. I also try to plan my purchases so I'm not rushed into buying. I take my time and evaluate as many cars as needed until I see the one that I want.

 

[Sandman62]

As much as I hear about used cars supposedly being a better value, I've always been skeptical.

Example (assuming you buy a car that can be driven through 10 total years):
1) New car for $20k and drive it 10 years = 2k/yr
2) Used car (3 yrs old) for $14k = 7 years, again 2k/yr. Then buy another used car and start over.

Either way, total purchase cost over 10 years = 20k. The used car approach over 10 years might even be a bit more because when you replace it after 7 years, the 3-yr old one you buy then is likely more than 14k. Admittedly, with the new car, you also paid higher sales and property taxes. But the used car likely has higher maintenance costs because you're replacing it 3 years sooner than the new one. Sure seems like a wash. Or is it just the psychological lure of having lower payments or shorter terms while paying for it? But isn't that offset by having to start over 3 years earlier?

I suppose the variable I could be missing might be that a new car that could be bought for 20k would cost less than 14k after 3 years? What else am I missing?

My previous [new] car was a '99 Acura. Shortly before our DD (oldest of 2 kids) got her license, I bought a new car for me, even though the Acura was only at about 120k miles. But I wanted both of our kids to have a shared car for HS and I knew that with the 15-17k/yr in miles I drive, that if I kept driving it, it might not make it. Here we are almost 5 years later, each kid enjoyed it for the last 2 years of HS, and now that they're conveniently at the same state U, they continue sharing it. Yeah, it's around 165k miles, but we just put a new transmission in last year because it's otherwise still in great shape. We're keeping our fingers crossed that it can survive another 3 years while our son's in college and will likely only had on 15-20k miles. So we surely feel like, going on 13 years and hoping for 16, we got our money's worth out of this car that we bought new. Had we bought it used, we'd have had to replace it a few years ago - and that's assuming we could've found something that was taken care of at the same level we care for ours and not just someone else's headache.

 

[pb4uski]

As much as I hear about used cars supposedly being a better value, I've always been skeptical.

Example (assuming you buy a car that can be driven through 10 total years):
1) New car for $20k and drive it 10 years = 2k/yr
2) Used car (3 yrs old) for $14k = years, again 2k/yr. Then buy another used car and start over.....

I think the flaw in your logic is that the reduction in the value of a car is straight-line ($2k a year in your example). In reality the reduction in value in the first 3 years is much higher than the reduction in value in years 4-6 or 7-9.

While for me used cars have been a better value that isn't always true.

 

[heeyy_joe]

Vehicle Owners | Safercar -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

 

[Dawg52]

My last 2 have been used. Both had a few months of warranty left so I felt like I had time to get things corrected if I had bought a lemon. My Trailblazer had a water pump problem, had it replaced at n/c. No other problems in the 5 years I have owned it. So overall I have been pleased with my used purchases.

Oh yes, I did get a carfax report on both before buying. Gave me some peace of mind.

 

[plex]

What else am I missing?

Someone may use it for more than 10 years, which makes the new car scenario gradually much less desirable. I have actually never used a car that I didn't keep for over 10 years. My next car I expect to keep 20-25 years.

E.g. I will get a $16k new car for $10k with 15-30k miles. Over 20 years, the new car would cost me (without other costs) 16/20= $800/yr, and the used car would cost me 10/20 = $500/yr. The first three year warranty is not worth $6000 to me.

 

[rbmrtn]

I think the flaw in your logic is that the reduction in the value of a car is straight-line ($2k a year in your example). In reality the reduction in value in the first 3 years is much higher than the reduction in value in years 4-6 or 7-9.

Exactly. Depends on make/model, domestics are the worst. first 3 years depreciation can be significant. A new caddy loses 50% of it's value.

For an econobox, sometimes a new one is cheaper than 1-2 yr old with discounts/rebates.

 

[Mulligan]

My last 2 have been used. Both had a few months of warranty left so I felt like I had time to get things corrected if I had bought a lemon. My Trailblazer had a water pump problem, had it replaced at n/c. No other problems in the 5 years I have owned it. So overall I have been pleased with my used purchases.

Oh yes, I did get a carfax report on both before buying. Gave me some peace of mind.

I bought a used 2002 trailblazer back in 2003 with 30k on it. It now has over 185k and the only thing I have ever changed is the S belt, battery, tires, wheel bearings, and brakes. Just maintenance stuff. I have never even changed the transmission fluid. I would like to get another Trailblazer when this one expires but they quit making them back with 2009 model so they may be long in tooth before I can replace it. It sure seems to me that "the spread" between buying new and late used has narrowed greatly since I last bought. I have never bought new ever, but may be forced to if I can't find
another Trailblazer.

 

[ERD50]

As much as I hear about used cars supposedly being a better value, I've always been skeptical.

Example (assuming you buy a car that can be driven through 10 total years):
1) New car for $20k and drive it 10 years = 2k/yr
2) Used car (3 yrs old) for $14k = years, again 2k/yr. Then buy another used car and start over.

While others have pointed out that the depreciation is not straight line, I also don't think it's a big deal if you keep the new car 10-12 years. I know others have said that the used car market has driven the prices up and closed the gap on that depreciation issue.

There's also the issue that you get 3 years less warranty coverage, and the car you are driving is always 3 years older - which can put you behind in safety and convenience features. At year 3, you are soon looking at new tires/brakes, so some expenses are brought forward.

It would be nice if we posted some real comparisons with links - we have company today, so I won't have time now, just thought I'd throw it out there.

-ERD50

 

[travelover]

Most cars have a 3 year / 36,000 warranty or better. Buy one still under warranty and get anything wrong with it fixed for free. You can even buy an extended warranty, if that suits you. You can buy an extended manufacturer's warranty online at a substantial discount - again if that suits you.

 

[brett]

We buy three to four year old low used cars mileage cars.

But we would never consider GM, Chrysler, or Ford products. These tend to be at the bottom of the quality/reliability spectrum. I drove a new one of these every year as a company car...everything from the luxury versions, the SUV's, and the standard sedans. My experience was far too many issues and the dealer service deptartments were much less oriented to service and to quality than their foreign plate cousins-notwithstanding often being manufactured in the same country.

We have had great success buying higher end Toyota and Honda sedans. Usually with a full load. We get them inspected, etc. At four years old, we expect to pay around half of their current price. The last car we bought, a 2006 Accord EXL had 26K miles with full load/leather etc. It has been a great car.

I picked up the recent Consumer Reports New/Used car mag. It is on the stands now. Take a look at their comments and their reliablity records.

 

[MDJO]

I've had disapointments from the two cars I bought used, but it was due more to the car's basic flaws than the fact that I bought them with miles. I buy new cars at a reasonable price through a dealer that treats me fairly, and then we drive them a long time- unless they are very unreliable. Five cars currently in our fleet, ages 15, 12, 6, and two are 3 years old.

 

[Sandman62]

While others have pointed out that the depreciation is not straight line, I also don't think it's a big deal if you keep the new car 10-12 years. I know others have said that the used car market has driven the prices up and closed the gap on that depreciation issue.

I didn't make a straight-line depreciation assumption at all.
I simply said that:

1) New car for $20k and drive it 10 years = 2k/yr
2) Used car (3 yrs old) for $14k = 7 years, again 2k/yr. Then buy another used car and start over.
Either way, total purchase cost over 10 years = 20k.

So ignoring salvage value (as they'd be the same) and loan interest (as you may have paid cash upfront or had an insignificant loan rate), either car costs $2k/yr due to what you paid and how long you drove; nothing to do with depreciation.

I do agree that for those who keep a car 20 years, it "could be" cheaper because now we're comparing $20k over 20 years = $1k/yr vs. $14k over 17 years = 823/yr. But again, increased maintenance costs could wipe out that savings.

Realistically, I highly doubt most people keep their cars that long.
"The average vehicle on America's roads is almost 11 years old, according to the auto market analysts at Polk."

 

[Tom52]

Had a neighbor once that bought a new car every 2 years, drove them about 25,000-30,000 miles but during that time never did one single thing except keep the oil topped off. No oil changes, no filter changes, no tire rotation, nothing that would cost him penny in maintenance. Then just before a trade in on a new car he would change the oil and filter.

Based on that experience I would rather buy new and keep it for 10 years. The depreciation factor is offset by piece of mind knowing exactly what I've got. I suspect many 2-3 year old used cars had owners with the same mindset as my former neighbor.

 

[youbet]

I would rather buy new and keep it for 10 years. The depreciation factor is offset by piece of mind

+1. I tend to go that route as well.

 

[KM]

We have been buying used cars and been happy. My last one was a 1996 Toyota Avalon that I bought in 2004. It had low miles and great price. Just got rid of it. God I loved that car. We put very little into over the years....

When I start shopping, I want one that is 3 or more years old. I am suspicious of anything newer than that (ie why are they dumping it so soon). But so many people trade-in in the 3-6 year time frame and the car will last forever.

I also do a lot of research on make, model and year before I buy.

This is one of the sites I like to use for reasearch. All cars will have problems, but it gives you an idea of the "bad years" to avoid "like the plague". You have to realize the more the car sells, the more complaints it will have - but it is helpful to compare years if you have narrowed down a make and model.
CarComplaints.com | Car Problems, Car Complaints, & Repair/Recall Information


I also use an MSN site (example here) and go to the RELIABILITY tab to see the history.
2008 Scion tC Reliability - MSN Autos

 

[Mulligan]

Bogleheads have had a thread on this before, and there have been a few that swear by leasing mid value cars as the most cost efficient way to own a vehicle. I would never go that route just because I don't know a lot about the process and they would screw me somehow on it.

 

[walkinwood]

I have bought used cars from individuals and so far have been happy with my purchases.

I bought from people who:
- kept a clean home/garage
- had receipts of work done on the car
- were straightforward and competent in their communications with me

The last time I bought, I also ran a carfax report.

Last step - I took the car to MY mechanic for a thorough check-up. Don't skimp on this part.

All the best.

 

[imoldernu]

1. 1998 Town Car... $40K list, paid $18K... in 2000... w/25K miles. Now 117K miles. Total non regular maintenance cost over 13 years - $1000 for A/C repair.

2. 1996 Cadillac SLS ... $47K list, paid $5500 in 2005 (estate car) w/26K miles. Now 68K miles. Total non regular maintenance cost over 8 years. $300 ignition key, $500 broken brake line (road debris).

3. 1996 Grand Marquis... For Florida/camp or family use (estate car). $28K list, paid $3000 in 2010 w/65K miles now 73K miles. . Total non regular maintenance cost over 3 years $1500- for product defect intake manifold.

25 ownership years, Less than $4,000 in non regular maintenance repairs. (another $2000 for pending non-critical fixes... ).

Total Car costs other than gas, regular maintenance and insurance, $25.5K plus $6K = $31,500 or $1260/ownership year.

....................................

A Love Affair... don't want another car. Like the luxury, the comfort, the speed and the looks. All three cars are near-showroom perfect.

 

[ERhoosier]

Not sure there is a single right answer for everyone. Over the yrs I've bought new & used, as well as leased. Usu keep my 'purchased new' cars for 4-9yrs. For TOTAL cost of driving, I think you can sometimes do well with some of the major car makers' advertised lease specials on low-mid range vehicles (IF your credit rating qualifies). But these are usu only for specific model & equipment level. Options can skyrocket your net cost. At least for 3yr lease you have pretty well fixed your costs (factory warranty during entire lease term). Reliable older car is usu lowest cost of driving, BUT unforeseen repairs turn an older car into a money pit if you don't know when to give up on it. I've had 3yr leases that cost me less $$ overall than multiple relatives have put into their 3yrs of ownership of their various mid-age used cars. Old car upkeep (tires, brakes, battery, eventually timing belt, etc.) adds up, and one major system repair (e.g. tranny, engine, even computer system) can exceed 2-3 yrs depreciation for many econo or mid-range cars. And newer cars usu get better mileage ($ saved) and have more safety features (lower medical payments insurance).

Bottom line- ya pays yer $$ & takes yer chances

 

[RunningBum]

I wondered whether the 20K/14K numbers were accurate, so I checked the first car I thought of that I knew was around $20K, the Mazda3. According to Edmunds.com, a new 2013 Mazda3 is $20,0xx, and a used 2010 has a value of $14,0xx. Almost bang on. So I don't see a flaw in your logic assuming a 10 year ownership.

The only advantage for used I might see is that a new car might have an unknown track record if they've made changes to the model whereas after 3 years you know more about its reliability, but I think that's offset by unknowns about how the used car has been treated. Even if you have maintenance record, if the original driver broke it in rough, is a heavy braker, drove it on rough roads, etc, it may have a shorter life span. A good mechanic can probably see this on an inspection.

The other obvious reason people buy used is it may be all they can afford, but your concern seems to be getting the best long term value.

I like buying new because I can get the model trim, options and color I want rather than settling for what's available in a good used car. And of course I like having those first 3 years of a newer car.

I also hate the whole car buying process, so doing it less often is good for me.

 

[Walt34]

Having had awful luck with used cars in the past we buy new but then keep them until either reliability or parts availability become issues. My 2003 GMC 4WD pickup and has been a peach so far with 85k miles on it (barely broken in) and DW's 2003 Buick Century with 156k miles on it has needed a new radiator, but no other unscheduled maintenance. Both replaced vehicles that were 18 and 14 years old, both also bought new.

So I figure if we're going to keep them that long depreciation becomes much less of an issue. And like Tom52 I've known people who do minimal or no maintenance and then trade in every 2 or 3 years. I don't want one of those cars.

As with so many other things "you pays your money and takes your chances".