How do you compare miles to dollars on used cars?

[Elkins45]

I’ve bounced around all over the place looking for a used car with an automatic transmission. I finally came to the realization that what I would really want is another Scion xB, just with an auto. I started looking for lower priced ones with similar mileage but my thinking has shifted to maybe paying a bit more for one with fewer miles and hoping it lasts a while.

I’m currently comparing two different 2012 models, both with decent service histories. One has 97K miles and is priced at $10,000. The other only has 34K miles but is priced at $12,000. Assuming both are equally good cars, is 63k fewer miles worth $2000 more to you?

 

[Pew]

Absolutely worth the $2k for me assuming the physical and running conditions of both are similar.

 

[supton]

I'm thinking, yes, $2k for less miles is worth it. The struts and other suspension components are likely in better shape, seat less worn.

That said, it could easily flip on actual condition.

I hear you on being all over the place, same boat here, would be happy to get another '99 Camry. I looked at pics of a '95 online, but my first thought was, the HVAC controls aren't in the right spot... ironically, it is becoming one of the things that bugs me in my 'rolla, they swapped heat and fan control around on me!

 

[fdcg27]

I look at it as ten cents per mile, just based upon my read of allocable cost per mile amortized over some reasonable life span of use less residual value.
On that basis, another $2K for 63K fewer miles is well worth it.

 

[marc1]

Definitely.

 

[mrsilv04]

Assuming both are equally good cars, is 63k fewer miles worth $2000 more to you?

No question about it. Now even more than ever.

 

[SeaJay]

Simple, assume a dollar three-eighty per mile and then do the math.

 

[Elkins45]

I look at it as ten cents per mile, just based upon my read of allocable cost per mile amortized over some reasonable life span of use less residual value.
On that basis, another $2K for 63K fewer miles is well worth it.

I’ve been playing around with an Excel spreadsheet graphing miles driven against asking price for the cars I‘m interested in. Unfortunately it’s not a simple linear relationship, especially as the miles approach 200k, but it is interesting to see the cars as data points on a graph.

Given the obvious point that a car with 0 miles selling for $0 is the ideal, I can make the blanket statement that cars closer to the lower left corner are a better value than the ones in the upper right. The rest is more complicated.

 

[eljefino]

There's definitely a parabolic curve involved. If I'm not shopping at 10k, but at 2k, for a beater, I almost like high mileage because it's "honest", as in, an honest reason for someone to be afraid of their car and getting rid of it, vs undisclosed issues. Especially with trucks, I drive them 1000 miles a year so starting with 250k means my wear will complement the wear that's already on it.

But if I want a "keeper" I don't want to be on the wrong side of the parabola, rapidly losing value. I guess this is why I buy either well-used or brand new.

I'm concerned about inspectability-- salt damage and bizzare emissions problems. Not everyone may have the same concerns. The 30k mile car could have been parked in a snowbank outside someone's apartment, eg, a city car, a minus for me.

Ya gotta go look at cars. People love looking at ads online and "imagining" what the story is but the more you look at, the more you know. Also benefits to stay with one model or at least one make so you can tell where a particular unit is on the wear & tear scale.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

For older cars, it's mostly about condition of each specific example. You have to take each car individually.

Old cars with low miles have done a lot of sitting. Higher mileage cars aren't necessarily worse than lower-mileage examples, and Toyotas can last a long time.

Check out the 34k car first, then go from there.

I've seen cars with 250k have better interiors than some cars with under 100k.

Absolutely worth the $2k for me assuming the physical and running conditions of both are similar.

This is key.

 

[duck__dodgers]

assume both cars are worth $0 at 180,000 miles then do the math backwards to get a $/mi value for the miles it takes to get to 180k.

then adjust based on the actual physical condition of the vehicles.

 

[michaelluscher]

Yes, the mileage premium is worth that $ premium
On xB² in particular, do you find value in a documented 2AZ oil consumption rebuild?
Or paying more for a MY14/15 that's still under the LSC campaign?

 

[Elkins45]

Yes, the mileage premium is worth that $ premium
On xB² in particular, do you find value in a documented 2AZ oil consumption rebuild?
Or paying more for a MY14/15 that's still under the LSC campaign?

The LSC campaign is 10 years from the date it went into service. A 14 model might have been sold in late 13 so it would already be ineligible. I wouldn’t mind knowing it had been rebuilt, but I would be willing to chance it given my success with a piston soak on my 09. Also, my understanding is that the farther past 09 you get the less the chance of getting bad pistons.

 

[SC Maintenance]

Generically the answer is go with the lower mileage one.

However I might rather have 100K in highway miles than 38K done 3 miles at a time. Maintenance and overall condition comes into play above all else, including miles.

 

[mr_boring]

99.9% of the time 60k less miles is 100% going to be worth a couple of grand (today or even years ago)

I will not buy a new or used vehicle any time soon due to interest rates (almost free loans soiled me for 10 years) but that's almost a no-brainer.

For me, in my world, that's like comparing a 2012 F150 with 37k for 17 grand or a 100000 mile F150 for 19k.

As others have stated, check the low mileage one out. If it's not beat to flinders and the underside of it looks fairly clean (watch out for steam cleaned ones, they exist) go for it.