Originally Posted By: StevieC
So spending $30K for a new car somehow is better than repairing a 10-12 year old vehicle, that lets say, needs and engine & transmission?
Last I checked Engines/Trannies and labour doesn't come up to be that much.
Not being a jerk, just don't see the logic.
Also a car that is old doesn't have to be a polluter so long as it was looked after with proper maintenance. Sure it's not as efficient as the newest vehicle but it's only slight and if you offset the waste it creates sending it to the junk yard to sit, it weighs heavily in the favour of keeping/repairing the old car IMO.
Depends on the vehicle, StevieC. I had a 10 year old 110k mile Buick Century that had a very expensive transmission rebuild. Paint was bad, engine sensors kept malfunctioning (even the dealer couldn't fix them), AC grenaded, ran bad (sensors again), etc. I couldn't wait to get rid of that piece of junk, and am sorry for every wasted repair performed after 100k miles. And it wasn't maintained poorly.
Now, I have a 14 year old 115k Toyota RAV4 that looks and runs like new, ditto on a 13 year old Chevy truck , and my "new" car is a pristine 8.5 year old Camaro. I would replace both the engine and transmission on any of those vehicles without blinking an eye.