The perfect mileage to buy a used car

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
953
Location
El Oeste
I was thinking about this the other day, assuming a buyer won't have access to a maintaince log for XXXX used car. The longer you wait, the cheaper a car gets. But the sooner you get it, the less another owner can neglect it. With that in mind, I think buying around 40K miles is best. Just a thought, but here's why...

If you buy around 40K miles, you're buying before the first round of fluid changes are needed. (Not oil, obviously.) So that should limit any neglect of (mainly) the transmission. You won't know how long the past owner went on OCs, but my experience is that the chances of life-threatening neglect over 40K miles are pretty slim. You're also taking advantage of a much lower price for the car, considering off-the-lot depreciation. And in terms of its overall life, 40K on the average car today is just getting started. You're buying a car that should have a ton of life left in it. (Assuming 200K miles is realistic, you're buying a car that is only 20% used up, but most likely at a discount much greater than 20%.)

You're basically letting someone else eat the initial depreciation during a time they shouldn't be hurting the car more than you would.

I hope this makes sense. I'm watching football as I type...
 
Depends on the car IMO. I would have no problem buying a Honda or a BMW at 40k miles, provided the visual inspection and a thorough test drive don't reveal any problems and a warranty of some kind is available. Couldn't say the same thing for a Ferrari, or even a quirky car like a Saab or a Mazdaspeed 3.
 
I agree. This is your average used car we're talking. Also, if I couldn't confidently buy a certain model of car at 40K miles, I wouldn't buy it at all.
 
You do make sense.
I bought our last used car more than six years ago.
It is a '97 Accord LX 5spd coupe.
The car cost me 6K, with 64,000 on it.
It had a fairly current Jiffy Lube sticker, new Coopers (which I would not have bought personally, but they lasted ~70K), and it looked okay under the oil fill cap.
The car drove like a Honda should.
So, for ~30% of the car's cost new, I got a car with probably 60% of its life remaining.
We still have the car, now with 160K.
So, I agree with you.
Find something decent with reasonable miles, and you should save some money, while getting a fully functional car.
 
The perfect car for me is just past 100k with with the timing belt, water pump, plugs and wires all replaced. New tires would be a great benefit, too. With this set up, and a good maintenance history, you could easily get another 100k out of 'er with very little money spent.
 
I've purchased several cars/trucks with just under 20k miles on them. no regrets at all. I do have some friends who bought a ford focus, 40k miles. the motor blew the 2nd day they had it. apparently the first owner never changed the oil - the filter appeared to be original and was rusted. somehow this escaped the dealer's 99 point inspection. it cost them some money and serious headache to get the engine replaced.
 
I like to buy MB diesels at 150-170k miles. I figure Ill have 200k of problem-free driving from there...
 
Originally Posted By: HawkeyeScott
I was thinking about this the other day, assuming a buyer won't have access to a maintaince log for XXXX used car. The longer you wait, the cheaper a car gets. But the sooner you get it, the less another owner can neglect it. With that in mind, I think buying around 40K miles is best. Just a thought, but here's why...

If you buy around 40K miles, you're buying before the first round of fluid changes are needed. (Not oil, obviously.) So that should limit any neglect of (mainly) the transmission. You won't know how long the past owner went on OCs, but my experience is that the chances of life-threatening neglect over 40K miles are pretty slim. You're also taking advantage of a much lower price for the car, considering off-the-lot depreciation. And in terms of its overall life, 40K on the average car today is just getting started. You're buying a car that should have a ton of life left in it. (Assuming 200K miles is realistic, you're buying a car that is only 20% used up, but most likely at a discount much greater than 20%.)

You're basically letting someone else eat the initial depreciation during a time they shouldn't be hurting the car more than you would.

I hope this makes sense. I'm watching football as I type...




Hawkeye: I think your logic is excellent. I've become a used car buyer for economics reasons. I can afford a new car but I can't JUSTIFY it. I think 30 to 40 K and 2 years old is perfect because the first owner takes the main depreciation hit.
The other good thing about buying used is that I'm not neurotic about scratches etc...
 
when the old warranty mark of 36k. I would think right before that mark, so if anything breaks, you would still have warranty. the car shouldn't be that so badly negletced around that mark and the inital depreciation would be gone. same as someone else said.
 
I'm not sure I can recommend a "perfect mileage" without factoring in how old the car is. Basically, I look for evidence that the car was mostly highway driven. So I'll buy a two year old car with 30K miles over a four year old car with 30K on it. Basically, I love used cars that average more than 15K a year because I know that has to be highway. Some of the worst cars our family had owned are the old/low mileage cars. My in-laws bought a 10 year old Camry with 60K miles on it. It was a total piece of [censored] because the engine had been abused from the short trips. The woman who owned it basically used it to go to the grocery store and doctor's office. I don't know if the engine ever fully warmed up. The greatest used car we've ever bought was a three year old Buick LaSabre with 70K miles on it. We got the huge price cut because of the miles but all those miles were highway. It felt like almost a new car and we got it for like $8K even though it was only three years old and retailed at $27K.
 
All things equal - I would rather buy a car with 100K on it where the owner took care of it, than a car with 50K that was neglected.
 
Age is something I failed to mention. I would look for something no more than 3 years old. And I agree, highway miles are a plus. The first Jeep I bought in college was a Grand Cherokee a hot air balloon pilot drove all over the country. I got it at 6 years old with 98K miles. Even as a dumb college kid I knew that was a lot of easy highway driving.

My current Jeep is a 2001 Cherokee. Bought it used in '03. It had 43K miles. Knew those were highway miles (family was sprint car racers and drove the car to races) Now at 133K miles and has been paid off for 2+ years. Lots of life left and no payments. (Knock on wood.)

What has me thinking about all this is my wife's 2007 Pacifica. Bought it new and it just went over 36K last week (so bye-bye bumper-to-bumper). We'll have a lot of car left when it's paid off, but we're paying $385/month (and that's with 0% interest). It's a nice car and I like knowing where it's been its whole life, but I'm not sure I could justify doing it again.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
The perfect used car buy is 2 years/30k miles, the highest percentage of depreciation and the car is still like new.


+1

Generally a car with that mileage is certified so it usually comes with a 6 year/7year warranty on the powertrain...All our cars came that way.
 
Originally Posted By: lairdwd
All things equal - I would rather buy a car with 100K on it where the owner took care of it, than a car with 50K that was neglected.


Thats almost impossible to find...At least here in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale area...It would take a very long time to find one...Most people can not wait that long.

In that case you would be better getting a take home car from the Highway Patrol...At least you know the car was serviced properly every 3-5K miles...Generally you can get the history of the maintenance on it.
 
Over 100k but with an identifiable issue. Let's face it, they'll all need repairs... get something with some problem the previous owner can't handle. Bad AC is perfect. Get an appropriate markdown and you'll know where you stand.
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Over 100k but with an identifiable issue. Let's face it, they'll all need repairs... get something with some problem the previous owner can't handle. Bad AC is perfect. Get an appropriate markdown and you'll know where you stand.


+1

For the most part they will need repairs..The only cars I would buy over 100K miles would be panthers...You can generally drive them into oblivion with very low maintenance...BTW on my last two cars [panthers] the first one had 300K miles and the other 200K miles and the a/c was still ice cold and was on the entire time and never serviced...The entire powertrain was orginal also.
 
I agree.

Many Japanese cars retain their initial value quite well. So I bought my Honda Accord new.

BMWs are good cars but depreciate pretty fast, especially the 5 series. So I bought a 3 year old BMW 528i with 50,000 km (31,000 miles) and a full year of warrantee left. In spite of the scary comments about the cost of maintaining BMWs, it's been a pretty good car. And since I've always wanted a BMW 5 series, but would never have paid what they cost new, I'd say it's worked out pretty well.

Ecotourist
 
Originally Posted By: ecotourist
BMWs are good cars but depreciate pretty fast, especially the 5 series.

Fast-depreciating BMWs are the exception, not the rule. They usually hold their value pretty well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top