A new car purchase

Good strategy. Likewise, it would pay to finance a two or three
year old car instead of taking the big depreciation hit in the first
two years of a new car. A car is a *depreciating* asset and a new
car is about the _worst_ investment you can make.

Then buy a Nissan, where you don't find artificially high prices
created by smart marketing and soccer Moms who droll over Camry's
and Accords.

Indeed.

 

You have pointed out one more problem with Japanese sedans.
They are smaller than most of the domestics with which they
compete, even though they cost 25 to 30 percent more to drive
home.



mike hunt

 

Go with automatic, easy to use and Hondas are better than Nissan
My Accord 91 has passed through 4 owners and I am the 5th ,.. still the
car's history has no major repair...but everybody has maintained it so well
that I still have the maintainance records of the first owner.

 

Go with automatic, easy to use and Hondas are better than Nissan
My Accord 91 has passed through 4 owners and I am the 5th ,.. still the
car's history has no major repair...but everybody has maintained it so well
that I still have the maintainance records of the first owner.

 

We hear that 'better resale' stuff in the NG's all the time,
but actually the resale rates on Japanese cars is NOT AS GOOD
as domestics, if you figure the resale value as a percentage of
what they cost to drive home. New domestic have a much better
return on investment. For instance the Taurus you sited is
indeed worth $4,000 less than an Accord but the Accord cost
at least $7,000 more to drive home two years ago, even more today
when the financing is factored in. Domestic finance
rates are much better, ZERO interest up to five years on many
model. That can easily save one another %5,000 if you must
finance your purchase.



mike hunt

 

Lots of us can "afford" a new car. Some of us realize that you

Lie. Most 2 year old cars aren't $10K cheaper than new cars. Just saw an ad for
a '01 Camry LE for $12,900. I saw an ad for a new '03 for $13,900!

Lies, lies, lies. I leased a very expensive car and treated it like shit. I
changed oil every 15K miles, used 87 octane (when it required premium 91),
drove over 100mph, never changed any other fluids, braked hard like a mofo and
got in to several accidents (over $10000 in damages). As long as you don't
over the allotted mileage and there aren't obvious dents, they don't care.

Why buy a used car for the same price as a new one? Considering interest rates
are low (even 0%) and huge rebates (as much as $4000 from GM), it's stupid to
purchase a used car.

Yeah so? Do you think people actually need a Ferrari or a Porsche?

-=-
I smell....

..... therefore, you stink.
-=-

 

That is why I said people that can AFFORD a new car, buys a new
car. If one must make a choice between a new car and the other
things in life, than he can't afford a new car. Contrary to what
you may believe, you can never know for sure what type of use or
abuse a sued car was subjected to or what service it did or did
not receive, no matter how 'good' it appears the day you buy it.
When one chooses that two year old car they are choosing one with
30K miles on the clock readily for its first big service, set of
tires and nearly out of warranty. On the other hand the previous
owner only needed to do a half dozen oil changes. Any problems
would have been covered by a warranty. Ever notice when somebody
comes "into money" from a lottery or inheritance the first thing
they buy is a new car. LOL



mike hunt

 

That is why I said people that can AFFORD a new car, buys a new
car. If one must make a choice between a new car and the other
things in life, than he can't afford a new car. Contrary to what
you may believe, you can never know for sure what type of use or
abuse a sued car was subjected to or what service it did or did
not receive, no matter how 'good' it appears the day you buy it.
When one chooses that two year old car they are choosing one with
30K miles on the clock readily for its first big service, set of
tires and nearly out of warranty. On the other hand the previous
owner only needed to do a half dozen oil changes. Any problems
would have been covered by a warranty. Ever notice when somebody
comes "into money" from a lottery or inheritance the first thing
they buy is a new car. LOL



mike hunt

 

When I was at university, I bought a 3 yo car that was a return from lease.
I couldn't afford a new one at that time.
The car looked great and everything seemed fine for couple of months until
some weird noises that a 3 yo Mazda is not supposed to do started...
Got rid of it and bought a new Honda.

 

When I was at university, I bought a 3 yo car that was a return from lease.
I couldn't afford a new one at that time.
The car looked great and everything seemed fine for couple of months until
some weird noises that a 3 yo Mazda is not supposed to do started...
Got rid of it and bought a new Honda.

 

Most vehicles if maintained properly will last for a long time. I am the
3rd owner of my 1989 Nissan 240SX and other than 2 injectors leaking, the
car has been trouble free. Very dependable, just regular maintinence stuff.
Body is still in near mint condition with minimal rust on underbody of
vehicle, not bad for 14 years. Only reason I'm selling it is I wanted
something newer. My mother has an 89 Nissan Sentra and it has never had any
mechanical problems either, again she just wants something newer now after
buying as a repo with 1800 miles on it in 1989. Both cars have 127,000
miles or so on them and still go strong. Again if you take care of the car
it takes care of you. Just my 2 cents. I would never choose a Honda over
my Nissan.


-BD

 

Most vehicles if maintained properly will last for a long time. I am the
3rd owner of my 1989 Nissan 240SX and other than 2 injectors leaking, the
car has been trouble free. Very dependable, just regular maintinence stuff.
Body is still in near mint condition with minimal rust on underbody of
vehicle, not bad for 14 years. Only reason I'm selling it is I wanted
something newer. My mother has an 89 Nissan Sentra and it has never had any
mechanical problems either, again she just wants something newer now after
buying as a repo with 1800 miles on it in 1989. Both cars have 127,000
miles or so on them and still go strong. Again if you take care of the car
it takes care of you. Just my 2 cents. I would never choose a Honda over
my Nissan.


-BD

 

Well, I guess I could have AFFORDED to buy a new GS-R in 1997 when
instead I bought a three-year-old one. I paid cash and the extra
$6-7K has just been sitting in my bank account (along with enough to
buy a second, new GS-R) ever since. Haven't needed it but it is worth
pointing out that it is there if I do.

True, but if you can AFFORD a new car, what's the big deal about
losing a little money on a used car deal?

After six years I am still driving my GS-R. I have spent some money
on clutch, brakes and tires - have to expect that in a hard-driven
performance car. But the big deal for me: I still catch myself
grinning on my daily commute. If I stop smiling, it's gone.

So why should I have spent another $6-7K?

Worn out tires were a bonus for me. It meant that I could install the
tires I wanted, not the inferior ones that came with the car. I can
AFFORD to spend extra money on tires that wear out quickly, and I
always do. I do most of the servicing myself and regular maintenance
is not that expensive.

That's because most lottery tickets are sold to people who spend
frivolously.

I am not opposed to ever buying new cars. I bought my '92 Volvo Wagon
new. Significantly less reliable than the used GS-R, but it is
otherwise perfectly suited to my needs.

My real money saving tip is that, whatever you buy, drive it a long
time. The Corollary is to buy a car you really like.

 

Well, I guess I could have AFFORDED to buy a new GS-R in 1997 when
instead I bought a three-year-old one. I paid cash and the extra
$6-7K has just been sitting in my bank account (along with enough to
buy a second, new GS-R) ever since. Haven't needed it but it is worth
pointing out that it is there if I do.

True, but if you can AFFORD a new car, what's the big deal about
losing a little money on a used car deal?

After six years I am still driving my GS-R. I have spent some money
on clutch, brakes and tires - have to expect that in a hard-driven
performance car. But the big deal for me: I still catch myself
grinning on my daily commute. If I stop smiling, it's gone.

So why should I have spent another $6-7K?

Worn out tires were a bonus for me. It meant that I could install the
tires I wanted, not the inferior ones that came with the car. I can
AFFORD to spend extra money on tires that wear out quickly, and I
always do. I do most of the servicing myself and regular maintenance
is not that expensive.

That's because most lottery tickets are sold to people who spend
frivolously.

I am not opposed to ever buying new cars. I bought my '92 Volvo Wagon
new. Significantly less reliable than the used GS-R, but it is
otherwise perfectly suited to my needs.

My real money saving tip is that, whatever you buy, drive it a long
time. The Corollary is to buy a car you really like.

 

Tires with some wear can tell some stories about a used car. If they
match and have even wear with no wear patterns, that is a better sign
than mismatched tires with uneven or strange wear patterns. And brand
new cheapest-possible tires could be hiding something that the old tires
would have revealed (as well as the seller expecting a premium for tires
that you probably would not have bought).

 

Tires with some wear can tell some stories about a used car. If they
match and have even wear with no wear patterns, that is a better sign
than mismatched tires with uneven or strange wear patterns. And brand
new cheapest-possible tires could be hiding something that the old tires
would have revealed (as well as the seller expecting a premium for tires
that you probably would not have bought).

 

Not true.

I buy lightly used to keep from paying the high mark up of a "new" car. One
can save themselves thousands of dollars by picking up the car they want,
with just a few thousand miles on it.

Look it up Ben.

And BTW...I can afford virtually *ANY* new production car offered in the US.

Stop spewing your ignorance Ben...it makes you look (more) stupid.

 

Not true.

I buy lightly used to keep from paying the high mark up of a "new" car. One
can save themselves thousands of dollars by picking up the car they want,
with just a few thousand miles on it.

Look it up Ben.

And BTW...I can afford virtually *ANY* new production car offered in the US.

Stop spewing your ignorance Ben...it makes you look (more) stupid.

 

I'll make a rash statement then: 99.999999% of usenet posters are
not independently wealthy and would be better off putting the
$6-10K in their retirement plan - if they could separate the
purpose of the car from their ego.

I'm not advocating buying the least expensive car you can get. Buy
what you like. But, buy smart.

True. But you're paying thousands and thousands of dollars for
that "warranty" you get with a new car.

Could be, depends on the car. Some two year old cars only have 20K
on the clock. The price is almost as low as the 30K cars since time
is more a factor in book depreciation than miles. You can also
but cars that come with 4/50 warranties. Or, if you don't like to
gamble, buy an extended warranty - most cars cost less than $1K
for a few years.

For me, the excuse of buying tires is great. I get to purchase a
real set of tires instead of the factory nonsense. Give me an
excuse to buy shocks/struts too, I love it.

And he paid $10K for the privilege.

I have noticed that. I've also seen a lot of people who can barely
afford to pay the mortgage, or can't afford a vacation, or good
furniture, go out and buy a new car with long paybacks and/or
disadvantageous leases. They'd be better off with a used car
for thousands less, even if they need to sink a couple of bucks
into it.

Auto manufacturers are great at marketing
and selling, auto salesmen are great at selling the monthly payment,
and peoples egos keep the whole thing going.

Bob

 

I'll make a rash statement then: 99.999999% of usenet posters are
not independently wealthy and would be better off putting the
$6-10K in their retirement plan - if they could separate the
purpose of the car from their ego.

I'm not advocating buying the least expensive car you can get. Buy
what you like. But, buy smart.

True. But you're paying thousands and thousands of dollars for
that "warranty" you get with a new car.

Could be, depends on the car. Some two year old cars only have 20K
on the clock. The price is almost as low as the 30K cars since time
is more a factor in book depreciation than miles. You can also
but cars that come with 4/50 warranties. Or, if you don't like to
gamble, buy an extended warranty - most cars cost less than $1K
for a few years.

For me, the excuse of buying tires is great. I get to purchase a
real set of tires instead of the factory nonsense. Give me an
excuse to buy shocks/struts too, I love it.

And he paid $10K for the privilege.

I have noticed that. I've also seen a lot of people who can barely
afford to pay the mortgage, or can't afford a vacation, or good
furniture, go out and buy a new car with long paybacks and/or
disadvantageous leases. They'd be better off with a used car
for thousands less, even if they need to sink a couple of bucks
into it.

Auto manufacturers are great at marketing
and selling, auto salesmen are great at selling the monthly payment,
and peoples egos keep the whole thing going.

Bob