No help or wrong help for Detroit?

Mike, if these idiots understood that they wouldn't be selling vehicles with
45-60K
on the clock. They would sell them with 150-200K on the clock and have at
least
3 years or more of ownership with -no- car payment, and during that time
they would
be taking the money they were normally sticking into a car payment, and
sticking
it into a savings account. Then when they sold that 150-200K vehicle they
would
have a large enough down payment that what loan they would be getting for
the
car would be easily payable 1 - 2 years.

It's quite possible for a young person with no money, by carefully
purchasing good
used cars for the first 2-3 cars he owns in his life, and by saving the
extra money
he would be spending on interest and insurance, to get into a position by
the time
he hits his 30s where he has enough savings that he can approach vehicle
purchase
from a positive, rather than a negative. What he then can save in interest
payments is
huge and he can finance much lower monthly payments, or much shorter loan
terms. In short he has a lot more flexibility in what he can do.

But of course this requires 2 things, delayed gratification, and
self-discipline, which
are not trained into most people when they are young, at least not in this
culture.

My favorite line from people like this is when I tell them they would pay
less overall if
they saved up for a car and then bought it, rather than buying it on credit,
and
having them tell me they would never be able to save up the money because
they
would end up spending it.

Ted

 

Other than the original 356 prototypes, Porsches were traditionally
rear-engine. The mid-engined cars didn't come out until the 356 had
already been in production for several years. Also I am not aware of
any Porsche ever having had what we would consider a traditional frame,
ever.

nate

 

The 911 was not introduced to the world until 1963; and while it did
have a good long run the current "911" is really not that closely
related to the original. That line was broken with the introduction of
the 993 back in 1998.

nate

 

That the way to start. When I first started to buy cars after the war I
bought cheap used cars for cash. When I started to buy better used cars I
needed to finance them. When I finished paying the contract I placed the
payment amount in a savings account.. With the accumulated cash I got into a
position where I had enough down money to finance new vehicles rather than a
used car that soboy else no longer wanted. After I finished paying the
contract I placed the payment amount in a savings account along with the
money I was now saving or repairing my used cars. Finally I got to the
point I no longer needed to finance my cars, if I sold them off and bought
another new one often enough for cash. Now the only thing I need to do is
change oil three of four times, have the car inspect one time and the dealer
I buy from even covers those cost for me on both of my cars. Now I simply
write a check for six or eight thousand every two years and drive home in
another new vehicle. Three or four grand a year, with no maintenance or
repair costs not even a set of tires, is hard to beat IMO.

mike hunt

 

I'm not sure I understand the math here. Most cars can be driven for
15 years or more. If you pay $8,000 and trade cars every two years
that's $60,000 in cash outlay over 15 years. A Toyota Camry can be
bought for new for $20,000 and the first 5 years of maintenance is
included in the warranty. I would be very surprised if you would spend
$40,000 ($60,000 - $20,000) in non-oil maintenance over that time.

Have you taken the time to look at how much a new car depreciates in
the first two years of it's life? Your car dealer is making a mint off
you.

 

That is not so, most new cars in the US are traded in three to four years.
Even buyers that keep vehicles till they need a major repair, trade within
ten years according to the US commerce Department. Only a very small
percentage of new car buyers in the US, around 2%, keep their cars past ten
years. Your suggested figures do not including the cost of replacing the
vehicle, mine does. In addition I believe you are confusing warranty
coverage with maintenance.


mike hunt

 

It's a fact that the most economical way of owning a car is
to drive it into the ground. John is correct.

The only advantage to your approach is less loss in time
dropping an older car off at the shop. And you're paying an
enormous amount for that privilege.

 

Perhaps, if you can not afford to buy a new car and have several cars as
back ups for the days one is in the shop and you live in a place like
Manhattan


mike hunt

 

Sure. Or even just one backup car.

I think a lot of couples are organized like this. Points up
the advantages of marriage etc. as a partnership.

 

AAA membership - $85. Don't leave home without it.

Backup car, rental car as backup, occasional bus ride, have spouse come pick
you up, having the dealer loan you a car, having the dealer pick you up at
or deliver you to your work or home. These are all workarounds for the day
your Toyota finally goes to the shop due to unanticipated problems.

Oh, I forgot, you drive Ford products. Yeah, you'd be using these
alternatives far more often than I. So far, I haven't had one of those days
with my Toyotas, but my Aerostar was in the shop for 45 days over the 2.3
years I owned it, so I do feel your pain.

With Fords, you probably are smart to trade them in after about two years.
I was very happy to let my Aerostar go after 2.3 years.


*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

 

Because some drivers trade cars every 3 years, 2 years or even every
year doesn't make the practice sound financially. I've been out
looking for used cars for my kids and have seen 1 year old cars with
10,000 miles for sale. The dollar hit those people take is incredible!

Cars can most certainly be driven for 15 years and for 300,000
miles...I've done it. And it is clearly less costly than trading new
cars every two years.

The people that do minimize the cost of car ownership are those who
pick up low milage late model used cars, maintain them well and and
drive them for hundreds of thousands of miles.

Your suggested figures do not including the cost of replacing the

You are replacing cars every 2 years. Consequently your replacement
cost is extremely high because you are absorbing the first two years of
depreciation on each of the 8 cars you will buy. In my example the
cost of the one car is taken once up front. In your example you pay
$8,000 every 2 years over and over. If you don't believe me ask your
accountant, or ask Click n Clack, the Car Guys. Or ask a mechanic.
Ask anybody but the guy that is selling you a new car every 2 years.

The luxury of owning a new car every two years comes at a tremendous
financial price. But it would be fun to do so.

No, a five year warranty comes with many cars and on the last car I
bought (and many others) it includes five years of dealer service.

 

I drive ford products, and the two of them combined have only been in the
shop because someone hit them except once in the last decade. One winter I
neglected to check the vent on the rear axle of the mustang and it got
clogged and the pinon seal was ruined as a result. Now there have been
little things that have gone wrong but nothing tragic for age and milage
that I could not take care of myself. (Could have done the pinon seal but
it wasn't worth it for what the ford dealer was charging, which was less
than the other places I called)

When I've taken the mustang in, I've simply put my bicycle in the trunk.
I ride the bicycle home. Then I ride the bicycle back to pick up the car
when it's done. Some people think it's odd, so what?

 

I have relatives who could pay cash for a new car tomorrow
and have a nice income, but they keep their old 1987 Ford
Taurus (and one newer car). IIRC it has around 120k miles on
it. The man of the house does no car repairs of his own. He
does keep a running tab on the 87 car's maintenance and
repair expenses. They have been on the high side the last
few years. His very exacting calculations indicate he's
still better off fixing the old car rather than buying a new
one.

It certainly would seem Fords (or maybe all car makes) have
come a long way.

Surely similar stories come up at the Ford newsgroup.

 

I own a bunch of old Fords, with from 100K to 300K on the clock, that look
and run like new as well. A 1941 Continental convertible, a 1964 Mustang
V8 convertible, a 1971 Pinto the one with the 300K, a 1972 LTD Brougham and
a 1983 Continental Mark IV Signature Sedan.


mike hunt

 

Come on. Aren't these classics?

Now we're talking.

Get over 12 mpg with these, do ya? ;-)

You maintain these yourself, right? I think we're exceptions
to the rule and our experience can't too readily translate
to mere mortals. My relative showed me how he computes the
cost of operating his 87 Taurus. It simply won't work for
me, because I do much of the major repairs and all the minor
work on my 91 Civic (174k miles) myself. He's up to
something like a $500-$1000 a year of maintenance and repair
costs. My car's lifetime average is I guess around $100, and
it's only that high because I was using shops for major
maint/repairs early on.

Your Pinto is still persuasive.

 

I bought those cars new, except the 41. That is the only real classic among
them. A friend of mine by the name of Leonard Pool willed that one to me.
I did at one time service my own vehicles, I even built the dirt track cars
I raced back in the sixties but haven't done either in a long time. I'm
going to be 80 in a couple of weeks


mike hunt

 

What cars new, top poster? What are you talking about?

 

Wow! You are rockin'!

 

The Pinto seems out of character with the rest of the cars. From a '71
Pinto to a "72 LTD Brougham seems like a huge step up!

 

Congrats, Mike. Keep up the good work!

Hernando