Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Edmonds is good for researching. What I like even better is RepairPal's top reported problems. If there is anything repeatedly reported that is a major transmission or major engine issue, I won't pursue the vehicle. If there are sensor problems, water pump, or something along that line, no problem. Can deal with the smaller remote issues. Anything that stops the car from running/moving is a big deal. If the struts wear out, no problem.
- a 3 year old Camry of typical condition will be more reliable than a brand new Dodge Avenger. Get a hold of a copy of the April Consumer Reports issue which includes recommended used cars at every price level.
Alas, this is the oft repeated fallacy. There is a somewhat greater likelihood a 3 year old Camry might be more reliable than a Dodge Avenger (new or three years old). However there is no "will be". It is always "might be." The particular Camry you buy might or might not be reliable. You can easily purchase a problematic Camry while the Avenger you might have bought would be perfectly trouble free. Averages do not tell you a lot about the particular car you are considering. Using averages only enables you to slightly shift the risk balance in your favor, for a cost.
Some will be more reliable and some will be less reliable. The increase in liklihood of reliability does not justify the higher prices these cars bring on the used car market. From a risk/cost model, the less reliable brand is often the better buy because you pay considerably less but take on only a modicum of increased risk. Thus, if you want to buy away risk, it is more cost effective to buy a cheaper brand and pay for a warranty (which is a poor risk/cost purchase, but better than the risk/cost balance involved in trying to avoid risk by brand recognition).
Having a mechanic check out vehicle is also buying away risk. You pay a price to try to reduce the risk of having a problem. A mechanic will only be able to identify patent problems. Latent defects or developing problems will not be identifiable. Further, the mechanic is only going catch what you pay him to check. You may pay anywhere from $50 to over $1000 depending on how thoroughly you want the car checked out. You have to balance the cost vs. the amount of risk you want to try to remove. Of course you also take on the risk the mechanic will not really check all aspects of your car and will just take your money, or the mechanic is incompetent. The mechanic will not give you a guarantee. Thus, if they turn out to be wrong and the vehicle is significantly defective, that is just too bad. However the mechanic will thank you for paying him to check out the vehicle.
This is not to say having a mechanic check out a possible purchase is a bad idea. There is no data available I am aware of indicating how often a car checked out by a mechanic experiences failures or what types of failures. Thus, there is no means to analyze the risk/cost balance of this procedure. Whether you incur the cost is completely a personal decision. It may be that mechanics checking used cars for problems miss major problems 93% of the time, or they may catch all major problems 88% of the time. That is just not known. You would need to know what types of problems can be identified by mechanics and what types cannot. Then you would need to know how frequently mechanics are successful in identifying the problems that can be identified and how likey the vehicle is to exhibit those problems. Then you could balance the typical costs against the likely risks and the cost of those risks with the cost and likelihood of success in having a mechanic check out the vehicle. If the data is available, it would not be terribly difficult to develop a program to calculate this balance and determine on the whole whether it is generally a good cost/risk balance or a poor choice.
Or you can just do what most people do and decide it sounds like a good idea or it sounds like a waste of money. The accuracy of human instinct is actually uncanny.
This thread is 6 pages. I read on page one that the OP got an $8,000 check from the insurance company.
What's the problem here? Go and get an $8,000 car!
Or get a $6000.00 car and keep 2 grand in the bank just in case the new used car needs repairs. After all, we know what they say about buying a used car, basically buying someone else's problems. sometimes you get a diamond in the rough though.
Alas, this is the oft repeated fallacy. There is a somewhat greater likelihood a 3 year old Camry might be more reliable than a Dodge Avenger (new or three years old). However there is no "will be". It is always "might be." The particular Camry you buy might or might not be reliable. You can easily purchase a problematic Camry while the Avenger you might have bought would be perfectly trouble free. Averages do not tell you a lot about the particular car you are considering. Using averages only enables you to slightly shift the risk balance in your favor, for a cost.
Or you can just do what most people do and decide it sounds like a good idea or it sounds like a waste of money. The accuracy of human instinct is actually uncanny.
There is also no I "will be" alive tomorrow. I "might be". And you said it yourself, "you will shift the risk balance in your favor".
It's not a fake reputation or fake consumer reports. It's real. How measurable, I don't know...that's more than I care to research at the moment. But you'd be better off with a used, reliable car, than a new Dodge Avenger any day of the week.
Quote:
Having a mechanic check out vehicle is also buying away risk. You pay a price to try to reduce the risk of having a problem. A mechanic will only be able to identify patent problems. Latent defects or developing problems will not be identifiable. Further, the mechanic is only going catch what you pay him to check. You may pay anywhere from $50 to over $1000 depending on how thoroughly you want the car checked out. You have to balance the cost vs. the amount of risk you want to try to remove. Of course you also take on the risk the mechanic will not really check all aspects of your car and will just take your money, or the mechanic is incompetent. The mechanic will not give you a guarantee. Thus, if they turn out to be wrong and the vehicle is significantly defective, that is just too bad. However the mechanic will thank you for paying him to check out the vehicle.
This is not to say having a mechanic check out a possible purchase is a bad idea. There is no data available I am aware of indicating how often a car checked out by a mechanic experiences failures or what types of failures. Thus, there is no means to analyze the risk/cost balance of this procedure. Whether you incur the cost is completely a personal decision. It may be that mechanics checking used cars for problems miss major problems 93% of the time, or they may catch all major problems 88% of the time. That is just not known. You would need to know what types of problems can be identified by mechanics and what types cannot. Then you would need to know how frequently mechanics are successful in identifying the problems that can be identified and how likey the vehicle is to exhibit those problems. Then you could balance the typical costs against the likely risks and the cost of those risks with the cost and likelihood of success in having a mechanic check out the vehicle. If the data is available, it would not be terribly difficult to develop a program to calculate this balance and determine on the whole whether it is generally a good cost/risk balance or a poor choice.
There is no paying a mechanic $1000 to "check out" a car. If you seriously think that is normal, you are posting in the wrong forum. Paying anywhere from $20 bucks for a friend to check it out up to ~$200 for it to be inspected in a shop seems right. Anything more than that, and you're paying someone to stand by their tool box and drink coffee pretending to check out the car. Or they're disassembling something, which I don't think the seller of the vehicle would be too happy about.
Quote:
Some will be more reliable and some will be less reliable. The increase in liklihood of reliability does not justify the higher prices these cars bring on the used car market. From a risk/cost model, the less reliable brand is often the better buy because you pay considerably less but take on only a modicum of increased risk. Thus, if you want to buy away risk, it is more cost effective to buy a cheaper brand and pay for a warranty (which is a poor risk/cost purchase, but better than the risk/cost balance involved in trying to avoid risk by brand recognition).
Wow you're way off here.
Higher prices? The Dodge Avenger mentioned previously starts at $19,8 for the base model.
You can get a 2010 Camry with between 30,000 to 60,000 miles for $13. You can spend money on a vehicle service contract, if you choose to, which could run anywhere from $1k to $3k and still come out ahead.
Or you can spend 6-8k, which is what the OP has and open a savings account for repairs.
The ONLY fallacy happening here is people thinking a new car is always better, more reliable, safer, or cheaper and thinking that a new car will give them peace of mind.
Just because a car is covered under warranty, whether new or dirt used, there is no speeding up a repair and the trouble of:
having bring a car in to the shop, get a rental (whether covered or not), wait, go pick it up, possibly have another problem, bring it back again, etc
and this can be a hamper on people's busy lives.
buying a known reliable brand, whether new or used is the real peace of mind. Research is all you need to do, not drink the koolaid being fed to you by society, new car dealers, and commercials
Last edited by NARFALICIOUS; 09-27-2013 at 11:31 AM..
We recently moved to Connecticut in a similar situation - we had just totaled my VW "new" Beetle, and weren't sure what to do about another car.
Thought at first we would be able to use the train/bus systems, but while those are actually quite good, there is just that general running-around-town and sometimes going to work thing that isn't solved with either train or bus when they fall at odd hours.
Our solution - a $1200 Honda. If you look carefully, you can find something THAT cheap that actually runs well and looks nice (this one was owned by an elderly businessman and is in exceptional shape - it's needed one $200 repair in six months) - you may have to do a little bit of upkeep/maintenance, but nothing near what a car payment would be. Insurance/registration will be less expensive because the car is "worth" less (although if it runs well and you like it, it's not "worth less" to you!), and if something does happen (knock wood), you haven't lost much at all.
You don't need to spend all the money available to you - spend less and enjoy having some leeway in your budget, or a backup fund.
Having been a major shareholder in a very large auto group which owned new car stores, I know a good bit about the subject. My family members had owned and some still own major ones to this day.
Number One: USED CAR must be from a Quality Manufacturer and must be one of the most respected and highly reliable models with the recommended engine etc from CONSUMER REPORTS. This will give you the most likely probability for success and long-trouble free/cost effective tenure of ownership!
Number Two: TRY VERY HARD TO FIND said vehicle with just (1) owner or at the most (2) owners, who could afford to maintain it properly. This means a mature, adult owner that is financially stable (middle class/upper middle class , at the very least). Our trade-in appraisers would take this into account always when factoring the ACV for a trade.
RePo vehicles from the "sale" (car dealer's auction)never were liked by our dealerships since we were large major dealers and wanted our pre-owned inventory to be the best around. (we wholesaled everything with more than 70k miles and more than six years old......obviously most dealers don't do this now, but we did this then)
Vehicles that were/are owned by owners with very little disposable income and do not have appearance of stability.....do not own a home (they rent) and are unmarried, and have no career path/job stability with a professional firm-corp for three or four years running are generally not great previous owners. That is overgeneralizing as there are those who make very little and take pride in religiously maintaining their automobile but you have to look at it more on a case by case basis. Military personnell: Those under 28 and single in the enlisted ranks will be more likely to abuse said car while they own it. Married and officers tend to keep their vehicles in much nicer shape.
The same in general applies for everyday people. Vehicles that are more family oriented such as 4 doors in Consumer Reports recommended makes/models tend to be owned by mature people of whatever age that can afford such a vehicle. Poverty owners or people who bite off more than they can chew to impress the Joneses or to attempt to be a chick magnet, are the worst from a previous owner standpoint. These idiots will ghetto-ize the vehicle with aftermarket rims and tires and high performance chip and other do-dads but won't properly upkeep the basics as their pocketbook gets tight. Avoid any vehicle that has been Modified in any way!
Steer clear of all LOW MONEY DOWN, BUY NOW car dealers.
You never want to buy any vehicle from just any used car lot.
Buy only from a REPUTABLE, long established dealer that sells only low mileage, late model vehicles in their pre-owned inventory.
The other corner car lots buy wholesaled trade-ins from the major dealers who wouldn't put older/high mileage late model stuff/and death row garbage on their lots. There is huge markup by these Herb Tarlek slick willie types that have cream puff used cars. That wholesaled $2200 car might be sporting a blo and go (cheap repaint) and steam cleaned engine, new tires and repaired upholstery and might be attractive with the $9950 DRIVE TODAY sign on the windshield.
Your only opportunity to avoid car debt and get a quality ride is to:
A) SAVE UP YOUR MONEY (my opinion is that you'll need a minimum of say $7000 to $8000 ) to buy a quality vehicle that is less than 7 years old and has less than 70,000 miles..................Obviously the newer the better but with minimum funds (7000 to 8000) you have to be realistic.
DO NOT GET TEMPTED TO BUY JUNK (a Detroit brand) THAT HAS DEPRECIATED MORE THAN BETTER BUILT CARS.
*******UNLESS Consumer Reports gives said Detroit make/model a great rating and BEST BUY status, you should avoid it like the plague!
Know the History of the vehicle that you are buying (ONE OWNER or 2 at the maximum)! SEVEN years old or Less!!
70,000 miles or less if at all possible!! Absolutely no more than 85,000 miles from just ONE registered owner.
Reputable dealers will show you the history of their trade-ins and other top quality pre-owns like these examples.
Never deal with a USED CAR dealer that sells junk or cars older than 8 years old!!
Save your money and buy a quality USED car. You will have to spend $7000 to $8000 to find a good PRIVATE PARTY used car (one owner) fitting the specifics listed above. Vehicles from a reputable dealer will likely be slightly higher, although many times it isn't the case.
Don't be tempted to but a fully depreciated Beater in the $3000 range. It is more likely MISS than HIT unless you are knowledgeable like a pro. Anything below $3000 and you're entering the NEEDS WORK , Piece O Zzzztt territory.
$3000 will get you a beater. Below $3000 and it will be POS in 98 out of 100 cases!!
****If you cannot discipline yourself to save at least $200 per month for three years, to be able to have the funds to buy a decent USED car, then re-think your strategy because that is the only way to prudently do it and buy a decent USED car. You still will need an addititional small reserve to cover any unexpected expenses, but it won't be anything like the amount in reserve that you'd need if you went the $3000 Beater or under 3k POS route.
Stick with quality proven brands, specific makes/models/recommended drive trains-engines, etc... $7000 to $8000 minimum should get you something decent and reliable that will serve you well.
Drive it until the wheels come off (repair costs come into play)!
You make a lot of generalizations about who is likely to upkeep their vehicles. Regardless of what shares you owned in whatever god awful stealership-autogroup.
Links on stats? Study? Such as a sample that takes into account age, sex, occupation, make of car, model, engine size, average $ that car eventually needed in future repairs, etc??
No? Didn't think so.
Quote:
This means a mature, adult owner that is financially stable (middle class/upper middle class , at the very least). Our trade-in appraisers would take this into account always when factoring the ACV for a trade.
Then your trade in appraisers were hacks. Plain and simple.
Your salespeople and technicians were probably hacks also as evident by my study that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
ACV should be determined by either KBB or NADA and be based on the vehicles condition as reported by a real appraiser that takes into account THE VEHICLE and ONLY THE VEHICLE.
While you have made good points in your post, I cannot take you seriously if this is the type of operation you are running.
Honda/Acura - 3,800,000
Toyota - 3,500,000
Ford - 3,300,000
Chrysler - 773,000
Subaru - 591,752
Hyundai - 503,418
General Motors - 500,000
Sure, don't buy Detroit based cars and only buy Hondas or Toyotas but that won't guarantee you will be buying quality. Things have changed since the '80s and '90s, and the playing field is pretty level when it comes to car quality. It's time for people to realize that Toyota's just another car company out to make a buck.
Honda/Acura - 3,800,000
Toyota - 3,500,000
Ford - 3,300,000
Chrysler - 773,000
Subaru - 591,752
Hyundai - 503,418
General Motors - 500,000
Sure, don't buy Detroit based cars and only buy Hondas or Toyotas but that won't guarantee you will be buying quality. Things have changed since the '80s and '90s, and the playing field is pretty level when it comes to car quality. It's time for people to realize that Toyota's just another car company out to make a buck.
Recalls are a way for manufacturers to admit fault and correct known problems.
If your point is trying to prove that Hondas and Toyotas are less reliable, you need to find a study that shows
Average # of repairs by make over 5 years, 10 years
Average $ of repairs by make over 5 years, 10 years
Average value (as a %) held by make after 5 years, 10 years
% of vehicles by make still on the road after 10 years, 20 years
Otherwise you have nothing.
Also since this thread is regarding debt,
Average cost of ownership by model should play into account for OP
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.jpg)
