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.
This is why I buy used. Years down the road I buy the cars I couldn't or didn't want to afford when they were new. I don't care what people spend their money on but the cost of a new car is not for me. The truck I have now I bought for $33k used and that is the most expensive vehicle I have ever purchased and probably will never do so again. I just don't like to be tied to a payment. Some people are very tech savvy, other like safety, or mpg's, etc... and are willing to pay for it. Id be just as happy with 2001 Toyota 4Runner as that is much more appealing to not only my eye, but also my pocket.
You misunderstand what 'solidness' and 'rigidity' bring to an automobile. The more of these features you have, the MORE shaking you will experience on rough driving surfaces. It is the ability to flex that smooths out your ride. In addition, a lot of the expense of building a vehicle today is spent on the creative use of 'crumple zones' which protect the driver and passengers at the expense of the life of the car.
What kind of car are you used to driving that makes use of copious amounts of metal trim? Metal trim on the inside becomes a weapon aimed at YOU in case of an accident, and metal trim on the outside of the cabin is a waste of weight that also has a far greater tendency to corrode or pit.
If you are comparing a 2015 auto to 'old school classics' like 1957 Chevys or 1963 Pontiac Bonnevilles, I think you will find that the modern vehicle is not only light years safer in the event of a collision, but it will achieve much better fuel economy and far greater average vehicle life in general due to improved corrosion resistance and much better engineering.
Oh yeah I hear you! Modern vehicles are much better compared to the classics for many reasons. I hate carburetors, and honestly out of everything that operates on cars prior to the 80's, they were the biggest problems as far drivability concerns. Mainly because they leaked gas which could cause fires, they can flood, linkages wear out and need replacement, gaskets wear out..etc The constant upkeep and maintenance is a PITA.
But this isn't to say that they were all built to fall apart. I find that the metal trim inside my classics (64 Cadillac, and formerly owned 61 Lincoln Continental), and it's materials, have outlived itself and proved to me that if you use stronger, heavier duty materials, it definitely matters for longevity.
What do you mean the more features can cause more shaking over rough roads? How so? The more rigid and tight a body is, the better, as it's ability to absorb vibrations goes up. Unit Body cars still present this problem, although they are not the "Flexy Flyers" of the past that's for sure. Adding sub-frames, and stiffening up the B pillars for safety concerns might of been a blessing in disguise as far as government safety mandates go.
I'm used to driving heavy full frame cars that weigh over 5,000lbs, and no I'm not an old fart either! The road isolation and comfort factor that a framed car gives you, cannot be copied using a unit-body structure.
The only car that reminds me of the way my classics drive is the current Chrysler 300, and those things are buttery smooth. I'm a firm believer that added weight has it's benefits to a structure. The more dense something is, the less NVH enters the cabin. This is why a RR Phantom or a Bentley Mulsanne weigh about 6,000lbs. You can throw the biggest pot holes NYC has to offer, and their bodies won't be bothered one bit.
Cars aren't really worth their price, but what can you do? They are now offering 72 month financing! Anyway, cars today are much better than the old ones back in the 70's and 80's. Back then getting 100,000 miles out of a car was a big deal. Now it is nothing. Also, thanks to the Japanese cars don't rust nearly like the old ones. Still, cars aren't worth the wildly high prices, but we are sort of stuck. The used car market is super strong as well and you are paying a lot for used.
A month ago I bought a "new" 2014 model year. The 2016's come out in the last quarter of this year, and they really wanted the last of the 14's gone. Very nice rebate and incentives. I feel that I got a good deal and paid what the car is worth. The same car in 14 would have not been a great deal.
I think it's a better way to buy even over very slightly used as mentioned often here. It's still new (mine had 12 miles on the clock), and I still got to let someone else eat the new car depreciation.
As new vehicles become more and more expensive, I have to ask everyone here that has had recent experience in purchasing new cars or trucks. Are they honestly worth it?
When I got in my friends recently bought 2015 Nissan Altima 2.5 SV model, I was surprised how much he paid for the car close to $30,000 once taxes kicked in, and for the money, it felt like he got ripped off. Not because it has just about every gadget and feature you think of, or how nice it was to ride in, but knowing how much plastic is used to put this car together.
The interior materials are actually pretty good, lots of soft spots and the seats are really comfortable, but other than that, everything else in and outside of the car feels flimsy.
I guess I'm used to my old school classics, but for the price you pay for a new car, I feel like most of that money is spent on technology, labor, and engineering rather than top notch materials that is used for longevity.
So for $30,000, you have one giant toy box to drive around in. It's like nothing has a sense of solidarity, too much plastic, lightweight trunk lid and doors, and ZERO metal trim anywhere.
How well will this car hold up in 10-15 years?
The car is very quiet, and it rode really well on smooth roads, but once you start driving over rough pavement, the car starts to quiver a little bit and you can feel some of the bumps enter the cabin. It's as if the body structure isn't rigid enough to filter out bad vibrations. The shock damping is rather stiff, so that could also be the issue. But what new car isn't stiff? Pretty much all newish midsize cars ride stiff somewhat besides for the larger ones.
I just can't see why anyone would waste their money on a new car. It's much wiser to wait 2-3 years for certain models, and buy used. But that's me!
Thoughts?
I'm guessing you're young, or you've forgotten a LOT about older cars. My father has a 1960's Mustang, and I have friends with restored classic cars. Want to talk about cowl shake and chassis flex...
Also, think about this. Inflation...27 years and money loses 50% of its value. So in 1988, your car would cost you $15K.
Oh yeah I hear you! Modern vehicles are much better compared to the classics for many reasons. I hate carburetors, and honestly out of everything that operates on cars prior to the 80's, they were the biggest problems as far drivability concerns. Mainly because they leaked gas which could cause fires, they can flood, linkages wear out and need replacement, gaskets wear out..etc The constant upkeep and maintenance is a PITA.
But this isn't to say that they were all built to fall apart. I find that the metal trim inside my classics (64 Cadillac, and formerly owned 61 Lincoln Continental), and it's materials, have outlived itself and proved to me that if you use stronger, heavier duty materials, it definitely matters for longevity.
What do you mean the more features can cause more shaking over rough roads? How so? The more rigid and tight a body is, the better, as it's ability to absorb vibrations goes up. Unit Body cars still present this problem, although they are not the "Flexy Flyers" of the past that's for sure. Adding sub-frames, and stiffening up the B pillars for safety concerns might of been a blessing in disguise as far as government safety mandates go.
I'm used to driving heavy full frame cars that weigh over 5,000lbs, and no I'm not an old fart either! The road isolation and comfort factor that a framed car gives you, cannot be copied using a unit-body structure.
The only car that reminds me of the way my classics drive is the current Chrysler 300, and those things are buttery smooth. I'm a firm believer that added weight has it's benefits to a structure. The more dense something is, the less NVH enters the cabin. This is why a RR Phantom or a Bentley Mulsanne weigh about 6,000lbs. You can throw the biggest pot holes NYC has to offer, and their bodies won't be bothered one bit.
I've owned and driven multiple body-on-frame cars, too, and strongly disagree. They squeak and rattle and sound terrible. As to "road isolation", you're probably talking about pillow soft springs and shocks and struts. That's not isolation. That's lack of control and feedback.
The last "body on frame" car I drove was my 2011 Z06 Corvette. My 370Z (monocoque) was MUCH more rigid.
I'll always remeber what happened around 2001-2002, don't remember exactly. There was a loud story in the news about private business owner who (imagine that) bought each of his employee a new BMW M3.
28 of them to be specific. He bought them directly from BMW and paid $250 000 total. Simple math says he paid less than $ 9000 per car. At that same time, new M3s where roughly $20-21 000 dealership.
I also have no doubt that BMW still made some profit off it.
This story was one and only mathematical proof how much mark up car manufacturers and dealers do when they sell a new vehicle. It also explains, why Tesla guy is hated and sued for direct sales.
I also hope this answers at least a part of OP question.
Of course not worth it.
Find a Mr Friendly guy with dealer license and ask him to get you a car out of lease from dealer auction. You'll save easy 30%.
This may not be the kind of answer you had in mind, but the value of consumer goods is by nature subjective, since it is dependent upon the consumer's circumstances, preferences, and values.
For some, the price is worth it; for others it is not. Fair?
Depends. I bought my 2009 Honda Fit Sport new for about $18K out the door. A 3 year old Fit with say 35K miles (from the dealer) is anywhere from $14 to $16K (with tax), so I'd say it's far better to buy new.
For $2K to $4K extra, I'd rather have a new car because I'd be 100% sure about service, have the warranty longer, and get the color/ features that I want instead of being limited to what's on the used car lot.
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.
The road isolation and comfort factor that a framed car gives you, cannot be copied using a unit-body structure.
Anyway, cars today are much better than the old ones back in the 70's and 80's. Back then getting 100,000 miles out of a car was a big deal. Now it is nothing. Also, thanks to the Japanese cars don't rust nearly like the old ones. Still, cars aren't worth the wildly high prices, but we are sort of stuck. The used car market is super strong as well and you are paying a lot for used.
