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.
I can afford to up my budget but not sure if that's prudent or not. Since I don't drive much (around 5k miles per year), I don't think a high mileage car is necessary since I am not going to drive it until the wheels come off. A higher mileage car combined with an older model year is a tough sell later on. Thus, a low mileage car (around 30k) that's even presently 8-10 years old I think is better because 10 years from now it will have 80k max miles. I'm looking for the lowest depreciation (because I will inherently suffer depreciation just due to low miles) over a 10 year period and car that will be easy to sell then as well.
The less gadgetry in a car, the less to go wrong down the line. The nicest 15 yr old car i see now are a 2000 Lexus LS 400, 2000 S Class, 2000 Audi's and 2000 BMW 5 or 7 series.
If you only plan to put 5k mi a year on the car, I'd look for cars with higher miles on them now as they will cost less initially and then depreciate less as their mileage normalizes with age.
If you get a car now with 60-70k mi on it, it won't have bad reliability over the next five years and you can still sell it before it hits the 100k mi mark.
The mid 2000s Ford 500 to the 2009 Ford Taurus has a classic style that should hold its own. No creases and flares in the sheet metal that will undoubtedly look dated in a few years. I'll add the late 2000s Chevy Impala to that list.
I drive a '07 Five Hundred and love it for how comfortable it is and the amazing view out, but let's face it, it looked dated already when it was new. On the other hand, I was able to get one with 42,000 miles for $11K off a commercial lease, and that was four years ago.
No, it won't be a bargain. The wisdom was that when Saturn was axed, the resale value would go into the toilet. It didn't happen. When i bought my last car, i went and shopped 6-cylinder Aura's, thinking that they would be cheaper than the Malibu. They weren't.
The Aura was considered a more "upscale" car than the Malibu. In 2009 it had special laminated glass that made it quieter along with a number of other NVH improvements.
I bought a brand new 2009 that listed at 29k for 19k in 2009. A bargain indeed. In 2013, when I sold it, the going price was about 1 k less than a comparable Malibu. At this time, if you go to any of the used car pricing guides, you'll find that a loaded 2009 Aura XR 6cyl. will be several thousand less than a comparable 2009 Malibu LTZ 6 cyl.
Last edited by HarryWho?; 01-22-2015 at 05:50 AM..
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.
