What matters more mileage or age for a vehicle (2013, tires, valve)

[skinsguy37]

As what others have alluded to, many variables involved with how long your vehicle lasts. How it's driven, where it's driven, and where it lives. Some good advice on here already, so I won't recreate the wheel on that.

I do think, in general, cars built after 2000 have the potential to last a very long time if taken care of.

[Stonepa]

Originally Posted by fisheye

As cars age there are some maintenance items that are not normally considered 'routine'; like the timing belt and brake lines. One bad timing belt can literally total the vehicle where it is not worth repairing. Most of the vehicles, I am familiar with, required the belt to be replaced every six years of 75,000 miles. Especially where states use a lot of road salt; our brake lines are corroding. Somewhere around the fifteen year mark, depending on how well the vehicle was washed and cleaned of salt, the brake lines could start to fail. It is not too bad if it is only one or two lines that have to be replaced; but it can get more expensive if the distribution blocks and all lines have to be renewed.

The road salt can also destroy the frame or unibody. That is hard to predict since it depends on the individual manufacturers construction and how well we remove the road salt. Ideally we would all use pressure washers on the underbellies of our vehicles right after they were exposed to the salt - but that does not always happen.

Timing belts and water pumps are normal maintenance on all vehicles that have a belt.

[KO Stradivarius]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

I live in the land of road salt and don’t garage my car. Age matters because corrosion is inevitable. Miles also matter. I need to be able to trust my car because I drive in rural mountainous places with no cell phone reception in subzero weather. If I don’t trust the car, I get rid of it.

In 2018, cars take more miles before becoming unreliable and corrode more slowly. 8 or 9 years and 150,000 miles doesn’t turn the car into a beater if I’m maintaining it properly. 40 years ago, there was no way I’d keep a car that long.

This is correct. I also got a low mileage car from my mother (2007 MKZ) a few years ago with < 20k miles. It's been great so far, after turning 55,000 miles, other than the chrome peeling off of the wheels/rims. It seems to be causing rim leaks . I just went to the tire shop a few weeks ago and they claim it will only worsen. But even if I replace the wheels for $800-$1000, that's still better than making car payments IMO.

There are other things to consider:

- Other things occur due to aging, mostly on rubber & plastic parts, such as weatherstrips "taking a set", hoses & belts cracking due to "crosslinking", interior trim UV fading, also exterior trim/paint, etc. On new cars it's referred to as "lot rot" when a new car sits for a while.

- Cars are always improving on safety. I work in "the business", and there is no doubt that safety improves with each new redesign of the model due to the evolution of both regulations and technology.

With all of this being said, I still think it's probably better to keep it and fix whatever is needed, until it becomes unreliable.

[Peregrine]

I'll take the other approach. Sure a well maintained vehicle trumps all the other factors. And yes, it's great when looking at used cars if you can see the full vehicle history. But let's be realistic here: when buying used you rarely have much of a glimpse into the cars full service history unless it was always at the dealer. In this case, which would be most: mileage wins. IMO AND my experience.
Every car I've bought until this one I always looked for low miles and I've had excellent luck with cars.

[Wolverine607]

I live in Metro Detroit where we got cold winters and hot summers.

My 2009 Escape is garage kept at my house, but sits outside all day at work on weekdays.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by Stonepa

Timing belts and water pumps are normal maintenance on all vehicles that have a belt.

They should be; but many people do not get past the 3,000 mile oil change. Also many do not have the money for the more expensive 'preventive maintenance' repairs and put them off. That does not mean that it is right; they could pay dearly for their procrastination.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by skinsguy37

I do think, in general, cars built after 2000 have the potential to last a very long time if taken care of.

I think there is a lot of variability from model to model.


I had a 2003 V8 AWD Mountaineer. Yep. The Ford Exploder. Between Vermont road salt and a notoriously problematic model, that car at 115,000 miles and 12 years living outdoors was an unreliable beater. I used it as my winter beater spare car to drive 2 miles to go skiing the last 7 years I owned it. Every summer, my indie mechanic would yell at me to get rid of it. He was tired of doing jobs that started with a cutting torch or a SawzAll and EasyOuts.



There are plenty of cars that would have been really mechanically solid at 12 years/115,000 miles.

[unit731]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

I think there is a lot of variability from model to model.


I had a 2003 V8 AWD Mountaineer. Yep. The Ford Exploder. Between Vermont road salt and a notoriously

There is a place in Shrewsbury, Vermont that does oil undercoating. My 2002 still looks new. I go every year for the oil undercoating.

Of course, I wash and wax my vehicles.

[SirDrums]

I had a 2005 escape I bought Brand new and drove 155k miles before I sold it to a college student that needed a car....ok, ok, I really wanted a New Mustang so the college student made the decision easier.... haha.

As far as I know the student is still driving it 4 years later....

[joee5]

That engine needs to be opened up every once in a while. Drive it on a major highway. Sometimes too low mirage or use is just as bad as too many miles or use.
Gotta ask OP though. You never drive on an trips, vacations or dates? As per your post you go to work, back home and visit your parents is all