Advice: What car would you buy?

MsA_2

Hi,

I really need some advice.

I am torn between 2 cars, both the same model deisel. Would you go for:

A 2008 car with 91k on the clock or a 2006 car with 70k?

I am tempted by the 2008 car, but worried about the mileage. I have worked out that if I have the car for 3 years, doing 10k a year on it, the average mileage would be brought down th 15k a year.

TIA

bigjl

Always go for the newest year myself.

A three yr old car with full main dealer history and a printout from a lease.company is a car with many more miles of life left.

The older car may have been a lease car then used by a budget conscious private owner that was only interested in running it with minimal maintenance.

I have worked for many years in the courier and private hire industry, and still kmow many blokes that still do it.

We would always buy cheap, above average mileage ex lease with a nice long print out service history.

A car that has done 91k has certainly done most of those miles on dual carraigeways or motorway at perfect running temperatures.

My advice, if you haven't already guessed is to go for the newest car you can afford. I bet the 91k has even had the first cambelt done.

Hammyman

MsA wrote: »

Hi,

I really need some advice.

I am torn between 2 cars, both the same model deisel. Would you go for:

A 2008 car with 91k on the clock or a 2006 car with 70k?

I am tempted by the 2008 car, but worried about the mileage. I have worked out that if I have the car for 3 years, doing 10k a year on it, the average mileage would be brought down th 15k a year.

TIA

I bought my Mondeo at 3 years old with 90,000 on the clock - one owner ex company sales rep motorway muncher lease car that'd spent most of its life in top gear. It is now nearly 7 years old and has 153,000 on the clock. Apart from an alternator bearing, rear subframe bushes (common fault on this model, now polybushed) and a split turbo pipe (again, common fault - £40), it has never let me down. Never uses a drop of oil between services, still returns mid 50 MPG.

21,000 miles is not a lot of difference but there's the "70k rule" to think about on the 2006 car which I and most mechanics I know are aware of. Basically the 70k rule states that around 70,000 miles or so a car will need one or more of the following or not be far off needing them:

• Cambelt
• Brakes - both pads and discs
• Clutch
• Shock Absorbers

70k is a dangerous mileage to be buying a car. At 90k, one or more of the above will have failed and been replaced.

LandyAndy

MsA wrote: »

Hi,

I really need some advice.

I am torn between 2 cars, both the same model deisel. Would you go for:

A 2008 car with 91k on the clock or a 2006 car with 70k?

I am tempted by the 2008 car, but worried about the mileage. I have worked out that if I have the car for 3 years, doing 10k a year on it, the average mileage would be brought down th 15k a year.

TIA

Knowing the make, model and asking price of the two would be helpful:).

In general, though, I would also go with the newer car.

Lum

Since we're talking modern diesels, I would go for the higher mileage one. The low mileage one is more likely to have been pootled around town, never getting warm enough to perform DPF regeneration and by now it's probably about to fail which can cost about £1500 to fix on average.

The high mileage one is more likely to have spent most of it's life on the motorway, gotten nice and warm and still have a DPF in good condition.

80,000 miles is not high mileage for a diesel.

It would help if we knew what model of car you were talking about, of course.

LandyAndy

Lum wrote: »

Since we're talking modern diesels, I would go for the higher mileage one. The low mileage one is more likely to have been pootled around town, never getting warm enough to perform DPF regeneration and by now it's probably about to fail which can cost about £1500 to fix on average.

The high mileage one is more likely to have spent most of it's life on the motorway, gotten nice and warm and still have a DPF in good condition.

80,000 miles is not high mileage for a diesel.

It would help if we knew what model of car you were talking about, of course.

70k in 5 years for the older one is still 14k per year. Hardly low mileage and enough to have taken care of the DPF regeneration.

rodenal

I would completely ignore the mileage for purposes other than working out what maintenance was needed / should have been done at or close to the mileage (i.e cambelt) and buy purely on condition. 2 years really is nothing, some drivers can destroy a brand new car in 12 months others can have nothing outside normal maintenance go wrong in 12 years (ok that's not likely but you get my point).

Strider590

MsA wrote: »

Advice: What car would you buy?

I'd go for the 2002 Dodge Viper :cool:

MsA_2

LandyAndy wrote: »

Knowing the make, model and asking price of the two would be helpful:).

In general, though, I would also go with the newer car.

They are both Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi Titaniums for 7k

I have just found out that the 2006 is £95 tax, not the £30 I thought, so it might have ruled it out.

Thank you all for your advice so far. I was worried about the 2008, but what you have all said has made sense and put me at ease a little more. I will ask on my lunch break what has been replaced on the 2008 91k to give me an idea of what might need to be replaced in the future.

jaydeeuk1

MsA wrote: »

They are both Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi Titaniums for 7k

I have just found out that the 2006 is £95 tax, not the £30 I thought, so it might have ruled it out.

Thank you all for your advice so far. I was worried about the 2008, but what you have all said has made sense and put me at ease a little more. I will ask on my lunch break what has been replaced on the 2008 91k to give me an idea of what might need to be replaced in the future.

You being serious?

Strider590

^^ It's a big difference, the money saved could buy a pack of crisps every week for a whole year! :rotfl: