used van with a reconditioned engine. A sign to stay away?

forgotmyname

Have you actually seen the vehicle, inspected it and driven it?

Any missing bolts or untidy wiring in the engine bay? Is it running properly?

I presume you checked that the engine and chassis numbers match?

xHannahx

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Transits are working vehicles and quite expensive to buy new, so the first owner or two tend to get their money's worth with high mileage. Just under 12k per year is on the low side for the sort of use they normally get and, while obviously possible, could be clocked.

Not always. Father in law has a peugeot van same size as transit.
Bought it at 12 months old, one owner -the peugeot dealer, it had 3000 miles on the clock and had been a demonstrator.
He's had it about a year and it's never done a days work, and about 600 miles a month.
He works long but split shifts (6am-12noon, 5pm-11pm) 4 days a week, so fitted it out with a camp bed and sleeps between shifts rather than do a 30mile round trip home and back in the split.
Whilst I appreciate father in laws use isn't normal it's not uncommon neither.
Another scenario here in Cornwall most of the surfers have vans just for taking their boards about, most doing fairly low mileage.

Joe_Horner

Agreed, there are plenty of exceptions, but the vast majority of the Transit fleet is still commercial use. Autotrader Vans has a vaguely interesting mileage system:

http://vans.autotrader.co.uk/used-vans/ford/transit/2008

If you click on mileage in the left hand menu then it gives a bar graph showing the spread across their adverts.

By eyeball, the mean for a 2008 transit is around 90k across the 357 they're listing at the moment and the median group appears to be around 100k, although that's harder to judge because they change the groupings after 100k.

So 70k is enough on the low side to raise an eyebrow, although probably not full alarm bells.

Amazin

forgotmyname wrote: »

Have you actually seen the vehicle, inspected it and driven it?

Any missing bolts or untidy wiring in the engine bay? Is it running properly?

I presume you checked that the engine and chassis numbers match?

Yes, he took me for a test drive and everything sounds fine to me. he also opened the bounet and showed me the engine. tbh, I haven't noticed anything suspcious.

Just under 12k per year is on the low side for the sort of use they normally get and, while obviously possible, could be clocked.

well, last time I checked 1 in 20 vechicle will be clocked but if they're clocked then how can they still pass the MOT tests?

Joe_Horner

Amazin wrote: »

well, last time I checked 1 in 20 vechicle will be clocked but if they're clocked then how can they still pass the MOT tests?

Mileage reading isn't part of the MOT test in any way, except that they enter the current reading as part of the paperwork. The system doesn't care at all if the mileage they enter is lower than it was the year before, or even 5 years before.

forgotmyname

If your putting faith in an MOT showing a vehicle is good then you need a reality check.

My mate took a car in and it passed when it didnt have a reverse gear. He just found an MOT station where they drive it in one way and out the other so no need to reverse it.

As long as it passes their tests when the tester prods and pokes it then thats all that is needed. It could be a wreck and still pass an MOT.