Mileage on a 17 Year Old Audi

mr_munchem

I’m looking at a Y reg Audi TT as my mileage has now dropped massively and I want a car primarily to have fun without breaking the bank!

This particular one has 150,000 miles which initially put me off but then I realised that’s less than 10,000 a year. There are similar models that have done about 5,000 a year. At this age is there a minimum mileage I should be looking for? Or is that a silly question?

Thanks!

marlot

At this age, I'd be going entirely on condition.

mr_munchem

Thank you. Just looking out for signs it’s been well maintained and looked after?

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

Unfortunately at that age, the problem isn't going to be mileage but things like seals that are made of rubber and decay over time. On my 13 year old Merc the engine itself was in tip top condition, but there are rubber buffers (can't think of the word) in the pulleys and they degraded and needed replacing - about £800 on a car that went later for £250!

Also, mileage is not a guide to how it has been driven. If it has been hammered when it has been driven, then parts will wear more than a car that has been loved, hence as Marlot says, condition is more important than mileage. Having said that, I'd be aiming for lower mileage and good condition as a very high mileage engine (200k miles+) will simply be more worn and be a risk - definitely towards its design life.

Basically, budget for repairs and then you can be more relaxed about having a fun car.

AdrianC

Mileage is irrelevant on any car. It's even more irrelevant on an older car. It's even more irrelevanter on an older car of a type that's rife for abuse. Condition, condition, condition.

LandyAndy

If I wanted a car that was fun to drive I'm not sure I'd be buying an early TT.

worried_jim

LandyAndy wrote: »

If I wanted a car that was fun to drive I'm not sure I'd be buying an early TT.

but if the price is right.....

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Mileage is irrelevant on any car. It's even more irrelevant on an older car. It's even more irrelevanter on an older car of a type that's rife for abuse. Condition, condition, condition.

backed up by evidence of frequent servicing, maintenance receipts, timing belt change receipts, good brand tyres matching at least across axles, evidence of preventative maintenance, no current faults, etc, etc

Its not hugely difficult to make something old and tired look like its been well cared for.

motorguy

LandyAndy wrote: »

If I wanted a car that was fun to drive I'm not sure I'd be buying an early TT.

They're not a bad little thing to drive, but you're right, they're not going to win any awards for Fun.

LandyAndy

worried_jim wrote: »

but if the price is right.....

Do they get more fun to drive if they are cheap?

poppasmurf_bewdley

Mileage on any car these days is immaterial. At 17 years, it's probably been clocked at some time. MOT's only started recording mileage about 10 years ago so you won't be able to verify that it's correct.

I buy cars at between two and three years of age. The last one had 16k and the previous one 58k. Both the same age and both have been perfectly reliable, the latter still in the family and showing 112k now.

The highest mileage car I bought was a Volvo 740 with 375k on and I ran it for two years and put another 30k on it.

As has been said, go off condition, not mileage.