Does this sound right?

Biggus_Dickus

MinuteNoodles said:

melb said:

hi there I'm having to scrap my 2004 Ford Focus cos work required for MOT is not viable.  So went to collect it from the garage who I have used for about 10 years and he tells me his friend is selling a 2010 Ford Focus on behalf of his dad with only 21,000 for £3000.
This sounded a good price but when I looked up the MOT history this is what I found.  How can all this be possible on a car with such low mileage?  

As we've repeatedly said, low mileage is not good for a car. Low mileage usually means lots of short journeys around town which wear out suspension, steering, brakes, the exhaust, the clutch, engine and gear box much much more than sitting in 6th gear at 2000RPM at 70MPH on a motorway for 40-50 miles at a time.

Think of how many gear changes you do, how much starting and stopping, how many bumps, potholes and speed humps you'll go over in a mile or two of urban driving then think about how little you'll do of all of that in the same distance on a non-urban A road, dual carriageway or motorway. 

I've known cars used almost exclusively for school runs, a bit of Tesco and short drive to work have the bottom ends of the engines go bang by 50,000 miles. On the other hand I've owned plenty of cars which have been motorway mileage munchers with over 150,000 on running as sweet as a nut. If you offered me two 2010 Focuses, one with 21,000 miles on and one with 121,000 miles I'd take the 121,000 miles as it'll likely give much less grief.

Not all cars with low mileage have done lots of short journeys;...I don’t know for sure but perhaps the elderly chap who drove this car for 9 years had quite a standard journey profile but just didn’t venture out that often.

During the last 8 yrs of his life my old dad’s Nissan (that he bought from new) only covered an average of 40 miles a week which in the main consisted of 2 (dual carriageway) trips to the supermarket and the odd (motorway) trip to see my brother.

He certainly wasn’t out every day and the car was kept garaged when not being used. It was in excellent condition when it was sold.

Each car needs to be judged on its own merits and one needs to take a more a holistic view rather than simply adopting the “high mileage good, low mileage bad” mantra;

....imho, of course. 

oldagetraveller1

"reudctions in weight means springs go"

Which results in the springs having less mass to support and probably last longer.

Scrapit

oldagetraveller1 said:

"reudctions in weight means springs go"

Which results in the springs having less mass to support and probably last longer.

What car is lighter now than it was 10 years ago?

facade

the typical car is about the same weight as it was when unit construction became popular in the '60s, however, they are a fair bit bigger.

My woeful Renault Nissan is supposedly made from "super duper high strength steel", which apart from frightening you out of welding it for fear it will crumple like a paper bag as soon as it warms up, means the panels are hyper-thin to keep the weight down, so they can get away with weedy little "corrodomatic (tm)" springs that snap as soon as you go over a ripple in the road.

molerat

Want to see low mileage ?  My SIL has just been given an 03 plate Focus with a genuine 6600 on the clock !

Scrapit

facade said:

the typical car is about the same weight as it was when unit construction became popular in the '60s, however, they are a fair bit bigger.

My woeful Renault Nissan is supposedly made from "super duper high strength steel", which apart from frightening you out of welding it for fear it will crumple like a paper bag as soon as it warms up, means the panels are hyper-thin to keep the weight down, so they can get away with weedy little "corrodomatic (tm)" springs that snap as soon as you go over a ripple in the road.

Bigger and heavier.

facade

Don't think so, medium cars have weighted 1100-1200kg for donkeys years, but they are definitely wider.

Scrapit

There's an argument every where on mse. 
I do think so. The numbers don't lie.

AdrianC

Scrapit said:

There's an argument every where on mse. 
I do think so. The numbers don't lie.

Let's look at Parkers, and the weights for something fairly generic and representative... Focus, base spec, all four generations.

Mk1 - ~1050kg
Mk2, 3, 4 - all ~1250kg

Of course, that ignores the minor detail that nobody buys Focuses any more. The people who bought Focuses now buy SUVs - and Ford are happy to offer the Kuga, on the same platform as the Focus.
Mk1 (Focus Mk2 platform) - ~1500kg
Mk2 (Focus Mk4 platform) - ~1450kg

So, yes, you could say the new Kuga is (slightly) lighter than the old. But it's still a damn sight heavier than a Focus.

And that's ignoring the move to EVs. Ford don't do a BEV Kuga yet, but the PHEV Kuga is ~1700kg. I dunno about you, but I make that about 2/3 heavier than the Mk1 Focus that the same buyer may have bought 20yrs ago.

Scrapit

AdrianC said:

Scrapit said:

There's an argument every where on mse. 
I do think so. The numbers don't lie.

Let's look at Parkers, and the weights for something fairly generic and representative... Focus, base spec, all four generations.

Mk1 - ~1050kg
Mk2, 3, 4 - all ~1250kg

Of course, that ignores the minor detail that nobody buys Focuses any more. The people who bought Focuses now buy SUVs - and Ford are happy to offer the Kuga, on the same platform as the Focus.
Mk1 (Focus Mk2 platform) - ~1500kg
Mk2 (Focus Mk4 platform) - ~1450kg

So, yes, you could say the new Kuga is (slightly) lighter than the old. But it's still a damn sight heavier than a Focus.

And that's ignoring the move to EVs. Ford don't do a BEV Kuga yet, but the PHEV Kuga is ~1700kg. I dunno about you, but I make that about 2/3 heavier than the Mk1 Focus that the same buyer may have bought 20yrs ago.

And on cue he here is, arguments to be had. Focus you say? Mk4 max curb weight vs say mk2 max curb weight? Youre welcome.