# Buying an old used car



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

I know this topic has been done to death a little bit. 

I've been a happy non-car owner for the last 3 years. Prior to that I owned my first car, a pretty sweet Audi A3.

ANyway, my kid is turning 7 and biking with him is much harder now so once winter comes it might be time to finally purchase a car. I've started looking now and I'm having a hard time figuring out what 'a good deal' is and what is a 'penny wise pound foolish' deal.

One car that caught my eye was a 2006 Subaru Legacy for about $8500. It only have 50K on the odometer so this seems like a great deal. Do cars this old get more and more expensive to fix? I'm leaning either that or getting a new Mazda 3 that has 5 years at 0% and a few other incentives. Those run about 25K (I figure the financing though is worth about 4-5K).

Strategies? Thanks.


----------



## lagagnon (Apr 13, 2017)

First check the value in the Canadian Black Book: http://www.canadianblackbook.com/ , to ensure you're paying a fair price. The $8500 seems steep for that vehicle, probably because the owner realizes he can get a bit more for such a low mileage vehicle. Also be aware that some Subaru's suffered from early gasket failure, one of their biggest drawbacks. Check for fluid stains where that vehicle has been parked.

Almost any modern post 2000 Japanese vehicle will do 300,000km without major expenses, as long as the maintenance schedule has been adhered to.

Buying new vehicles leaves you to wear very large depreciation costs in the first 5 years, so financially it is always better to find a good used vehicle at a good price.


----------



## DollaWine (Aug 4, 2015)

Always better to get a 1-3 year old car rather than a brand new one. The depreciation is insane and doesn't justify the negligible (if any) difference in repairs for a new car vs LIGHTLY used car. The Subaru seems like a pretty good deal, but I feel you could negotiate that even lower. The car has low mileage, but at the end of the day it's still 11 years old. You could probably get a 2011 Mazda 3 with ~100k on it for that same $8500, and it will do fine in snow and is great on gas and will run to 300k+.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

I would get a Consumer reports yearbook to review the reliability and repair records for the various makes you want, Japanese cars are usually the best but the D3 are much better than they used to be now too. Get a 1-3 yr old car w a reliable v6 and save 30-50% vs new. Decide on the model then check out auto trader or Kijijij for deals. Dealers are usually pretty good too as you have more recourse if there is an issue.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Leaning on 1-4 years old myself; maybe 2-4 years None - to avoid the same questions you have. re: do cars this old get more and more expensive to fix? 

I suppose the 0% financing vs. cash back incentive is worth about that isn't it - about $4-5K extra costs on a $30K car?

I was considering a Honda Civic hatch but I also have my eye on a sporty Mini. I've heard the latter has maintenance issues? Can anyone confirm that about Mini?

None - are you thinking of buying via dealer or private sale?


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

My Own Advisor said:


> Leaning on 1-4 years old myself; maybe 2-4 years None - to avoid the same questions you have. re: do cars this old get more and more expensive to fix?
> 
> I suppose the 0% financing vs. cash back incentive is worth about that isn't it - about $4-5K extra costs on a $30K car?
> 
> ...


First: Don't buy a civic for the simple reason that it's the most boring car on the planet. It's my most hated car actually. Funny story, my ex girlfriend just bought one. That has killed any chance of any sort of reconciliation. I just can't do it. I have standards. I do not share a bed with a woman who sits in a civic. NO THANKS. DEAL BREAKER. GAME OVER.

I looked at a mini. I found a crazy awesome one - 2005 - 10,000km (not kidding) for 6K or something. I'm told they handle great (as one would expect) but I'm told it's not a man car. It's not that, it's more a convertible in Canada doesn't make much sense plus they're not safe for kids. Oh well. 


The thing I'm struggling a bit with is tech in cars has changed so much just in the last 5 years and will change even more in the next 5. Maybe not playing the tech game at all and just going outside the window is what to do.

Anyway, we'll see what the guy says. His ad sucked, it was light on deets and also no photos. If the thing has been left out in the rain to collect moss over the last decade it could still be a piece of garbage even at 50K.

I prefer private b/c I think you end up saving about 10% that way although there is (presumably) more risk


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Jimmy said:


> I would get a Consumer reports yearbook to review the reliability and repair records for the various makes you want, Japanese cars are usually the best but the D3 are much better than they used to be now too. Get a 1-3 yr old car w a reliable v6 and save 30-50% vs new. Decide on the model then check out auto trader or Kijijij for deals. Dealers are usually pretty good too as you have more recourse if there is an issue.


Issue is that there are incentives for new that can save you about 20% off the purchase of a new car so the argument for a 2-3 year old car doesn't hold that much.


----------



## JWC (Nov 6, 2014)

none said:


> Issue is that there are incentives for new that can save you about 20% off the purchase of a new car so the argument for a 2-3 year old car doesn't hold that much.


I disagree. 2 year old will lose 40% value, 4 years old around 60%. Buying new cars is for people that don't mind parting with money.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

JWC said:


> I disagree. 2 year old will lose 40% value, 4 years old around 60%. Buying new cars is for people that don't mind parting with money.


Youre living in the past. Cars hold their value much better than this now.


----------



## JWC (Nov 6, 2014)

none said:


> Your living in the past. Cars hold their value much better than this now.


I'm currently in the process of buying a car for $35,000 that is 3 years old. The new price was $69,500. I've been shopping for the past month or so, this has been the norm from what I've seen. I'm sure there are some exceptions just like anything else but the 2 year old lose 40% value, 4 years old around 60% loss has been the average or so my calculator thinks anyways. 

I guess we will just agree to disagree.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I don't think there is anything wrong with buying an end-of-model year new Mazda 3 (for example) if you can get enough $$ off the MRSP. I agree that the depreciation on well built Japanese cars is nowhere near the exaggerated numbers being thrown around here. The key is to getting a dealer discount as well as factory rebates. A new vehicle (or next to new) provides peace of mind for those not all that keen or interested in making trips to auto repair places for some time.

I wouldn't buy a 2006 (11-12 yr old) car no matter what its reputation (unless it is perhaps garaged most of the time). Super low mileage itself can be an issue with lack of use, along with aging seals and rubber seals around windows and doors, leaky shocks, corroded brake calipers, etc. If it is still on original rubber, the tires have expired due to age. It can be unsafe driving on such old rubber (google tire age if you don't believe me). 

No matter how reliable a vehicle make/model is, aging is a factor and some money will have to be spent.

Added: Invest some money in the Consumer Reports book on vehicle reliability ratings. It will at least give you some directional advice. Too many of the American model stuff is pure crap and there are some Japanese lemons too here and there (Nissan is hit and miss). Hyundia and Kia are (or have) caught up to Japanese vehicles but only in the last few years.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

This seems appropriate:
http://www.theonion.com/article/toyota-recalls-1993-camry-due-fact-owners-really-s-50480

*Toyota Recalls 1993 Camry Due To Fact That Owners Really Should Have Bought Something New By Now*"


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I drive a 14 year old and a 35 year old car, so I'm perhaps biased... but to answer your question, a typical car will start to need major repairs at between 10 and 15 years old. However, a car with 50K on it at that age is far from typical (most have close to 200K on them by that age). Of course, you can still have issues if the car sat unused for long periods of time. If you're unsure you can have a mechanic check it over, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a 11 year old car with that kind of mileage if everything checks out.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

yeah, I think I'm going to use the BCAA mobile car checking service. ($200) and if it all checks out then maybe I'll just get it. I'm not exactly enjoying this process.


----------



## Emjay85 (Nov 9, 2014)

I think personally, I would lean towards a car that an average, or slightly below, amount of KM on them. If you buy with 100k+ km it should have had a lot of the consumable parts already replaced (brakes, tires etc) and probably a couple of the "usual" suspects replaced also (wheel bearings, bushings etc) The rest of the components, if driven fairly, should last quite some time. If not I'm sure you will notice on a test drive.

With 50K on an 11 year old car, be prepared to put new tires on right away. They might have tread but there would be a good chance they are cracking and/or the rubber compound will have changed substantially.


----------



## CalgaryPotato (Mar 7, 2015)

JWC said:


> I disagree. 2 year old will lose 40% value, 4 years old around 60%. Buying new cars is for people that don't mind parting with money.


Except it's not true anymore. I tried buying a used Odyssey or Sienna last year vs. a brand new one, and 2 years old wasn't even cutting off 10% (after incentives) let alone 40%.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

Interesting car ownership cost analysis here. Depreciation is 57% of total ownership costs in the 1st yr but it will vary from model to model. Table at the bottom shows costs to operate cars that might be useful. All the Japanese compacts are the cheapest. Prius, M2, base Corolla ,Honda Fit etc

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/what-that-car-really-costs-to-own/index.htm


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

CalgaryPotato said:


> Except it's not true anymore. I tried buying a used Odyssey or Sienna last year vs. a brand new one, and 2 years old wasn't even cutting off 10% (after incentives) let alone 40%.


It's definitely brand and model-specific.
When we bought our Forester, we wanted to buy used, 2yr old, but they only depreciated 10-15% from new, so we bought new instead.
When I bought my car (Fusion), it depreciated almost 40% in 1.5 yrs, so it made more sense to buy used.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

nobleea said:


> It's definitely brand and model-specific.
> When we bought our Forester, we wanted to buy used, 2yr old, but they only depreciated 10-15% from new, so we bought new instead.
> When I bought my car (Fusion), it depreciated almost 40% in 1.5 yrs, so it made more sense to buy used.


I can see that. The Japanese cars still have far better repair records so they hold their value better.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Jimmy said:


> Interesting car ownership cost analysis here. Depreciation is 57% of total ownership costs in the 1st yr but it will vary from model to model. Table at the bottom shows costs to operate cars that might be useful. All the Japanese compacts are the cheapest. Prius, M2, base Corolla ,Honda Fit etc
> 
> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/what-that-car-really-costs-to-own/index.htm


What a weird way to do it. Why standardize it to yearly costs like that? Pie charts are garbage


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

none said:


> What a weird way to do it. Why standardize it to yearly costs like that? Pie charts are garbage


The yearly cost idea is very practical for comparing models. There will always be outliers and lemons within the subset, but we do the same thing with our couch potato investments all the time. Stick with the lowest cost 'model' and in the long run, you'll come out ahead.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

none said:


> What a weird way to do it. Why standardize it to yearly costs like that? Pie charts are garbage


The pt was to show some of the cost of cars relative to each other which should help you unless it is too complicated. Pie charts are used all the time for cost studies too btw.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Jimmy said:


> The pt was to show some of the cost of cars relative to each other which should help you unless it is too complicated. Pie charts are used all the time for cost studies too btw.


It's not too complicated it's just a stupid method to communicate information. The concepts are trivial. People who use pie charts usually don't know what they're doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/pie-charts-are-the-worst-2013-6


----------



## STech (Jun 7, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> I wouldn't buy a 2006 (11-12 yr old) car no matter what its reputation (unless it is perhaps garaged most of the time). Super low mileage itself can be an issue with lack of use, along with aging seals and rubber seals around windows and doors, leaky shocks, corroded brake calipers, etc. If it is still on original rubber, the tires have expired due to age. It can be unsafe driving on such old rubber (google tire age if you don't believe me).


Bingo.

I wouldn't totally shy away, but I'd inspect very carefully.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

none said:


> It's not too complicated it's just a stupid method to communicate information. The concepts are trivial. People who use pie charts usually don't know what they're doing.
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/pie-charts-are-the-worst-2013-6


I was talking about the table at the bottom. Not sure what your problem is in seeing which cars are cheaper than others in a quick comparative format but whatever


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

All I can say is that I drive a 2011 Subaru Legacy 3.6 with 150,000 kms on it and with the exception of brake pads and regular oil changes have never spent any money on it. Gas mileage at 10.2 l per 100 km is not that great on the 3.6 litre but it is excellent in the snow and very reliable. For what its worth they would only give me ten grand on a trade in for a new one.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Well I put in an offer in a used mazda 3 last night. It was rejected.

A problem is that mazda 3 have a 5 year at 0% right now. based on a 30K car I figure that's worth about $4-5000. Buying a 2 year used for 25K just doesn't make sense but used cars are not taking this into account.

Oh well. 

I went to the dealer yesterday and I caught the sales person lying to me (about when the 5 year 0%) ends. Anyway, car shopping isn't as much fun as I hoped!


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Our last two cars have been used. One, a Honda was three years old. Took us three months to find the 'right one'. The Solara convertable (summer car) was ten years old, low milage, summer car. We live in Calgary. We bought it in Edmonton. Most of the others on the market were trash...high mileage, bad tops, rebuilds, accidents, poor or worn out rubber. It takes time and effort to find a good one. In our case the Solara was out of production so used was the only way to go...plus the depreciation has been absorbed by someone else. And one more nice aspect. NO tax, just a registration/plate fee of $79.

Lots of junk out there, late model and otherwise. Just make sure you do car proof for accident reports and liens. Stay away from the US stuff....lots of it came from flood areas and the reporting is poor. While you have the VIN number in hand to do the car proof search, check the vehicle manufacturer's website for recall information. This may give you an indication of the reliability of the car and how will it was built.


----------



## tavogl (Oct 1, 2014)

The more perks/options a car has, the more expensive it gets to fix small things, for example, we bought a 2016 Hyundai Sonata, couple of months ago someone broke our side mirror, went to the dealer, and KABOOM, they quoted 1.000 cad$ for the new side mirror, parts 500, paint, 200, install, 150 and taxes. Todays cars have tons of technology, even on the side mirrors, mine tilts down automatically when reversing, blind spot monitoring alert and what not. If you don't need/enjoy that get someting basic that's cheap to fix or replace parts.


----------

