Owning a used jalopy: Same cost as leasing brand car.

[InsideTheCult]

I bought a used Honda in 2007.
Paid $6000.
It had 70k miles.

It finally died in 2011 at 140k miles.
I sold it for about $1000.
$5000 in depreciation, and $3000 in repairs.
Total cost of ownership was $8000 over 4 years.
$2000 a year. or $166/mo.
And this was to drive a 8 to 12 year old car

Average annual miles = 17500
I can easily reduce my miles, if needed.

Note: As an owner, I carried no comprehensive.

I think for about the same cost, I can drive a 0-4 year car.
I am done with ownership. From now on, I drive brand new leases, like everyone else.
For the same cost.

Am I missing anything?

[Leesbro63]

Yes. A lease with 17,500 miles per year is going to cost way more than commonly advertised 12,000 mile leases. And your warranty will be up in just over 2 years. And if you reduce your driving, then you need to redo the calculation for the jalopy costs also to keep the comparison apples to apples.

[Midpack]

Google will give you all you would ever want on leasing vs buying new or used. Maybe start there.

Do you think dealers are losing money leasing you a car? That's what your calculations and conclusions imply, but I'm sure any dealer will readily agree with your POV and lease you a car right away! I suspect dealers are smarter than that.

And what can you lease for $166/month (don't forget to add in the upfront cost, usually a couple thousand, and the excess mileage charges)?

[Leesbro63]

And the taxes. And the repair costs once the high miles have burned up the warranty early but the lease still has a year to go. And the fact that a leased car has to be turned with good tires and in good repair, yet the car will have 50,000+ miles at the end.

I think there is another issue. Most Hondas won't be totally dead at 140,000 miles and will be worth somewhat more than $1,000. Your spin of the roulette wheel of used car buying came up bad here but that is not a given. And perhaps the curve favors a used car that is "less used" than the one here was when you bot it.

Finally consider BUYING the new Honda Civic (or equivalent) and driving IT for 140,000 miles. That will probably be your lowest cost of total ownership without as much risk as buying a used unknown. You can probably get the payments down to near leasing levels if you stretch the loan to 60 months, which still might be the better option if you can't pay cash.

[snyder66]

A Honda dying at 140k? Define dying?

[Midpack]

A Honda dying at 140k? Define dying?

Good point. I traded a Honda at 164K miles without spending anywhere near $3000 on maintenance even in the last 4 years (OP's term) and it was still running fine, I just finally wanted something new. I know someone who has an Element with 315K miles and it's still going. Most sources say a Honda will go 200K without any serious maintenance costs, and you certainly still see old ones on the road.

[stevewolfe]

Am I missing anything?

Yes, a sample size of one. While a personal experience usually has more of an impact on a persons thinking, I think that on average, particularly with well maintained (you did maintain the car per the manufacturer specifications right? How about the folks that put the original 70k miles on the car? Any records with it at sale or proof of maintenance?) Honda, Toyota, etc you should've expected more.

3 years ago I sold my Toyota Corolla - purchased 1 year old with 5,390 miles on it. I drove it for 11 years and put an additional 234,000 miles on it. Paid $11,695 for it and sold it for $1,000. It's still running fine and a month or so ago I ran into the current owner who says it now has 269,000 miles on it.

Other than routine maintenance the only repair I ever did to it was to replace the seat belt on the drivers side due to sticking.

[bertilak]

Finally consider BUYING the new Honda Civic (or equivalent) and driving IT for 140,000 miles. That will probably be your lowest cost of total ownership without as much risk as buying a used unknown. You can probably get the payments down to near leasing levels if you stretch the loan to 60 months, which still might be the better option if you can't pay cash.

Agreed. My previous car was paid for in 3 years and I drove it for another eight years. That's five years with NO car payments. There WERE a bunch of maintenance costs and when the last estimate (blown head gasket, busted water pump, leaky hoses) came in at over $2000 I decided to sell.

So in my experience, having owned about a dozen cars, buying comes out ahead, but it assumes you can come up with the cash flow -- a little under twice what is needed for a lease. I priced a 60 month finance and it was about $580 compared to $302 for the lease. (I eventually leased a slightly more upscale car for $329 but didn't price the sale on that. I assume it would also be about 10% more.)

P.S. Don't take the first offer on a lease any more than you would take the first offer on a purchase!

[Kenkat]

I think the other thing you are missing is that the advertisements you see "Lease for $166 a month" does not include the down payment that is required up front. This easily adds the equivalent of another $100 a month or so to the real cost of the lease.

[jeffyscott]

My newspaper has an ad today for 36 mo. lease of Honda Civic LX, 4 door automatic. This ad says $0 down, the only extra cost is tax title and license plus a "service fee" (that is typically $129 around here). This a a 12,000 mile per year lease, so that is what is missing from the calculation, this lease is about 18 cents per mile plus there would still be some maintenance costs, so that is going to bump it up to at least 20 cents per mile. Your costs were about 11.5 cents per mile.

I have usually either bought new and kept "forever" (12-14 years) or bought cheap used cars in models with higher depreciation rates than Honda, myself. I don't see the value in higher priced used cars, especially in recent times.

[declan911]

I posted this previously in the buy or lease thread --> http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtop ... =2&t=86095

I used to be the most anti-lease person you probably could meet. I never cared much about what I was driving and never had a new car.

1 1/2 years ago my 99 Civic's suspension dropped out of it. I was able to sell it for about $1500 (I have no idea how). I shopped around for the best options, at first only looking at used cars. I was still in school at the time and didn't have the cash to lay out for a decent car and knew that even if I bought a "reliable" car like a Toyota or Honda for $6k it could realistically be a nightmare if problems began. I decided to take a look what the options are lease wise.

I shopped around and got a great deal, not picky about the car I got. I narrowed it down to a Nissan Versa and a Mazda 3. I got the best deal on the Mazda so I went with it. I haggled the hell out of the dealerships (going to 6-7 total). I ended up getting a 2010 Mazda 3 for $1,500 down (which included all fees + 1st months lease), $160/mo, 2 yr lease with 15k miles per year. In total for 2 yrs the car will cost me $5,340 - there's no way I could've found a used car anywhere near as reliable that wouldn't have similar depreciation.

Bottom line is, leases aren't as terrible as many would have you believe.

I quickly found out while doing my search that Hyundai, Chevy & Ford all have insanely high lease prices b/c of their low resale value when they are used. That's why cars like Toyota, Nissan, Mazda & Honda can be leased for $200/mo or less, once you return it to the dealer they can still get a decent price for it.

Also, I just found a site last night that looks at least pretty useful -- http://TrueCar.com

Basically gives you an idea what price you can haggle them down to if buying a new car. Or what potential residual cost you can talk them down to as the buy out if you are leasing.

My current lease is up in 6 months, I wish I had gone for the 3yr lease rather than the 3yr deal but it was my first lease and I didn't wanna be locked in for 3 yrs, in hindsight I should've done it b/c it would've saved me from making another downpayment for another year. I went into my Mazda dealer yesterday and I can get the brand new 2012 Mazda 3 for the same exact deal I got last time around. Just make sure to shop around, when I started shopping I was being quoted as much as $220/mo w/ $2200 down and only 10-12k miles per yr. Never agree to the first or even 3rd offer

[Leesbro63]

My newspaper has an ad today for 36 mo. lease of Honda Civic LX, 4 door automatic. This ad says $0 down, the only extra cost is tax title and license plus a "service fee" (that is typically $129 around here). This a a 12,000 mile per year lease...

You failed to quote the payment. $219 is what I'm seeing around Pittsburgh, plus the 10% Pennsylvania lease tax (versus 7% sales tax on a purchase difference between the trade in and the new car price). So that would be $241 per month times 36 months divided by 36K miles = 24 cents per mile. Plus extra insurance costs versus an older used car, minus maintenance/repairs compared to the older car.

[grabiner]

Note: As an owner, I carried no comprehensive.

I think for about the same cost, I can drive a 0-4 year car.

If you lease (or buy on a loan), you have to carry collision and comprehensive to protect the bank's interest. And even if you do want collision and comprehensive, you may want a higher deductible than the bank demands. (When I bought my first car, the bank required a $500 deductible; I raised it to $1000 as soon as I paid off the loan.) That's an extra cost.

The best way to drive a new car is to pay for it with cash; this makes the negotiations simpler, saves on paperwork, and ensures that you don't have to buy insurance you don't want. (But in order to do that, you have to save money for your car purchase in advance, or have enough liquid assets that you can make the purchase when you need it.)

[Leesbro63]

Bottom line is, leases aren't as terrible as many would have you believe.

This has become a correct statement. The real danger of leases is in the temptation to do more car than one can otherwise afford and to end up in a new-every-three cycle that is generally more costly than buying new and holding for 10-15 years. But for the person who does the unBogleheadish thing and gets a new car every few years, leasing is probably the better way to go these days. The game, by the way, with leasing (if you don't intend to buy at the end) is not the lowest price but the lowest payment. As you correctly pointed out, often the higher priced Honda/Toyota will have the lowest lease payment because of the higher residual value due to the market perception that, as used cars, they are worth more. The same thing, by the way, is often why Honda/Toyota cars are priced so high as used cars. The value curve favors going new with Honda/Toyota.

[Leesbro63]

If you lease (or buy on a loan), you have to carry collision and comprehensive to protect the bank's interest. And even if you do want collision and comprehensive, you may want a higher deductible than the bank demands. (When I bought my first car, the bank required a $500 deductible; I raised it to $1000 as soon as I paid off the loan.) That's an extra cost.

When I leased my son's Corolla 15 months ago, Toyota Credit was OK with me having a $1000 deductible. But I think my high credit score might have made this OK for me, whereas someone with lower credit might have been subject to carrying a lower deductible.

Your points, however, are correct. Insurance costs are higher on a new car and generally have even more restrictive provisions by a (lease or buy) lender. And paying cash and holding "forever" (10-15 years) is the cheapest way to go.

[Leesbro63]

By the way, Consumer Reports panned the redone 2012 Honda Civic mainly for interior styling and hard materials. If you are OK with that, I would guess there would be good deals to be had because of this. The mechanical quality is not in question. So buying a 2012 Civic might be a good deal for someone right now who can live with the horrible effects of hard plastic dash materials. :roll:

[zaboomafoozarg]

Though it may not have been your experience, owning a used car CAN be substantially cheaper - but there's a random chance that it won't be. It would be interesting to see a statistical analysis of the cost of used vehicles. For example, I also bought a used Honda Civic (in '05 for $4000), and have put about $3000 in it for repairs as well. Depreciation will likely be $3000-$4000, so if I can keep it until the Next Big Repair then trade it in, I'll probably be running about $1000 a year.

I've also been able to get cheap (~$25 a month) liability-only insurance on it, which saves money as well.

[Watty]

A hidden cost of leasing is that in a few years when the lease expires you may be forced to get a replacement car when you are on a deadline and when it could be a bad time to buy or lease a car.

One of the things I have learned over the years is that it is better to replace a car before it dies so that you can take you time to wait to buy a car when there are very good deals available. Buying a car in a hurry when you "have to buy" is a very costly thing to do.

This also allow you to get a pretty good price for your old car since you can sell it while it is in reasonably good working order. About 18 months ago I bought a new car when there were great deals and I was able to sell a 9 year Camry with 130K miles for over $5,000 which was almost a third of what it cost new. I had planned on keeping to for a few more years but the way the numbers worked out it made a lot of sense to get the new car early.

[dbltrbl]

I guess we are in new math. Absolutely no way lease is better than owning a car unless you are the dealer. If you compare apples to Apples lease will fall by the wayside. Yes you were unlucky that your Honda died prematurely. Most cars, even American brands I have had, I drove till 180,000 and 230,000 miles. My current Honda has 145000 miles and going strong.

I wish you best but think carefully before signing a lease. If that's right for you for business or other reasons its OK.

[cacophony]

By the way, Consumer Reports panned the redone 2012 Honda Civic mainly for interior styling and hard materials. If you are OK with that, I would guess there would be good deals to be had because of this. The mechanical quality is not in question. So buying a 2012 Civic might be a good deal for someone right now who can live with the horrible effects of hard plastic dash materials. :roll:

To be fair, they panned a lot more than the interior quality:

"Handling has lost its agility and is now plagued by vague steering. The ride is choppy and road noise remains overly noticeable. Interior quality took a step backward. Braking performance suffers from long stopping distances in the Civic LX"

[jeffyscott]

My newspaper has an ad today for 36 mo. lease of Honda Civic LX, 4 door automatic. This ad says $0 down, the only extra cost is tax title and license plus a "service fee" (that is typically $129 around here). This a a 12,000 mile per year lease...

You failed to quote the payment. $219 is what I'm seeing around Pittsburgh, plus the 10% Pennsylvania lease tax (versus 7% sales tax on a purchase difference between the trade in and the new car price). So that would be $241 per month times 36 months divided by 36K miles = 24 cents per mile. Plus extra insurance costs versus an older used car, minus maintenance/repairs compared to the older car.

Oops , it was $176 per month and there is no special tax on leases here. Sales tax is 5.1% in my county. So you could add a penny per mile for that and get to about 21 cents per mile for lease, plus tax, plus maintenance costs.

[Leesbro63]

There must be some difference between the $219 vehicle here and the $176 vehicle there. If not, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? :lol

[Leesbro63]

To be fair, they panned a lot more than the interior quality:

"Handling has lost its agility and is now plagued by vague steering. The ride is choppy and road noise remains overly noticeable. Interior quality took a step backward. Braking performance suffers from long stopping distances in the Civic LX"

Oops, I stand greatly corrected!

[jeffyscott]

If you lease (or buy on a loan), you have to carry collision and comprehensive to protect the bank's interest. And even if you do want collision and comprehensive, you may want a higher deductible than the bank demands. (When I bought my first car, the bank required a $500 deductible; I raised it to $1000 as soon as I paid off the loan.) That's an extra cost.

The true extra cost, though, is the portion that covers the insurance company's administrative costs and profits (if any). If you have collision coverage or a lower deductible that you would not otherwise want, you would collect more should you have a claim. If, for example, 75% of the average insurance premium goes to pay the claims of policy holders, the net expected cost of the insurance is the other 25% of premiums.

[jeffyscott]

There must be some difference between the $219 vehicle here and the $176 vehicle there. If not, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? :lol

Here's the ad: http://hondacity.net/custom/newspaper-ads/

[declan911]

There must be some difference between the $219 vehicle here and the $176 vehicle there. If not, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? :lol

Here's the ad: http://hondacity.net/custom/newspaper-ads/

Looks like an awesome deal for a Honda Civic that has at least some of the bells and whistles (usually deals strip the car of AC/radio). Only thing may be they may require prestine credit for that deal, so when you go in there and your credit is less than 780 they may hit you with extra charges. That's the only potential trick I see here just looking at the ad and the fine print.

[Leesbro63]

The only thing about the Consumer's Report thing that bothers me is the stopping distance thing. Is that serious? The whole talk about ride and steering is blah blah blah to me. It's a new car and I can't really tell the difference in ride. I've had many different tires and they seem the same to me, even though TIRE RACK reviews range for "horrible ride" to "floats like a cloud" for the same tire. Also, I have a "comfort" and "sport" switch on my Lexus. I swear it's a placebo dummy switch. $176 for a Civic LX seems like a huge bargain to me, provided the stopping distance thing isn't a serious problem.

But that's just me.

[3CT_Paddler]

I bought a used Honda in 2007.
Paid $6000.
It had 70k miles.

It finally died in 2011 at 140k miles.
I sold it for about $1000.
$5000 in depreciation, and $3000 in repairs.
Total cost of ownership was $8000 over 4 years.
$2000 a year. or $166/mo.
And this was to drive a 8 to 12 year old car

Average annual miles = 17500
I can easily reduce my miles, if needed.

Note: As an owner, I carried no comprehensive.

I think for about the same cost, I can drive a 0-4 year car.
I am done with ownership. From now on, I drive brand new leases, like everyone else.
For the same cost.

Am I missing anything?

What you are missing is that your example doesn't seem typical. A Honda dying at 140k? What kind of shape was the car in to only be worth $1k? Did you maintain the car? In my example when I owned a Honda over 4 years my car depreciated on the order of $500... And that was several years ago when used car prices were not at a premium.

The cheapest 12 year old Honda I see on KBB is a 1998 manual transmission Civic Coupe... around $2100 in fair condition. Maybe you just received a poor price on the sale (and maybe when you purchased it).

[declan911]

I just saw TV commercial for the $179/mo Civic - the TV commercial clearly says $1,999 due at signing. Not sure what the deal is but I doubt they can do it for 2 grand less than the national promo...then again, maybe they can

[Dandy]

If you are just looking at costs then there are buy vs lease calulators available. I don't believe that most leases are better
financial deals then purchasing the car outright and holding it for 10 years.

Here are my reasons for not leasing:
1. Dealers would rather put you into a lease then have you buy. Are they thinking of your costs or their profits?
2. Almost all dealer ads hype lease amounts/terms vs the cost to buy outright
3. It is often hard to bargin with dealers and get a good price if you are buying. The lease contract is more complicated and
therefore a bigger advantage to the dealer. You have to negotiate (or factor in) the purchase price, the residual value, the downpayment, the mileage allowance - want to trade in your old car - you add even more advantage to the dealer. Remember they guys do this every day -- you do it every few years.
4. It is too easy to sell you a more expensive car since it is "only a few dollars more a month". Anytime a sales person has you focus on monthly payments you lose.
5. If you go over the contract mileage then you pay through the nose. I have had a few people either turn in their car early or
have to dramatically restrict their driving because of this limitation. I wonder what percent of leases have excess miles?
6. You have to return to the dealer in 2 years and again enter into a complex negotiation. What a great thing for the dealer to help insure future sales.
7. When you return to the dealer they can charge you with excess wear on the vehicle you are turning in. What leg do you have to stand on?? They can easily pull the "switcheroo" and say they will waive the excess wear charges if you lease another car from them. Sounds great for them but restricts your options and you negotiation position.
8. If you buy you have one more simple negotiation every 10 years? If you do two year leases you must do 5 more complicated leases. What are the odds you will out negotiate dealers a majority of those times.
9. You will pay higher insurance costs on newer cars than on one that is aging over a 10 year period.

Are there advantages -- sure
1. Newer cars need less maintenance
2. Newer cars are usually safer
3. It is fun driving a new car every two years
4. If your needs change you can get a different type vehicle e.g. gas prices go up you can get a car with better mileage.

[bottlecap]

If you drive your car only 12,000 miles per month, I imagine that the lease equation might only be slightly in the dealer's favor. I don't know how you can say that you averaged 17,500 miles per year but you could drive a third less. Do you drive around just to pass the time? You're driving somewhere. Dealers are counting on you to misjudge how little 12,000 miles is.

My reasons for not leasing:

1. I have never driven less than 15,000 per year;

2. I don't want to not do things for fear of going over the milage;

3. I definitely dont want to buy a new car every 3 years;

4. I don't want to pay sales taxes every three years; and

5. I like old stuff.

Safety is a concern (I drive a 12 year old vehicle), but leasing sounds like a lot of hassle for the pleasure of driving a new car, which isn't really a pleasure for me.

JT

[InsideTheCult]

A Honda dying at 140k? Define dying?

Sudden massive oil leak on the highway blew the motor by the time I got to the exit.
Oil pump seals went.

[InsideTheCult]

Most sources say a Honda will go 200K without any serious maintenance costs, and you certainly still see old ones on the road.

Complete and total bullshit.
O2 sensors, Evap cannisters, check engine lights, etc.
These cars cost money to keep on the road, and every repair is $500.
The ones that go to 200k generally have mechanics as family friends.
"Just gas and go!" is a myth for all but a few lucky outliers (and mechanics)

[InsideTheCult]

One of the things I have learned over the years is that it is better to replace a car before it dies so that you can take you time to wait to buy a car when there are very good deals available. Buying a car in a hurry when you "have to buy" is a very costly thing to do. .

This is 1000% true.

[InsideTheCult]

Good points about:
[*]Having to pay for repairs in the 3rd year. (But, probably none)
[*]Paying for any damages
[*]Mileage limits
[*]Taxes (?)
[*]Extra insurance

The point is that I was brainwashed into thinking leasing is for suckers,
but really, one can make a case that owning is for suckers also.
You're paying a somewhat comparable rate to drive a piece of shit.

I have never leased, but I am going to look into this.
I might lease a used car. It will probably cost me next to nothing.

[InsideTheCult]

. Yes you were unlucky that your Honda died prematurely. .

Wrong, it needed a shitload of work.
The rear suspension was rattling.
The check engine light came on.
The passenger window stopped working.
It was probably ready for another $1000+ worth of work.

NONE of this would have been an issue with a brand spanking new car with under 30k miles.

It's so ironic that frugal drivers are driving jalopy shit, and paying almost the same for the privilege.
I am done with that game. I'll stick to $150/mo (or hell, $250/mo) and drive a kick ass brand new car... FOR LIFE.

Bottom line: I spent $8000 to drive an unremarkable piece of shit for 4 years. The joke's on me.

[GregLee]

I bought a used Honda in 2007.
Paid $6000.
It had 70k miles.

It finally died in 2011 at 140k miles.
I sold it for about $1000.
$5000 in depreciation, and $3000 in repairs.
Total cost of ownership was $8000 over 4 years.
$2000 a year. or $166/mo.

I bought a used Neon 2002 in 2005 for $6000, and I'm still driving it. I haven't kept precise track of maintenance costs, but it's not even close to $3000 -- maybe around $250/year. I'll junk it when it breaks.

I don't understand why you've paid so much in repairs. I bought a used American car rather than Japanese because I found that the used American cars were much, much cheaper.

[zaboomafoozarg]

It's so ironic that frugal drivers are driving jalopy s**t, and paying almost the same for the privilege.

Except that quite often, that is NOT the case (see my post above). Maybe it's just ironic that you don't realize there's some inherent variance in the costs of maintaining a used car, and your case may not be near the mean.

[beareconomy]

I think there is something to say about the new safety features of the new cars like stability control, 10 airbags, ...

I just think it is better to spend the money for the safety features. I mean, you can even finance some toyotas with all those features for 0%, and have a 3 year warranty.

I just think the older cars are a little out of date as far as safety. Now if you live in warm weather like california, you may not need the stability control as much as it doesn't snow.

But I could tell you livingin cold weathe, that stability control is nice to prevent accidnts.

[InsideTheCult]

Actually, my experience is pretty par for the course.
At least half these cars sustain major damage before 150k miles.

All my life, I just assumed "new car = TOTAL waste of money"
I was a fool to just ASSUME leasing is reckless and wasteful, without ever researching into it myself.
Because spending $8000 driving a beater for 4 years is even dumber.

These cars need regular maintenance once they reach 80k miles.
People only focus on the $700+ timing belt/water pump job at 100k.
But, these days, ANY repair is $400 to $600 in NY.

I've been a frugal used car driver my entire life, but owning is really not worth it anymore.
I'm joining the "idiots" who drive MUCH nicer cars for just a few bucks more.

Sometimes, you need to know when to spend a little more for a LOT more value
There's a difference between being a miser and being frugal / responsible. The miser doesn't know value.
If you can live in a studio apt in the ghetto for $700, or live in a gated luxury condo for $750, only the miser/idiot chooses the former.
Owing a jalopy for $166/mo vs. a brand new car for a few bucks more is a no brainer.

And yes, my experience is par for the course.
I am the only idiot in my peer group still driving shitboxes like it's the 1970s.
Everyone else figured this out years ago, but I was the smug idiot who thought I was "saving".
Screw that, a new car for an extra $500 year is the best $500 you'll ever spend.

[Madd Hatter]

You sound bitter. And/or possibly like you work for a dealership and thought it'd be fun to throw a line out on a forum of predominantly frugal (i.e. "bad") consumers.

I bought an 01 Maxima for $5900 in June of '08. In 3.5 years I've done 5 oil changes, one new battery, and one plug went bad. I suspect it will go another 3 years without incident, likely more. It gets me from A to B without worry...and I park it in an open lot at work and wherever else without worry. Better things to worry about. Pretty sure my TCO will be lower than the typical leasee.

I will use my personal anecdote to reaffirm my decision as you will yours, but one of us has statistical analysis backing us up.

[pteam]

Even if it costs a little more money to lease a new kia or something like that you'll be much happier with a brand new car and spending a little more money than driving a car with 150,000 miles and having break downs and still spending around the same amount of money or maybe a little bit more.

[InsideTheCult]

I will use my personal anecdote to reaffirm my decision as you will yours, but one of us has statistical analysis backing us up.

Exactly what statistical analysis do you have? These cars become money pits after 100k miles.
Sure, not as bad as a BMW, but you can easily average 2 check engine lights a year ($500 a pop)

How many miles on the Maxima?

[InsideTheCult]

Even if it costs a little more money to lease a new kia or something like that you'll be much happier with a brand new car and spending a little more money than driving a car with 150,000 miles and having break downs and still spending around the same amount of money or maybe a little bit more.

You're 100% right, I am now seeing the light. I was a brainwashed idiot who just assumed "renting is for suckers"
Crappy old cars that are 8-10 years old are almost more expensive to own than new leased cars.
I'm done taking a loss on depreciation and paying for constant repair bills.
Oh, and you're driving a shitbox while people with a fraction of your networth are enjoying new rides,
while you're the wealthy miser stuck on the side of the highway. I am so done with that crap.

[3CT_Paddler]

Actually, my experience is pretty par for the course.
At least half these cars sustain major damage before 150k miles.

These cars need regular maintenance once they reach 80k miles.
These days, any repair is $400 to $600 in NY.
Oh, and don't forget the $900 timing belt/water pump job at 100k.

I've been a frugal used car driver my entire life, but owning is really not worth it anymore.
I'm joining the "idiots" who drive MUCH nicer cars for just a few bucks more.

All my life, I just assumed "new car = TOTAL waste of money"
I was a fool to just ASSUME leasing is reckless and wasteful, without ever researching into it myself.
Because spending $8000 driving a beater for 4 years is even dumber.

Sometimes, you need to know when to spend a little more for a TON more value
There's a difference between being a miser and being frugal / responsible. The miser doesn't know value.
You can live in a studio apt in the ghetto for $700, or live in a gated condo for $750, only the miser/idiot chooses the former.
Owing a jalopy for $166/mo vs. a brand new car for a few bucks more is a no brainer.

[Deleted -- mod oldcomputerguy]

It sounds like you had a frustrating car experience, but I don't think your experience is typical at all. A massive oil leak is not typical for Honda vehicles, especially if the gaskets and seals are replaced according to their maintenance schedule. Your depreciation on a vehicle isn't typical either.

My personal experience is much more like Mad Hatter's, and I think if you stick with it you will see the value is in holding on to a car for a long time, used or new. $500 a pop for a check engine light... maybe you should find a different mechanic.

[jeffyscott]

I bought a used Honda in 2007.
Paid $6000.
It had 70k miles.

It finally died in 2011 at 140k miles.

...$3000 in repairs.

I bought a used Neon 2002 in 2005 for $6000, and I'm still driving it. I haven't kept precise track of maintenance costs, but it's not even close to $3000 -- maybe around $250/year. I'll junk it when it breaks.

I don't understand why you've paid so much in repairs. I bought a used American car rather than Japanese because I found that the used American cars were much, much cheaper.

I'm assuming the $3000 is all maintenance and repairs. That's 4.3 cents per mile, which I think is remarkably low for a car or that age and mileage. Edmunds estimates an average of about 9.3 cents per mile in repairs and maintenance for a 2006 Civic, almost $7000 over the next 5 years and 75,000 miles.

[bottlecap]

Has anyone figured out that the OP is a troll, yet?

Although he asked to discuss this, he doesnt want to. Let him alone.

JT

[jeffyscott]

Looking at that edmunds true cost to own again, they have a 2006 Civic, 4 door LX auto, valued at $8900. They have depreciation at $4187 over the next 5 years, 75,000 miles. Add the repair and maintenance costs of $6952 and the total is $185 per month

For a new Civic, they have $914 in maintenance costs for the first 3 years. So that would add about $25 per month the the ~$175 lease cost. Giving a total of $200 per month. (note their figure for 3 years depreciation comes to about $180 per month, so it is in the same ballpark as that lease price).

If those costs are realistic expectations, I'd say that between those two options, the lease for an extra $15-20 per month does look to be the better deal.

[cacophony]

Looking at that edmunds true cost to own again, they have a 2006 Civic, 4 door LX auto, valued at $8900. They have depreciation at $4187 over the next 5 years, 75,000 miles. Add the repair and maintenance costs of $6952 and the total is $185 per month

Those numbers are rather absurd. Or perhaps, I should rephrase that as "find a good independent mechanic!"

Here's a great site for finding good mechanics:
http://www.cartalk.com/content/mechanics-files

There's no reason a five year old Honda should require more than $2500 in maintenance and repairs over 5 years. I spent less than $2500 over 5 years on a 15 year old Corolla, and that included timing belt replacement and a full brake job.

[nwrolla]

I find it pretty interesting to blow a Honda motor, I owned one for years, worked on it and many others and I have seen some Honda's beat to death and they still ran like a top What type of check engine lights was it throwing? O2 sensors commonly go out; Easy fix generally if you know how it could be less than 100$
autozone will pull codes for any car if you have a check engine light, with some research and a manual it can save thousands in the long run. Just a thought for the future, good luck with your new purchase though!

I will use my personal anecdote to reaffirm my decision as you will yours, but one of us has statistical analysis backing us up.

Exactly what statistical analysis do you have? These cars become money pits after 100k miles.
Sure, not as bad as a BMW, but you can easily average 2 check engine lights a year ($500 a pop)

How many miles on the Maxima?