Millage on "modern classics"
Discussion
Hi,
I can never make my mind up about how I feel about "modern classics" and mileage.
For the sake of argument, lets say "modern classic" is an interesting car that is (or was before the virus) either near the end of the depreciation curve, just about holding level, or just starting to climb in value. Probably built in late nineties or naughties.
On the one hand these relatively modern cars can go a long way before they are worn out. A 60s car may need quite a lot of work at 100k miles, maybe a complete engine rebuild, but a "modern classic" probably won't. But millage is still a major factor in deciding market value. Does a "smart buyer" therefore go for higher millage, car, knowing that there will be a saving on price and the car still has plenty of miles left in it. The saving can be partially used to fix any mileage-related faults.
But, if you spend all the savings on fixing the faults then you haven't saved money, you've had a load of hassle, and the car still isn't very valuable because of the high mileage! Its not like a 60's classic where you would expect a mechanical rebuild every so often, effectively zeroing the milometer.
On the other hand, high millage cars do generally go wrong more often than low mileage cars. Things that might not really be seen as wearing components, like radiators, start to fail. This can quickly get expensive. So maybe in the long run it would be cheaper to pay a lot more for a lower mileage car (say 60k miles - I'm not talking the ultra-low millage cars seen on white backgrounds), hoping that nothing much goes wrong. However, this saving in repairs will be offset by the depreciation caused by increasing the mileage when used.
For me this is particularly complicated a I'm looking for a third car for maybe 2-3k miles per year, but a keeper! So If I bought a 60k car it will be an 80-90k miles car in 10 years. So no longer seen as low millage, though it may be increasingly rarer as the high millage ones fall by the wayside. But it will now be in the "getting unreliable" stage of ownership, though a lower millage than most.
On the other hand, if I bought a fairly high millage car (say 120k) and only do 2-3k miles per year, then everyone else might catch-up and my car's 140 - 150k is normal for the ones on the market.
I think I might have over thought this!
By the way - I'm not really interested in cars as an investment, I have no doubt that the best way to do that would be to go for a very low mileage car and then not use it. I am interested in total cost over 10 years of ownership, assuming the car is sold at the end but hasn't dramatically risen in price.
I can never make my mind up about how I feel about "modern classics" and mileage.
For the sake of argument, lets say "modern classic" is an interesting car that is (or was before the virus) either near the end of the depreciation curve, just about holding level, or just starting to climb in value. Probably built in late nineties or naughties.
On the one hand these relatively modern cars can go a long way before they are worn out. A 60s car may need quite a lot of work at 100k miles, maybe a complete engine rebuild, but a "modern classic" probably won't. But millage is still a major factor in deciding market value. Does a "smart buyer" therefore go for higher millage, car, knowing that there will be a saving on price and the car still has plenty of miles left in it. The saving can be partially used to fix any mileage-related faults.
But, if you spend all the savings on fixing the faults then you haven't saved money, you've had a load of hassle, and the car still isn't very valuable because of the high mileage! Its not like a 60's classic where you would expect a mechanical rebuild every so often, effectively zeroing the milometer.
On the other hand, high millage cars do generally go wrong more often than low mileage cars. Things that might not really be seen as wearing components, like radiators, start to fail. This can quickly get expensive. So maybe in the long run it would be cheaper to pay a lot more for a lower mileage car (say 60k miles - I'm not talking the ultra-low millage cars seen on white backgrounds), hoping that nothing much goes wrong. However, this saving in repairs will be offset by the depreciation caused by increasing the mileage when used.
For me this is particularly complicated a I'm looking for a third car for maybe 2-3k miles per year, but a keeper! So If I bought a 60k car it will be an 80-90k miles car in 10 years. So no longer seen as low millage, though it may be increasingly rarer as the high millage ones fall by the wayside. But it will now be in the "getting unreliable" stage of ownership, though a lower millage than most.
On the other hand, if I bought a fairly high millage car (say 120k) and only do 2-3k miles per year, then everyone else might catch-up and my car's 140 - 150k is normal for the ones on the market.
I think I might have over thought this!
By the way - I'm not really interested in cars as an investment, I have no doubt that the best way to do that would be to go for a very low mileage car and then not use it. I am interested in total cost over 10 years of ownership, assuming the car is sold at the end but hasn't dramatically risen in price.
I generally consider "mileage", rather than millage.
That being said, the best cars I have owned have been those with high mileages. The ultimate was a 1991 Saab 900 T16S, bought at 7 years old and with 210,000 miles carefully accrued by a company director. The car was his pride and joy and he was able to afford, through the company, to have it maintained precisely as prescribed and by a main dealer.
And for me that's the key: history. That car had been driven extensively but maintained meticulously. I ran it until 246,000 before I had to sell but if I had the space at the time I'd have kept it. I've had other, less extreme examples since (a similarly well maintained Audi A6 TDI estate I ran from 160,000-195,000 miles springs to mind).
Mileage does not put me off buying a car, no matter what age it is.
That being said, the best cars I have owned have been those with high mileages. The ultimate was a 1991 Saab 900 T16S, bought at 7 years old and with 210,000 miles carefully accrued by a company director. The car was his pride and joy and he was able to afford, through the company, to have it maintained precisely as prescribed and by a main dealer.
And for me that's the key: history. That car had been driven extensively but maintained meticulously. I ran it until 246,000 before I had to sell but if I had the space at the time I'd have kept it. I've had other, less extreme examples since (a similarly well maintained Audi A6 TDI estate I ran from 160,000-195,000 miles springs to mind).
Mileage does not put me off buying a car, no matter what age it is.
mbwoy84 said:
Far too many unknowns. The only way to give any accurate opinions would be to know exactly what the car in question is and relate to common faults, ownership experiences etc.
I think someone with experience could make general comments, with appropriate caveats. Its very specific to "modern classics" that I'm interested in, but the bulk of my ownership experience has been "proper classics" and modern cars.
I've had Mercedes, Porsche and TVRs over the last few years manufactured between 1996 and 2003 and I quite like the 'modern classic' years.
Your quandary over the mileage selection is something I identify with. Whether or not we like it, even classic cars seem to attract that cliff at 100k miles that potential buyers look at. As if it's going to explode if it has more than 99,999 miles on it! If you view a classic car catalogue, I believe you'll see odometer mileages in the 90 thou range more than any other. The exceptions to sale prices seem to be BMW M5s, Audi and Porsches. They still fetch strong money after they pass 100k miles, perceived build quality perhaps?
I agree you have selected the 2 options you should consider if you intend to use one a lot and keep it that long. I rarely keep a car more than 2 yrs and cover only a few thousand miles per year, and very few people actually do keep a car 'forever.'
If you buy one with low mileage and intend to use it a fair bit, try to sell with it still under 100k miles. You may also be unfortunately refreshing all the things that may be required at about that age and mileage; clutch, suspension, worn interiors etc.
If you buy one with already over 100k miles on it, many consumables will have already been changed but the big items like engine, gearbox / diff may need work soon. But you'll have got the car a fair bit cheaper start with, although it will 'feel' like an older car with most likely more stone chips, worn buses etc.
Bodywork requirements / corrosion have no truck with mileages, some cars are just rusty as hell even with low mileages!
It's a dilemma only you can solve yourself but I think your considerations are the correct ones, At least You want to drive them and not just store them......
Your quandary over the mileage selection is something I identify with. Whether or not we like it, even classic cars seem to attract that cliff at 100k miles that potential buyers look at. As if it's going to explode if it has more than 99,999 miles on it! If you view a classic car catalogue, I believe you'll see odometer mileages in the 90 thou range more than any other. The exceptions to sale prices seem to be BMW M5s, Audi and Porsches. They still fetch strong money after they pass 100k miles, perceived build quality perhaps?
I agree you have selected the 2 options you should consider if you intend to use one a lot and keep it that long. I rarely keep a car more than 2 yrs and cover only a few thousand miles per year, and very few people actually do keep a car 'forever.'
If you buy one with low mileage and intend to use it a fair bit, try to sell with it still under 100k miles. You may also be unfortunately refreshing all the things that may be required at about that age and mileage; clutch, suspension, worn interiors etc.
If you buy one with already over 100k miles on it, many consumables will have already been changed but the big items like engine, gearbox / diff may need work soon. But you'll have got the car a fair bit cheaper start with, although it will 'feel' like an older car with most likely more stone chips, worn buses etc.
Bodywork requirements / corrosion have no truck with mileages, some cars are just rusty as hell even with low mileages!
It's a dilemma only you can solve yourself but I think your considerations are the correct ones, At least You want to drive them and not just store them......
I think the problem with considering something as a "modern classic" is that use and behaviour then gets modified to what you consider to be appropriate to the classic or pending classic status, as against simply practicalities/economics.
I enjoy my classics as leisure vehicles and I use them accordingly, I do not keep them outside, I do not park in supermarket car parks, I don't motorway cruise at 80 and I do 20,000 - 30,000 miles a year in them, all things I do require of my everyday car.
After years' of driving new-3 year old cars I changed strategy ten years' or so ago. I positively seek out cars with over 100,000 on them, double that over the next 3/4 years and repeat. It has to be the cheapest motoring I have ever done and you can buy for buttons 12-15 year old cars of a quality that you would never have stretched to when new. This also make the economics really simple, spend on routine maintenance and if a four digit figure looms sell up and move on.
As was said in an earlier post, there is a real phobia of cars of cars showing over 100k, my previous two both came to me in this bracket and I doubled without drama.
I enjoy my classics as leisure vehicles and I use them accordingly, I do not keep them outside, I do not park in supermarket car parks, I don't motorway cruise at 80 and I do 20,000 - 30,000 miles a year in them, all things I do require of my everyday car.
After years' of driving new-3 year old cars I changed strategy ten years' or so ago. I positively seek out cars with over 100,000 on them, double that over the next 3/4 years and repeat. It has to be the cheapest motoring I have ever done and you can buy for buttons 12-15 year old cars of a quality that you would never have stretched to when new. This also make the economics really simple, spend on routine maintenance and if a four digit figure looms sell up and move on.
As was said in an earlier post, there is a real phobia of cars of cars showing over 100k, my previous two both came to me in this bracket and I doubled without drama.
Sorry, but the expression "modern classics" is to me rather like someone saying he has a manual agricultural implement. It's a way of doubling the price of a knackered second hand modern car. You can buy from a two-faced used car dealer who will smile at you, or buy privately from someone who has had refusals from all the dealers and is desperate to get shot, and the price will be very different, so if what you want to buy is of that genre, so be it.
lowdrag said:
Sorry, but the expression "modern classics" is to me rather like someone saying he has a manual agricultural implement. It's a way of doubling the price of a knackered second hand modern car. You can buy from a two-faced used car dealer who will smile at you, or buy privately from someone who has had refusals from all the dealers and is desperate to get shot, and the price will be very different, so if what you want to buy is of that genre, so be it.
"Modern classics" is now a perfectly used description acknowledge within the UK auction houses...with my small collection of cars I would use that very description of "modern classics" I can't think of any other description... certainly not Agricultural nor Knackered..
In a decade's time when the majority of cars are EV's, Hydrogen/EV hybrids or Hydrogen Fuel Cell - the fact that you have a classic ICE-powered vehicle at all will trump any scrutiny of its mileage.
In the age of non-ICE vehicles the value of ICE classics will lie in their condition & the perceived desirability of the particular model.
In the age of non-ICE vehicles the value of ICE classics will lie in their condition & the perceived desirability of the particular model.
This may or may not fit the criteria of the OP.
Eight years ago I bought a 2007my 14k miles Aston V8V manual. It hasn't required much more than general maintenance over the 41k+ miles I've put on it since then.
Brakes, bushes, dampers and the like. But nothing chunky like a clutch so there's been no real expenditure.
I mistakenly presumed it was getting close to the bottom of its depreciation curve when I bought it and figured I'd still get a reasonable cut of the cash back should I face the situation where I was forced to sell.
It's worth about 16p and a packet of crisps these days so I might as well keep it for a bit longer.
Eight years ago I bought a 2007my 14k miles Aston V8V manual. It hasn't required much more than general maintenance over the 41k+ miles I've put on it since then.
Brakes, bushes, dampers and the like. But nothing chunky like a clutch so there's been no real expenditure.
I mistakenly presumed it was getting close to the bottom of its depreciation curve when I bought it and figured I'd still get a reasonable cut of the cash back should I face the situation where I was forced to sell.
It's worth about 16p and a packet of crisps these days so I might as well keep it for a bit longer.
Cars from the pre-80s don't seem to have the stigma regarding high mileage, I'm guessing most people expect the car to undergone some form of restoration since then and people buy on condition, regarding modern classics and being mileage sensitive probably originates in the high end market in American auction houses, the knock-on effect being people buying cars like Ferrari F430 as ornaments, as there's so many with mileage under 30k they are hardly rare but the shrewd money would've been buying one with a manual gearbox, much rarer than the paddleshift and the new desirability rather than ultra low miles.
So back to the original post, in time a modern classic will be more about condition than mileage to a degree but having something like a manual Porsche 928 rather than an automatic will be the biggest factor in price variations.
So back to the original post, in time a modern classic will be more about condition than mileage to a degree but having something like a manual Porsche 928 rather than an automatic will be the biggest factor in price variations.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff