What's the "sweet spot" age/mileage for a used car purchase?

[Ari]

I have a theory (based on nothing but instinct and wishful thinking) that the "sweet spot" for buying a used car is at three years old with a typical (circa 30,00) miles.

My logic is, it will have shed about 50% of its value but still be new enough to look, feel and drive like a fairly modern car and ought to still be reliable and less liable for big breakdowns and bills.

Keep it for another three years and you get 90% of the drive and benefits the first owner had (apart from warranty of course) and if it halves in value again over that time then its cost 50% of what it cost the first owner.

So as a simple example, buy a 3 year old car that was £40K new for £20K, run it for 3 years, sell for £10K (or hopefully more). First owner lost £20K in depreciation, you've lost £10K for the same period in the same car.

This is absolutely not a new car buying bashing thread. I totally get the benefits of a new car and would buy new myself if I could easily afford it so that I could shoose the spec, know how its been treated from day one, and got the full benefit of the warranty.

But, buying secondhand as I have to, I reckon the above is my "sweet spot" and wondered how others saw it and what they felt was the best used car buying/selling strategy for them.

[Ari]

S3000 said:

im always looking for low miles.. the age plays the second role in my book.
Bought my 330d as a 10 year old car with 36K miles... zero problems so far,except small things.
Prior to that i had a good experience with a 5 year old WRX,used it for 6 years/60K miles before selling.

See now that's interesting because I'm the other way around. Less worried about miles, more worried about years. So I'd rather have a 3 year old 50,000 mile car than a six year old 30,000 mile car.

[Ari]

longblackcoat said:

There's no absolutes - depends how many miles you do, how wedded you are to a warranty, how often you change your cars etc.

For me, however, a 70,000 mile ex-fleet car which is two years old is ideal. It's got lots of miles, all of which will have been motorway, it'll have probably only ever had one person in it, the servicing will have been done on time (the lease company will give you a printout), and it still has some warranty. The high mileage will have driven the price down, but there'll be no rust or anything like that. Buy it, run it for three years and 40k, and you'll still get a fair amount back for it so long as you buy something sensible to start with. High-mileage diesel Mondeo/Passat estates shift very easily; a Micra with the same mileage will not.

There's a lot of logic in that.

[Ari]

fozzymandeus said:

Availability and social acceptability of car finance and loans.

My dad never once in his life bought a car on the tick. It has become much, much more widespread to do just that in the last 20 years, and now we are at the point where a lot of people consider a car finance repayment as part of their fixed outgoings.

Agree with that. There's a growing band of people that effectively just hire cars on a permanent basis, they never ever own them.

[Ari]

blearyeyedboy said:

Take the following semi-fictional example.

I can save £300 a month for the car fund in three years. That'll make £10800.
I can borrow £10000 for £350 a month for 36 months. That £50/month might be a small price worth paying to drive the newer car I want 3 years earlier.
For some people, £50 a month isn't worth it. For some people, it is.
If you're not borrowing beyond your means- which is a critical thing here- and you decide it's worth it for your quality of life... why not? And if it's not worth it for you, then good for you for making that choice too.

That's quite an interesting point. And you could add that, depending on the age and reliability of the older car whilst he's saving up, his £50/month in interest might be saving him from some hefty bills on the old car. Plus, given recent advances in efficiency, his new car might be saving him money on fuel and road tax.

I've always been finance averse and always paid cash, I hate paying interest. But that's quite a compelling way of looking at it.

[Ari]

Alfanatic said:

My first car in the uk was a 1989 fiesta. 15 years old and 15k miles. The mechanical / cosmetic condition and maintenance requirements were more closely aligned to what I would expect from the age then the mileage, I.e it acted more like a 15 year old car of average mileage, less like a 15k mile car of average age. On the plus side, the interior was in great condition.

Yup, that's my thinking. A higher mileage newer car is likely to feel newer than an older lower mileage car.

So to use your Fiesta as a great example, a seven year old 30,000 mile Fiesta would have felt a lot newer than your 15 year old 15,000 mile car.