Buying an 16yr old low mileage car Vs higher mileage 10yr old car

[Tomjones1995]

Hi everybody,

 

I'm just wondering if you could possibly give me some advice please.

 

As some of you may know, I've had my fair share of problems with my car over the years and I'm now considering part exing it for another car.

 

What are people's thoughts on the topic regarding younger car + higher miles Vs older car + lower miles?

 

Obviously how well it's been maintained is a factor to consider bit more generally speaking. Which is the best option in your opinion's?

 

 

Thanks in advance,

Tom

[xman]

10yr old will be a mk2 fabia, 16yr old will be a mk2.

 

You should always buy on condition, mileage means nothing if its been neglected, not serviced well or run on too tight a budget.

 

I'm inclined to think a mk2 is a better car than a mk1, going on experience. 

[Tomjones1995]

3 minutes ago, xman said:

10yr old will be a mk2 fabia, 16yr old will be a mk2.

 

You should always buy on condition, mileage means nothing if its been neglected, not serviced well or run on too tight a budget.

 

I'm inclined to think a mk2 is a better car than a mk1, going on experience. 

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

So to clarify, In your opinion a lower mileage older car could potentially be a viable option provided it has been serviced well each year?

 

Buying a car with the mileage north of 120-130k would worry me that it may become problematic due to the higher mileage

[xman]

Condition is more important than mileage at those ages. There's much more to assess than its service record. You need someone you trust who is mechanically savvy and skilled to check the car over. Looking out for state of the suspension, underbody rust, brakes as well as engine gearbox etc. Its not something I can put in a simple checklist, it also depends on the car, its specification and more

 

For instance the high mileage car may be MOT worthy but a thorough visual might see brakes, shock absorbers, bushes are all well worn and will soon all need changing. Assessing the engine, gearbox and drive line takes a certain set of skills and knowledge. Each engine variant has different things that you need to look out for. Oil burning, cam chains etc

 

A low mileage older car could equally be a crock of sh** . Might be rust ridden, plus everything the previous example needed.

 

Even needing a new set of tyres is something to budget. A cambelt and waterpump is a major maintenance milestone that many cars will have skipped. Cars of this age will have entered the twilight zone when it comes to service and maintenance. Done only on a need to fix/get going or get through an MOT basis using cheapest parts/labour possible. Some examples may simply be ready only for the scrapyard. Car service records can be "creative" or made up, buyer beware.

 

Fabias can be sturdy cars but not  something I would want to run beyond 120,000 miles unless you are really into bangernomics and have handy motor maintenance diy skills. They cost as much to service and usually much more to repair and maintain  than a young low mileage car, it all depends.....Some may even cost more annually to run than they cost to buy or are worth.

 

Ask yourself, why is the owner getting rid of it?  Is the seller hiding something? Watch out for major issues, that where you need that trusted mechanic friend.

 

Thats all I can advise, good luck hunting and hope you make the right, informed choice.

 

Edited 4 April, 2021 by xman

[Tomjones1995]

18 minutes ago, xman said:

Condition is more important than mileage at those ages. There's much more to assess than its service record. You need someone you trust who is mechanically savvy and skilled to check the car over. Looking out for state of the suspension, underbody rust, brakes as well as engine gearbox etc. Its not something I can put in a simple checklist, it also depends on the car, its specification and more

 

For instance the high mileage car may be MOT worthy but a thorough visual might see brakes, shock absorbers, bushes are all well worn and will soon all need changing. Assesing the engine, gearbox and droveline takes a certain set of skills and knowledge. Each engine variant has different things that need to look out for. Oil burning etc

 

A low mileage older car could equally be a crock of sh** . Might be rust ridden, plus everything the previous example needed.

 

Even needing a new set of tyres is something to budget. Cars of this age will have entered the twilight zone when it comes to service and maintenance. Many done only on a need to fix or get through MOT basis using cheapest parts possible. Some examples may be ready only for the scrapyard. Car service records can be "creative" so buyer beware.

 

Fabias can be sturdy cars but not  something I would want to run beyond 120,000 miles unless you are really into bangernomics and have handy motor diy skills. They cost as much to service and usually much more to repair and maintain  than a young low mileage, it depends.....Some may cost more annually to run than they cost to buy.

 

Ask yourself, why is the owner getting rid of it? Watch out for major issues, that where you need a trusted mechanic friend.

 

 

So basically both vehicles are too old to be considered 'good' options?

 

The issue I have is that I don't have a mechanically minded friend and my budget can't stretch to a 2016 or younger low mileage car

[xman]

2016 is only 5 or less years old. You were talking about a 16 year old car before. There are lots of cars in between.

 

If you don't have the necessary mechanical knowledge or right mechanic friend, then you need to rely on warranties.  A 10+ year car will be sold as seen, little or no warranty from a bottom rung sales outlet.

 

There are some excellent examples of older cars available privately, but probably equally as many or more dogs and of course you have no comeback at all if you buy privately.

 

Look for an example from a reputable garage with at least 6 month warranty, however check very very carefully what that warranty covers, read and understand the small print.

[Tomjones1995]

1 hour ago, xman said:

2016 is only 5 or less years old. You were talking about a 16 year old car before. There are lots of cars in between.

 

If you don't have the necessary mechanical knowledge or right mechanic friend, then you need to rely on warranties.  A 10+ year car will be sold as seen, little or no warranty from a bottom rung sales outlet.

 

There are some excellent examples of older cars available privately, but probably equally as many or more dogs and of course you have no comeback at all if you buy privately.

 

Look for an example from a reputable garage with at least 6 month warranty, however check very very carefully what that warranty covers, read and understand the small print.

 

I mentioned the 2016 car because as I understood it, your advice was that an older car, even one as young as 10, would be perhaps too old and higher mileage and would therefore be an unreliable option as would the lower mileage 16yr old car and that your were implying I chose a much younger, lower mileage car.

 

But as you say, buying from a trade seller with a warranty would probably be my best option which could theoretically give me the option of both the before mentioned choices to safely negate any potential disasters within the initial 6 months or so.

 

It would certainly prevent them from selling me a dud car.

 

Thanks for all the advice!

Tom

 

 

 

 

[sepulchrave]

The problem you must consider is that later cars have to conform to much stricter emissions requirements, this makes maintenance difficult, often much more frequent and therefore expensive.

The build quality of the early Fabia mark 1's is noticeably better than later cars, there is still no rust on my 2000 1.4 16V but I've had to replace all the suspension parts and many electrical parts as well.

If you can find a 1.4 16V petrol or a 1.9 PD100 diesel with a comprehensive maintenance history and in good condition then you can enjoy a good few years of cheap motoring, my 2.0 MPI has been astonishingly reliable and has no rust either but they're getting vanishingly rare now.

[VanhireBoys]

This is quite a conundrum!! As lads have said condition is king and a full looking at by someone who knows their stuff is paramount 

 

A lad I know had a 04 Golf 1.9 PD which was of the age where everything was wearing out and he spent a fortune fixing her up - he then got rid of it saying "It's a money pit and I've spent a fortune" "That car is cursed" and so on !

 

But my brother bought that very car and it gave good reliable transport for 6 years and apart from normal service items and tyres she never needed a cent spent on her. The original owner had inadvertently fixed all the suspension and brakes thinking that the car was on her last legs !!

 

Moral of the story - condition is king !

[Tomjones1995]

49 minutes ago, sepulchrave said:

The problem you must consider is that later cars have to conform to much stricter emissions requirements, this makes maintenance difficult, often much more frequent and therefore expensive.

The build quality of the early Fabia mark 1's is noticeably better than later cars, there is still no rust on my 2000 1.4 16V but I've had to replace all the suspension parts and many electrical parts as well.

If you can find a 1.4 16V petrol or a 1.9 PD100 diesel with a comprehensive maintenance history and in good condition then you can enjoy a good few years of cheap motoring, my 2.0 MPI has been astonishingly reliable and has no rust either but they're getting vanishingly rare now.

 

So in a nut shell, younger lower mileage cars are more expensive to run but on the other side of things, an older car could be more expensive in replacing many parts that have worn with age as I have been doing with my current vehicle

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, VanhireBoys said:

This is quite a conundrum!! As lads have said condition is king and a full looking at by someone who knows their stuff is paramount 

 

A lad I know had a 04 Golf 1.9 PD which was of the age where everything was wearing out and he spent a fortune fixing her up - he then got rid of it saying "It's a money pit and I've spent a fortune" "That car is cursed" and so on !

 

But my brother bought that very car and it gave good reliable transport for 6 years and apart from normal service items and tyres she never needed a cent spent on her. The original owner had inadvertently fixed all the suspension and brakes thinking that the car was on her last legs !!

 

Moral of the story - condition is king !

 

 

That story is very similar to mine. My 05 Polo 1.9TDi has been a bit of a 'lemon' you might say and I've spent a fair pretty penny on fixing many things and I'm at the stage where I feel it's a money pit and am considering replacing it. But it sounds from your story that I may be better off trying to weather the storm of problems until their isn't anything else to replace because I still like the car

[sepulchrave]

You really need to forget about mileage, it's a VERY poor indicator of the future reliability of a car, it's important to the motor trade because it allows them to inflate their prices dramatically and therefore make a larger profit.

 

If you see a rep-mobile that's done 150k in 5 years but has been main dealer serviced bang on schedule versus the same car that's covered 50k in 5 years but has no recent service history then the 150k car will be a better buy, half the price and twice as reliable.

 

In order to clock up a high mileage you need to drive a very long way which means motorways, 70 mph in top gear is the easiest life a car can live.

 

Who cares about mileage? The trader tugging at your waistband, that's who.

[Tomjones1995]

2 hours ago, sepulchrave said:

You really need to forget about mileage, it's a VERY poor indicator of the future reliability of a car, it's important to the motor trade because it allows them to inflate their prices dramatically and therefore make a larger profit.

 

If you see a rep-mobile that's done 150k in 5 years but has been main dealer serviced bang on schedule versus the same car that's covered 50k in 5 years but has no recent service history then the 150k car will be a better buy, half the price and twice as reliable.

 

In order to clock up a high mileage you need to drive a very long way which means motorways, 70 mph in top gear is the easiest life a car can live.

 

Who cares about mileage? The trader tugging at your waistband, that's who.

 

Thanks for the advice 👍

 

I'l have another look tomorrow for another car making mileage less of a deciding factor and way up my options.

 

This Polo GT of mine has been a great car when it's not in the garage and I could see myself keeping it seeing as I've spent so much already but I can't keep it forever so it's good to have some advice on what I could do now and in the future

 

Thanks to everybody for the advice, much appreciated

 

[anewman]

I reckon always check the MOT history online. All you need is the reg number. There could be advisories on there that will eventually need fixing and cost alot, such as worn steering rack. If advisories from a fail all still exist in a later pass/turn into fails, this might suggest corners have been cut in maintenance.

[AndyPandy]

It is a very difficult decision. Say the older car belonged to a retired next door neighbour who always had it serviced ,and repairs done,and the newer car was an ex taxi  .Then it isnt hard to make a decision.

I bought my Fabia 1.9 sdi in 1982 when it was 2 years old from a private seller,it had done 25263 miles. The only things that have been done to it  other than tyres are both front wheel bearings.Both front springs. Front antiroll bar. Power steering motor and sensor.Two tailgate struts.Front bake discs and pads Rear Drum,Brake shoes and hand brake cables.and Four new batteries.   The car has now done about 54,000 miles. The car has not been used much,because I used to ride a motorcycle to work,and have been retired nearly 21 years. I would say  the most important thing in buying a car is how it looks overall,and its history. I would suggest  buying a high mileage car could  be a problem because you need to remember every  moving part on the car has done this mileage.

Edited 5 April, 2021 by AndyPandy

[Tomjones1995]

9 hours ago, anewman said:

I reckon always check the MOT history online. All you need is the reg number. There could be advisories on there that will eventually need fixing and cost alot, such as worn steering rack. If advisories from a fail all still exist in a later pass/turn into fails, this might suggest corners have been cut in maintenance.

 

Yeah that's a good idea actually. I have checked the mot history of vehicles I was interested in in the past to check how many fails they had along the way, but hadn't considered whether the advisories were sorted year after year.

 

The one thing I have found with personal experience is that different mot testers have different ideas about advisories and one mot tester can spot an advisory and it could go unnoticed by another as I have found.

 

 

6 hours ago, AndyPandy said:

It is a very difficult decision. Say the older car belonged to a retired next door neighbour who always had it serviced ,and repairs done,and the newer car was an ex taxi  .Then it isnt hard to make a decision.

I bought my Fabia 1.9 sdi in 1982 when it was 2 years old from a private seller,it had done 25263 miles. The only things that have been done to it  other than tyres are both front wheel bearings.Both front springs. Front antiroll bar. Power steering motor and sensor.Two tailgate struts.Front bake discs and pads Rear Drum,Brake shoes and hand brake cables.and Four new batteries.   The car has now done about 54,000 miles. The car has not been used much,because I used to ride a motorcycle to work,and have been retired nearly 21 years. I would say  the most important thing in buying a car is how it looks overall,and its history. I would suggest  buying a high mileage car could  be a problem because you need to remember every  moving part on the car has done this mileage.

 

 

It is most definitely a difficult decision to make, so far I have done the A/C regassed once, head gasket replaced, two cambelt and waterpump changes, new radiator, new front light cluster (pheasant flew through it), three wing mirror (one in car park, one from lorry, last one wasn't adjusting), new rear wiper motor, two new rear wiper arms (original and 1 new one snapped), 3 new brake calipers (2 on the same corner). And I'm faced with a clutch & flywheel, car doesn't start first time in the mornings, 4 buckled alloys and dodgy rear brake caliper. These outstanding jobs will set me back a good £1,500 but it may well be a great car then for hopefully 12 months, two years for me.

 

I could also buy a new car and have similar issues then so this is my predicament as you quite rightly say

[xman]

6 hours ago, AndyPandy said:

I bought my Fabia 1.9 sdi in 1982 when it was 2 years old from a private seller,it had done 25263 miles. The only things that have been done to it  other than tyres are both front wheel bearings.Both front springs. Front antiroll bar. Power steering motor and sensor.Two tailgate struts.Front bake discs and pads Rear Drum,Brake shoes and hand brake cables.and Four new batteries.   The car has now done about 54,000 miles.

 

Sounds a bit like Trigger's Broom

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LAh8HryVaeY

[Lofty]

My old Black Fabia vRS was probably the best car i've ever owned, 55 reg, had it for 3 years from 2017 to 2020 (so was already 12yrs old when i bought it on 98k miles). I did 90k miles in three years, serviced it on the exact 10k intervals using genuine parts and apart from tyres and 1 set of front pads it never wanted for anything. No rust on the body, everything worked and it just did the whole daily drive/commute thing with ease. 

 

Only reason i moved it on was the addition of a dog in the household so needed a bigger estate car.

[Tomjones1995]

On 13/04/2021 at 14:08, Lofty said:

My old Black Fabia vRS was probably the best car i've ever owned, 55 reg, had it for 3 years from 2017 to 2020 (so was already 12yrs old when i bought it on 98k miles). I did 90k miles in three years, serviced it on the exact 10k intervals using genuine parts and apart from tyres and 1 set of front pads it never wanted for anything. No rust on the body, everything worked and it just did the whole daily drive/commute thing with ease. 

 

Only reason i moved it on was the addition of a dog in the household so needed a bigger estate car.

 

That's more of less what I would be hoping to find in another car if and when the time comes to sell my Polo because my budget wont stretch to a VAG car under 9yrs old with decent mileage.

 

Thanks for sharing 👍 its good to know that it is at least possible to have an old car that is also still able to be reliable