Age or mileage?

What's your preference, or deal killer?

I know we've had this discussion before, but I don't think I could find it.  There have been a number of used car threads recently and I was surprised at some the cars discussed because of the mileage.  As I recall, one of the cars recently purchased had only 150k miles. That would be over 240k km. I wouldn't even consider a used car with that mileage. I know I'm old school, and come from a time when a car's life was over at 100k, and that's no longer the case, cars being so much better built today. But still the big number scares me. 
Overall, what's your max age and mileage if you're looking for a daily/commuter that you like to get maybe  five solid years out of? 

Northerners don't like mileage- it typically means bad rust. 
 

Southerners don't care. 

Daily commuter...

I've done well with late 90's southern cars at about 175K. 
 

That's an age that drops the price to near zero, and people are afraid of JUST the mileage and age. Often the car has only minor issues and needs a set of tires. 
 

I can get 5 years out of that. 

In reply to Mr. Peabody :

I'm a decade older than you and grew up in Quebec with tons of salt, so I'm a low mileage guy. Like you, I see guys on here buying high mileage vehicles and I struggle with it. Now, to Paul's point, I'd buy something relatively new and drive it forever if it didn't rust, but I'm not starting with a 150K vehicle, no matter what. Around here people commute so much that 4 or 5 year old vehicles have 120-150K on them. I won't even look at them.

In reply to Mr. Peabody :

Care. I drove a 30+ year old, 230K+ mile 944 from FL to WA with basically no issues thanks to the care that Danny put in the car all that time.

I have driven 20K mile and <5y/o cars that were total POSes. 

Depends on the car.  Some are worn out at 100k miles, others can go 400k and still be in pretty good shape.

SV reX said:

Northerners don't like mileage- it typically means bad rust. 

At the age range I'm looking at now, roughly 8-10 years, I correlate rust with low mileage. When cars sit they rust.  One just came up, 2012, 132k miles, no rust.  I can probably get it for 3 grand. I don't know if I can do it. 

My 87 4Runner had 450,000 miles and zero rust. It was from Montana where they don't salt.

I had a 95 9C1 squad car that rusted completely out by 190,000.

I'll echo that rust is what is the killer. Things that sit need more attention then things that have been driven, but things that have been driven have likely seen more road salt. 

Mr Peabody...  Ask the seller that you be allowed to take the car to your favourite garage for a Pre-Purchase Inspection (PPI) at your expense....  (essentially a Safety Inspection)...  it's not a 100% guarantee but it does help ...

Gordon in Ottawa

Hands down, mileage for me.  There are exceptions, but my last truck was a 94 Mazda B4000 with 87k.  Current van is an 06 with 97k.  I once bought a 73 AMC Hornet Sportabout with 7400 miles.  After replacing some swollen brake hoses and resurfacing the drums it ran great.  I had a 73 Impala wagon with 58k for a long time.  It hadn't even been started since the 80s and I didn't hesitate for a minute to fly-n-drive it home 1300 miles (after I replaced the nylon bias ply tires of course.)

There is deterioration from time that can't be ignored, but to me - every mile driven is 5000 more times the wrist pins have endured several tons of force, 2500 times the crank journals have revolved in the bearings and the crank seals, 5000 times that the rings have been up and down in the cylinders, several shifts with momentary slippage (of the clutch or hyrdraulic clutches) of the transmission, 1000 revolutions of the wheel bearings, carrier bearings, and the races they ride on, 3500 revolutions of the u-joints, 20,000 times that the coils and injectors have fired.

The other thing that I can't escape is that every mile driven is a chance for a dim-witted previous owner to have forgotten an oil change, a coolant flush, or other deferred maintenance.  If I buy a 15,000 mile car that's been sitting since Grandma died in 2004 and Grandma never did an oil change, it's still likely just fine.  If I buy a 5 year old car with 150k on it and they changed the oil twice, I just inherited a vehicle that will need an engine really soon.

Duty cycles.  They're a thing.  Every mile means cycles on every component which put every component one step closer to failing.

Condition.  Mileage in good condition usually means it was well maintained.  Cars that are older with low mileage tend to get weird annoying issues like seals that heave fluids.

Age does not worry me although it does matter for maintenance parts.  I'd drive a 2002 Chevy before a 2002 SAAB.

Condition. I just recently bought a 2007 Pilot with 265k on it. It's in amazing condition and will be easy to keep running.

The price break for something like that is so good it makes up for having to do some minor maintenance.

I don't care about age, but I'm sensitive to mileage. I usually try to keep my purchases under about 90k, but I have bought a handful of cars in the 100-110k range. The major exception was a rust free CRX that had 180k and a lot of recent mechanical work. Sometimes you just know when it's the Right Car and you need to pull the trigger.

Right now I'm looking for a fairly new Jeep Wrangler and prices are crazy. I came close to buying a couple that had around 135k on them. But I don't need to put a ton of miles on the one that I will eventually buy, so knowing that they will reliably get to 135k has me looking at others in the 105k range.

I refuse to buy rusty cars.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Condition.  Mileage in good condition usually means it was well maintained.  Cars that are older with low mileage tend to get weird annoying issues like seals that heave fluids.

Age does not worry me although it does matter for maintenance parts.  I'd drive a 2002 Chevy before a 2002 SAAB.

I never trust condition.  The previous owner might have waxed it weekly and never even eaten a potato chip in it.  But it tells you nothing about how long they drove it with a misfire before someone said "hey, driver, you should have that checked out."  Then you inherit a catalyst replacement.  I was in an Uber just last week and the rear wheel bearing was so loud I couldn't hear the driver.  I pointed it out to him so maybe he wouldn't lose a wheel and his income for a week.  He had no idea.  The car was spotless inside and out because Uber, but who knows what maintenance he had failed to do.  It's vehicle owners like that that keep me in low-mileage vehicles.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Condition.  Mileage in good condition usually means it was well maintained.  Cars that are older with low mileage tend to get weird annoying issues like seals that heave fluids.

Agreed.  Low mileage is nice, but high enough mileage with everything in good condition generally points to good maintenance and not being abused. 

Mileage is hard on some parts, age is hard on everything. Especially the older you go, the worse the rubber formulations were and the quicker stuff aged out. A high mileage well maintained car is going to be far better and more reliable than a car that's sat for the majority of the last however many years.

Case in point, the low mileage 986/996 are the ones that have the most IMS issues these days, because consistent light use is way easier on the bearings than sitting for months at a time and all the residual oil draining out of everything.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

You can usually tell when a car has been abused like that, though.  They tend to be derelict in visible ways.

A stack of maintenance records an inch thick certainly does help.

Using my S60R as an example, purchased at 184k miles, it was clean inside and out, appeared to have been waxed and detailed on a regular basis, had newer decent quality tires (as opposed to brand new cheap tires thrown on for sale purposes) and it drove well with no squeaks/rattles/clunks.  Tracked straight, good brake pedal feel, no warning lights, etc.

After I got it home I noted the newer (rather expensive) shocks and struts, and the fat stack of maintenance records done at a decent-appearing Euro specialist indie. 

The Prius C that I bought not all that long ago had 290k when I bought it.  Carfax shows it was regularly serviced, with a very lengthy history.  One owner.  The car looks and drives like it had 50k miles on it.  It's now at 301k and running phenomenal.  Of course now that I jinxed myself I expect the block to ventilate itself tomorrow...

Age or milage doesn't matter to me one bit. I drive a neon that's old enough to drink that has 340,000 miles on it daily. I just bought a Honda that has 200k as a spare daily. It's all about condition for me.  

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Just playing devil's advocate... so Dad did a truckload of maintenance, but was the son doing neutral drops to impress the other kids?  Was mom a two-foot driver and went everywhere with the brake lights on?  How many curbs did the daughter hit during her Meth addiction causing how many spot welds to pop?

These are the things I think about.  The fewer clicks on the odometer, the less road-time someone had to abuse it, or if they did abuse it, at least you're getting it before they could have caused damage.

The only way to know how it was driven was if you were riding shotgun.  My old boss sold her Dakota many moons ago.  It was flawless, dealer maintained, and super clean.  She was an interior designer in a tri-state area, so the only thing the truck ever hauled was her in business casual clothing and paint and carpet samples, but she put 120k on it in a few short years.  Stack of paperwork, just like you mentioned.  I also happen to know that she abused the crap out of that thing and we once dragged it out of the quarry lake at 4am with a winch tied to a tree after a six pack each.  We had to pull the spark plugs to get the water out of the cylinders and take the carpet out to dry it.

Looked like a million bucks, flawlessly maintained, and I know it probably had a bent frame from how many times it saw air, high-centered on a rock, or otherwise was on two wheels.

But paperwork and clean upholstery

SV reX said:

Northerners don't like mileage- it typically means bad rust. 
 

Southerners don't care. 

QFT. 

Condition is more important than anything. Mileage or age is a long distant second. My DD is 11 years old and has 248k on it. My wife's is 22 years old and has 325+-. There are no plans to replace either of them as of yet. 

Woody (Forum Supportum) said:

Sometimes you just know when it's the Right Car and you need to pull the trigger.

I get that. I've been there a few times, trusted my instincts and it's paid off. 
I think cars are so much better built today there's less risk than there used to be. Condition, of course. Used to be that we would judge a car by its interior. If the interior was clean and well looked after, often the rest of  the car is too. 
More and more I'm seeing accident claims show up on the carfax. If it's reflected in the price I'll have a look, but without knowing what the damage was, or if I can't tell or find out I'll usually walk. 

Woody (Forum Supportum) said:

Right now I'm looking for a fairly new Jeep Wrangler and prices are crazy. I came close to buying a couple that had around 135k on them. But I don't need to put a ton of miles on the one that I will eventually buy, so knowing that they will reliably get to 135k has me looking at others in the 105k range.

I refuse to buy rusty cars.

The current issue with Jeep Wranglers are that it is likely cheaper to just buy a new one.  Locally(dealer in Atlanta I ordered my gladiator from) I can order a new one for 7% under invoice or pay the same for one with 85k miles.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

Most of those condition problems are observable with a close look at the vehicle, however.  I don't go just on maintenance records, but crawl around the thing as much as I can and see what little things aren't quite right that may point to past abuse, damage, or poor repairs.