From AOL's front page, one of the fluff articles from "AOL motoring". Percentage of value lost after 3 years ownership. No clue who compiled the list or how they came about their figures.
Top 6 cars:
BMW 116 SE 49%
MB C180 SE 49%
MINI Cooper 50%
VW New Beetle 54%
Jaguar X type 2.0 V6 55%
Mazda 2 1.4 Antares 55%
Bottom 6:
Perodua Kenari 77%
Suzuki Alto 1.1 GL 76%
Perodua Kelisa GXi 1.0 76%
Nissan Primera 74%
Kia Magentis 74%
Hyundai Accent 1.3CDX 74%
I am not in the market for any of these cars, but that Nissan Primera looks an excellent buy at 3 years old. Especially when they are generally considered reliable cars, not sure the same could be said for the other 5 bad performers. Too bad I can't fit comfortably in it.
|
|
Interesting stuff. Of course the problem with most of these surveys is that they are based on the RRP rather than the actual transaction price. E.g. the Primera can be readily bought with substantial discounts....
|
|
|
Those figures (top ones) are quite a bit different to those quoted in What Car magazine.
My last two cars were a MINI One which was supposed to be worth ~70% or original price after 3 years/36k miles and now my Golf V which they are predicting 60% retained value for.
I certainly did well with the MINI which after 2 years/25k miles was worth 80% of what I paid for it when I traded it in. This is the real figure after factoring in what I could have got the Golf for from the dealer if bought cash.
|
|
Once again they are probably calculating against *list price* rather than purchase price. I have seen new Kia Magnetis advertised at a little over £9k - well below list price. Nissan Primeras are also often heavily discounted. Minis, BMs and MB are seldom discounted by very much - I should think that when the figures are worked out that way the results would be very different.
|
|
VW Phaeton or Maybach as per previous thread and Top Gear.
|
|
It is also very dependant on what car you are buying next. If it is a rare, sought after model with a waiting list, you will get less than for a standard, popular model.
|
A new shape Nissan Primera is a good buy as a nearly new, never mind three years old...:-)
As most people don't pay full price for a new car, such depreciation tables have to be taken with a pinch of salt - better to work on a figure that's approximately the price paid new by private buyers prepared to haggle. Even that is higher than for fleet buyers.
A part exchange offer isn't normally based on the listed new car price of the vehicle concerned...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Just found a comment regarding a certain consumer magazine's overview of depreciation levels:
"XXX predicted that a Nissan Primera 1.8 LX will lose £11,135 (this figure seems a bit high to me!) over three years, based on the list price of £15,250.
"But you can buy this particular Primera for approximately £11,400 from a broker at present, which means the XXX estimate is not fully reliable.
"Based on XXX's valuation, in three years' time the car will have depreciated around 64-65 per cent - about the industry average. This also applies to other brands that discount from new, among them Vaxuhall and Citroen."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
There are additional factors to consider here I think. You need to think also about the capital outlay.
If I lose 70% of a £10K car then I've lost £7K. If I lose 50% of a £14K car then I've lost £7K also but I've also lost potential interest on £4K (or had to pay out additional interest on £4k of loan).
If your car of choice (mentioning no marques, of course but I think you can guess) has an inflated sale price then when it loses a wedge it's still a lot - it just seems less in percentage terms.
|
Superb! People forget that.
Also, to have 4K in your back pocket, you have to earn I guess 7K if you are a higher rate tax payer (this is a guess), so the effect is compounded.
It is pretty sad, but when I buy anything I look at the price and add roughly back tax etc to make me think how much I would have to earn gross to buy it.
|
The bizaar thing is that when we looked at a Freelander some years ago, we were told to consider buying new as the offers that LR were doing made it uneconomical to buy a used model!
The new price was about 3 grand higher but with 0% interest and a discount etc it really was not much more expensive. And to boot they were posting silly screen prices on the used.
The list price minus discount was apparently LRs way of protecting the 2nd hand value of their freelanders.
Hugo
|
|
land rover defender must hold its value as better than most,3 years old in good condition still ask 75% of new price and if you bought one 40 years ago you might even make a profit if you sell it now .some in good condition at this age double the new price. good 14 year old discos still ask 25% of new price
|
|
Of course, if I had that £14k in my pocket, then the wear and tear on my strides would be pretty excessive. Tommy Hilfigers aren't cheap.
Funny thing is tho', to be serious and motoring.....when you also look at Glass's guide or Parkers, they all seem to quote different figures too. So, when you come down to it, what you might get back after three years is down to a flip of the coin.
Is the car in vogue? is it the right time of year to sell/px? is the dealer you are p/x'ing with close to the end of the month for his manufacturers bonus?
|
|
|
|
|
I would be VERY sceptical about some of these figures, for istance I do not believe the X type Jag has a 55% 3yr residual nor the Mazda 2 for that matter.
I'd say it was some bored Web-Master somewhere who just wrote almost the first thing that came into his head !
|
|
|
