Some 20 or 30 years ago I saw a survey which compared the cost of motoring for cars of different ages. I think it was by the AA, but it may have been RAC or Which? magazine. The survey showed that the cheapest cars to run were 4 to 6 years old. Newer cars cost more in depreciation. Older ones started to cost more to maintain. The survey assumed that you were paying a garage to maintain the vehicle, and keeping it in full working order.
Does anbody know if similar research has been done more recently? On average is a 4 to 6 year old still the cheapest car to run?
|
I've never seen any such research, but I would have thought that this would still apply, probably more so these days due to higher depreciation.
One thing is for certain -- 4-6 year old cars cost less to run than new ones, especially those from manufacturers who offer long warranties. Having said that, cars seem to last so well now that the cost of maintenance on older vehicles isn't that great, with it being quite common for some models to be 10-15 years old and still requiring nothing more than routine maintenance to keep going.
It's getting to the point where there probably is no such thing as an old banger any more -- our virtually worthless Daewoo Nubira is quiet, starts first turn of the key, rides and handles almost as well as it did when it was new and has no rust. Plenty of cars about like that.
|
Stuff has started to go more frequently on the Mondeo in the last 6 months, probably as much a function of its 135,000 miles as its 7 years. But in parts costs, everything has cost between a fiver (reverse light switch) and forty quid (CV joint), and as I have done the work myself in my spare time, labour has cost me nothing. Had I had this work done professionally at £50+ per hour, this wouldn't have been a cheap car to run at all, but it's still cost me less than a couple of main dealer services on a new Mondeo, and that's without the depreciation which is a few hundred quid at most this year.
It seems a little artificial to restrict it to professional maintenance only, as labour costs are more significant than parts costs, particularly on makes like Ford where parts tend to be quite cheap. Genuine Ford parts for a major service on the Mondeo come to about sixty quid and the last major I had done at a dealer (on a Fiesta) totalled nearly £300, four years ago.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
It seems a little artificial to restrict it to professional maintenance only ...
Not really. You may do the required work on your car yourself, but the majority of the population do not, and have to pay a garage.
|
Both sons using father as unpaid mechanic find cars costing under £3k to buy s/hand last for > 5 years and cost about £250pa tops to maintain including MOT..
(cars are 12 and 10 years old).
Depreciation costs per miles? Maximum of £500 over 10k miles.. 5p/mile... Tops...
madf
|
Sweeping generalisation, but there's less and less you can DIY as cars become stuffed with electronics.
Even things like braking systems can be fraught with complexity now.
|
Sweeping generalisation but there's less and less you can DIY as cars become stuffed with electronics.
Not sure I buy this; there's a lot less you have to DIY, the spark plugs on our Galant last 100,000 miles, and of course there ignition and fueling is pretty much maintenance free. There's an engine management light if something's amiss and I reckon a plug-in diagnostic tester for less than £80 will see a fault diagnosed a lot quicker than the old fashioned "hmmm, is it the carb or the condensor playing up......?"
|
|
|
|
Not really. You may do the required work on your car yourself but the majority of the population do not and have to pay a garage.
I think including DIY totally changes the picture and the answer.
On a DIY basis I find cars are cheaper the older the better. My 43 year old Triumph 2000 has cost very little over the last 10 years. Spares are cheap, plentiful, and easy to fit.
No road tax, cheap insurance, no depreciation.
But then I'm not paying anyone to maintain it.
|
|
|
|
|
Some years back I had an old Micra which got expensive to run after about 9 years of age, and for the 4 years I had it it was not cheap to service. My Ka from new has been much cheap over the last 6 years. But that is no more than very limited anecdotal evidence.
One benefit of buying new is less risk. If some big things go wrong, you can get them fixed under the 3 year warranty. And then you look after the car, safe in the knowledge that it has only had one careful driver, and has been well serviced, ensuring a long life time. Some used cars are bought new, thrashed for 1 to 3 years with minimal servicing, then sold when the warranty expires. I think some companies that use cars for business buy in bulk new, and then sell them after a few years, and it works out cheaper than used, because they get fleet discounts, and the cars need less replacement parts, less servicing, and less time off the road not earning money.
Another factor is the brand. If you do not need prestige, then makes such as Ford offer cheaper parts and servicing.
Anyway, I hope someone finds a link to a suitable analysis or study.
|
|
|
"Some 20 or 30 years ago I saw a survey"
I don't know if it was the same one, but I recall the AA reporting that the economic life of a car was 8 years. I imagine that this was largely determined by bodywork/rust - you could probably double it now... (43-year old Triumph 2000's notwithstanding!)
|
Depreciation is the killer of most modern cars these days.
Once a car is only worth £500, faults that would have been repaired without quibble when the car was newer (and which are not terminal to the overall running of the vehicle) are not fixed, and the car is scrapped instead.
This is the one and only reason that VWs appear to last longer than some other brands. Since an old VW might still be worth £1500-2000 (due only to the badge stigma), a £500 fault will be sorted. A Peugeot of the same age (worth maybe £800-1000) will be borderline, and a Hyundai or Citroen (worth £3-500) will be scrapped.
In many other countries even the "lesser" makes will still be worth maybe £1500-2000 (where the badge is meaningless and people go on condition). In those countries of course you see many more very old cars about because people repair them rather than scrap them in the disposable society that is modern Britain.
Forget the 4x4 debate, gas-guzzlers or whatever, the real scandal in this country is the depreciation effect. That we are scrapping perfectly good cars in the name of image is a national disgrace.
|
That we are scrapping perfectly good cars in the name of image is a national disgrace.
I agree. With all the energy which goes into extracting and refining the aluminium, steel and plastics I would much prefer to see cars having a 15 year economic life. Instead of which a five-year-old Mondeo TDCi is one big bill away from the scrapyard.
|
|
|
Forget the 4x4 debate gas-guzzlers or whatever the real scandal in this country is the depreciation effect. That we are scrapping perfectly good cars in the name of image is a national disgrace.
You appear to be arguing for a hefty tax on new cars?
|
You appear to be arguing for a hefty tax on new cars?
What about tax credits for older cars? :)
But don't let HMCE run the scheme.
|
Every time SWMBO's car comes to MOT time, we have the above debate. And it's uneconomic to repair and even more costly to replace. As it is nearly pristine, it gets repaired. Now 14 and still looks OK and runs well.. Only another 111 years to its quarter century.
madf
|
|
|
|
"hefty tax"
Does 'car tax' still exist? Long time since I bought new.. :-)
|
|
|
|
This is the one and only reason that VWs appear to last longer than some other brands.
Not the only reason, 10-15 years ago they used to be well made....
That we are scrapping perfectly good cars in the name of image is a national disgrace.
I agree. Here's a scheme in the US: www.market-basedsolutions.com/ovc-vehicles.html They only take cars in good condition that would run well for at least 3 years!
Vauxhall have a scrap and crush policy here already, called Ecoflex: "Vauxhall will scrap your older and higher emission vehicle in an environmentally friendly manner and offer you £1000 to take it off the road"
|
|
|
|
|
You appear to be arguing for a hefty tax on new cars?
I'm not sure what the answer is if I am being honest.
Some sort of tax disincentive to companies against buying in new cars every year or two and flooding the market with repmobiles?
Not sure if it would work, but anything should be trialled that might be better than simply going for the easy targets.
|
|
|
A hefty tax on new cars?
The alternative is no VED on cars say over 15 years old.
That will do nicely.:-)))
madf
|
|
|
