Motoring dilemna

[willman]

In the op the newer one was a 2003 the old one was V.

 

I'm off to look @ a 2001 tonight - the guy was looking at 2300 for it, very low miles with loads of service and work done it.We've agreed 1700 if the car is what i want. 11 months T&T.(seems to be a hobbyist/enthusiast not a repairer)

 

The other is also a 2001 but a 51 plate from a garage -same money but 123k.(no tax either)

[2pac]

same make and model(ish) newer one is a higher spec model.

Older rmodel - new clutch,head gasket,brakes,12 months mot(from yesterday)

Newer - no details,just says full service history and book stamped. 12 months mot.

 

Annual mileage will be 3000 miles if that.

 

Keep old one.

[Xt500]

Difficult decision time.

 

Older vehicle- with service history and the major fault areas replaced and lowish mileage for year.

OR

Newer vehicle with FSH and average miles for modern cars but higher than normal for this type.

 

Financial saving not huge,perhaps £500.

 

Service history or mileage is overstated hype and neither guarantees condition or likelyhood of any problems to come.

 

A vehicle can have a full service history but be riddled with problems,all a service history denotes is the oil has been changed,it does not point to wether or not any problems have been addressed.

Mileage is another misused indicator you can have an engine blow up at 5000 miles just as likely as one at 100,000 infact id say its more likely.At 100,000 any factory defects will have already raised their head.

two cars at 50,000 can be entirely different conditions,one thats spent its time in town all its life will be alot more heavily worn im most areas than one sat on motorways all its life.

There is only one way to judge a vehicle and thats to look at it and we cant do that so any advise on this thread that leads that way is pretty much fruitless.

The best advice is if someone doesnt know what they are doing when buying a car,pay someone who does,it will save the tears later.