5 ms·

Older cars are massively undervalued in the USA because of social norms, which is a massive opportunity to anyone willing to exploit it to get reliable transpor

by _yb2s 2y ago

Older cars are massively undervalued in the USA because of social norms, which is a massive opportunity to anyone willing to exploit it to get reliable transportation for nearly free. People are afraid that older cars are dangerous, unreliable, or (worst of all) will make you look poor, but all 3 are just misinformation. Boats and airplanes are just as reliable when old as new because they're maintained well- and cars are the same. If you maintain an old car well, it doesn't really ever wear out, and stays as reliable as a new car. It's also massively cheaper to maintain an old car well then to buy new ones even if you pay someone else to do it. People complain when they get a $1000 repair bill every few years for an older car so they will say "it's getting unreliable" and then consider paying up to $1000 a month for a new one. There is a middle ground where you pay maybe $1000-2000 every year to stay on top of stuff, and it stays reliable indefinitely. Moreover, an older high end car is just so much nicer than a new car in the same price range. You can buy a well maintained low mileage older but high end Porsche, Audi, etc. for well under $10k on Craigslist these days and you'd have to be a car nerd to know it's not a new model. Is it cheap to maintain well? Not exactly, but it will be 1/10th the cost of a car payment on a new low end economy car, and you're driving a high end car. Plus, when you buy a 20 year old high end car and maintain it well, it will appreciate rather than depreciate in value. My daily driver is an older Porsche, and in 3 years of driving it, it has probably appreciated in value enough to make all of the maintenance, insurance, etc. free- basically a free car if you don't count the space in my garage it uses to keep it nice.

fragmede 2y ago
No. A 10 year old Mercedes is not preferable to a newer used Honda Civic in terms of maintenance and reliability, unless you're a mechanic yourself. it's true that it's nicer vehicle, but having to go to a Mercedes service center instead of an independent shop really racks up the bills. If you're getting the used Mercedes because you don't have the finances to get a new one, the maintenance costs to have the Mercedes are going to sink you even further into debt, compared to a Honda Civic/equivalent.
alliao 2y ago
I think it's a lot to do with how it's designed too.. I kept an old hatchback bmw made in 2000 and that thing already have bit of plastic parts in the engine bay (coolant pipes no less) which are just time bombs. parts and labour costs are usually why people decided to go newer cars. good job on the old porsche though, just don't get the one with starter motor in the transmission case.. some of them are maintenance nightmares
- _yb2s 2y ago
  I'm not familiar with BMWs of that era, but other German cars from that era, the plastic cooling system pipes will likely last forever- they don't corrode or crack like metal pipes would over time. For really critical things like through hulls below the waterline on boats, plastic pipes like glass filled nylon (Marelon) are considered safer and more reliable than metal, because they never corrode, and are much physically stronger than a comparable weight metal part. I grew up with 1970s European cars where every plastic or rubber part would fail eventually, but by the 90s the materials got much better.
  - alliao 2y ago
    that's good to hear! it's the only weak spot on that engine M44, and that particular plastic cooling pipe is in a nightmarish place right up against the firewall. Need tiny hands if you want to replace it while the engine's inside.
rozap 2y ago
> will make you look poor I have an oldish (1997) exotic car as a toy. It cost less upfront than a new Toyota Camry. At a car meet, I overheard someone say to their friend "Man, if I had infinite money, this is what I'd get". I definitely do not own a money printing machine. Maintenance is something else but I do the work myself so it's not bad. And the fun thing about old low volume exotics is that they are mostly parts bin cars. Tons of shared components are easily available.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  Same, I'm the "rich guy" picking up my son at school in an old Porsche I got cheap on Craigslist and maintain myself, despite the fact that its a school my kid was transferred to in a wealthy neighborhood we can't afford to live in. It cost me way way less than a newer economy car would. It's funny the general reactions I get- young men try to race me at stoplights, and strangers on the street will often give me a defiant fist or middle finger, as if I represent the wealthy exploitative class, in what is likely the cheapest car that has driven by in half an hour. I enjoy working on cars, so that helps make it cheap.
  - rozap 2y ago
    The street race invitations are funny. I get that a lot in my Esprit and, apart from it being incredibly stupid and dangerous, new cars are so absurdly fast in a straight line that everyone knows who would win. It was uncomfortable at first having people oogle over the car and make assumptions, but the number of conversations it has started with people genuinely interested in it definitely outweighs the awkwardness.
    - _yb2s 2y ago
      I've always loved the Lotus Esprit- sounds like a really fun car!
  - wing-_-nuts 2y ago
    I got a lovely note left on my car for parking in a handicap spot (with a tag!). The person assumed I was a rich guy flaunting the rules. My little miata was so proud of being called a "rich man's" car it practically pranced out of the parking lot. People just assume that anything sporty looking is ruinously expensive.
cityofdelusion 2y ago
I love older cars, but they are significantly more dangerous. My 93 pickup had no airbags and was notorious for the engine intruding into the passenger compartment in collisions. My 91 sports car only has an air bag for the driver as a premium option, and they are known to not deploy due to the ancient explosives and electrical contacts. The A pillars on both cars are tiny and will fold in any kind of hit or rollover, plus both cars were designed for 55 mph max speeds, not the 85+ that is common today. An accident on the freeway in either would be a coin toss of survival.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  It depends on how old and what you are comparing. In another thread on here I suggested comparing a brand new Chevy Trax to a 2012 Audi Q5- I think it's pretty safe to say the Audi will be a much safer car for 1/4 the price. If safety is important, someone with cheap new economy car money can instead get into a high end vehicle well known for its safety and quality, still for a lot less money. Sure, if you are going to compare something over 30+ years old, and from a manufacturer not known for safety or quality in the first place, it will be a lot more dangerous. Still, even with old stuff it varies. Late 80s Mercedes and Volvos, even base models, for example had most of the modern safety tech that other cars didn't see for a very long time. Weight is also a huge factor- a big old truck with no regard for safety in its design is still a lot safer than a light economy car in a collision. Probably the safest cars on the market are still the over-engineered 20 year old full sized luxury SUVs that weigh as much as a 3/4 ton truck and have tons of heavy offroad gadgets they don't put on SUVs anymore.
bityard 2y ago
There is no such thing as owning an "older car" here in the midwest rust belt states. The frames corrode to orange dust on _every_ car when they get to be between 10-12 years old. You _do_ see cars older than that on the road, but that's only because we don't have mandatory inspections in my state. The only exceptions here are the "toys" that people buy for summer use only. (Sports cars, vintage cars, etc.) Once in a while I see repair videos on cars from mechanics in Florida, Texas, Arizona, or Southern California. The car will be 15 years old and everything underneath will look entirely brand-new (minus some dust and scratches) compared to a brand-new car here that has seen only a winter or two.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  As someone that loves old cars that sounds terrible. Are you sure every car? Some of the higher end European cars have a hot dipped galvanized frame. Volvo advertised pretty heavily that the 1980s 740s were galvanized… I’m pretty sure I’ve seen some that ended up out here on the west coast from the midwest and you can’t undo a suspension bolt, but the chassis was fine. You could always buy a used car out of state and drive it back.
  - bityard 2y ago
    I haven't seen a hot-dipped galvanized frame here myself, but I would certainly be an interested buyer if any are still be made. The only cars with aluminum frames are luxury/sports cars, and the Honda Insight from like 20 years ago. Some newer cars have aluminum bodies (F-150?) but not aluminum frames which makes no sense to me. Steel car bodies last a _very_ long time these days, compared to the frames.
hagbard_c 2y ago
> pay maybe $1000-2000 every year to stay on top of stuff, and it stays reliable indefinitely. ...and then they implement some new laws which state that cars older than year X are no longer allowed within zone Y because of emissions (think 'ULEZ' in London or variations on the 'Milieuzone' in several Dutch cities). A few years later they update X to (X + a few years) and expand Y to (Y + the rest of where you want to go). They'll also write into law that you can not adapt your car to abide by the required emissions standards, no no, buy a newer car you shall. This is common practice in many European countries, if there is no US equivalent yet there will be one soon enough.
jaredhallen 2y ago
I'm all in on keeping older rigs on the road, but my experience has been that the monetary and effort cost is higher than what I'm seeing described here. Sure, it's technically possible to keep an older car in like-new condition, but it doesn't happen with an annual $1k trip to the shop. Cars are neither boats nor airplanes. The amount of use they get is an order of magnitude more. Everything wears out. Seats, window regulators, body mounts, pedals, interior molding, etc. That's all on top of the normal wear items like drivetrain, suspension, and whatnot. My househould has three vehicles currently, with 280k, 310k, and 420k miles on their respective odometers. I'm glad to keep them going, but it's constant upkeep, and the parts bill alone is quite substantial. Works for me, but definitely isn't for everyone.

by _yb2s 2y ago

fragmede 2y ago

No. A 10 year old Mercedes is not preferable to a newer used Honda Civic in terms of maintenance and reliability, unless you're a mechanic yourself. it's true that it's nicer vehicle, but having to go to a Mercedes service center instead of an independent shop really racks up the bills. If you're getting the used Mercedes because you don't have the finances to get a new one, the maintenance costs to have the Mercedes are going to sink you even further into debt, compared to a Honda Civic/equivalent.

alliao 2y ago

I think it's a lot to do with how it's designed too.. I kept an old hatchback bmw made in 2000 and that thing already have bit of plastic parts in the engine bay (coolant pipes no less) which are just time bombs. parts and labour costs are usually why people decided to go newer cars. good job on the old porsche though, just don't get the one with starter motor in the transmission case.. some of them are maintenance nightmares

_yb2s 2y ago
I'm not familiar with BMWs of that era, but other German cars from that era, the plastic cooling system pipes will likely last forever- they don't corrode or crack like metal pipes would over time. For really critical things like through hulls below the waterline on boats, plastic pipes like glass filled nylon (Marelon) are considered safer and more reliable than metal, because they never corrode, and are much physically stronger than a comparable weight metal part. I grew up with 1970s European cars where every plastic or rubber part would fail eventually, but by the 90s the materials got much better.
- alliao 2y ago
  that's good to hear! it's the only weak spot on that engine M44, and that particular plastic cooling pipe is in a nightmarish place right up against the firewall. Need tiny hands if you want to replace it while the engine's inside.

rozap 2y ago

> will make you look poor I have an oldish (1997) exotic car as a toy. It cost less upfront than a new Toyota Camry. At a car meet, I overheard someone say to their friend "Man, if I had infinite money, this is what I'd get". I definitely do not own a money printing machine. Maintenance is something else but I do the work myself so it's not bad. And the fun thing about old low volume exotics is that they are mostly parts bin cars. Tons of shared components are easily available.

_yb2s 2y ago
Same, I'm the "rich guy" picking up my son at school in an old Porsche I got cheap on Craigslist and maintain myself, despite the fact that its a school my kid was transferred to in a wealthy neighborhood we can't afford to live in. It cost me way way less than a newer economy car would. It's funny the general reactions I get- young men try to race me at stoplights, and strangers on the street will often give me a defiant fist or middle finger, as if I represent the wealthy exploitative class, in what is likely the cheapest car that has driven by in half an hour. I enjoy working on cars, so that helps make it cheap.
- rozap 2y ago
  The street race invitations are funny. I get that a lot in my Esprit and, apart from it being incredibly stupid and dangerous, new cars are so absurdly fast in a straight line that everyone knows who would win. It was uncomfortable at first having people oogle over the car and make assumptions, but the number of conversations it has started with people genuinely interested in it definitely outweighs the awkwardness.
  - _yb2s 2y ago
    I've always loved the Lotus Esprit- sounds like a really fun car!
- wing-_-nuts 2y ago
  I got a lovely note left on my car for parking in a handicap spot (with a tag!). The person assumed I was a rich guy flaunting the rules. My little miata was so proud of being called a "rich man's" car it practically pranced out of the parking lot. People just assume that anything sporty looking is ruinously expensive.

cityofdelusion 2y ago

I love older cars, but they are significantly more dangerous. My 93 pickup had no airbags and was notorious for the engine intruding into the passenger compartment in collisions. My 91 sports car only has an air bag for the driver as a premium option, and they are known to not deploy due to the ancient explosives and electrical contacts. The A pillars on both cars are tiny and will fold in any kind of hit or rollover, plus both cars were designed for 55 mph max speeds, not the 85+ that is common today. An accident on the freeway in either would be a coin toss of survival.

_yb2s 2y ago
It depends on how old and what you are comparing. In another thread on here I suggested comparing a brand new Chevy Trax to a 2012 Audi Q5- I think it's pretty safe to say the Audi will be a much safer car for 1/4 the price. If safety is important, someone with cheap new economy car money can instead get into a high end vehicle well known for its safety and quality, still for a lot less money. Sure, if you are going to compare something over 30+ years old, and from a manufacturer not known for safety or quality in the first place, it will be a lot more dangerous. Still, even with old stuff it varies. Late 80s Mercedes and Volvos, even base models, for example had most of the modern safety tech that other cars didn't see for a very long time. Weight is also a huge factor- a big old truck with no regard for safety in its design is still a lot safer than a light economy car in a collision. Probably the safest cars on the market are still the over-engineered 20 year old full sized luxury SUVs that weigh as much as a 3/4 ton truck and have tons of heavy offroad gadgets they don't put on SUVs anymore.

bityard 2y ago

There is no such thing as owning an "older car" here in the midwest rust belt states. The frames corrode to orange dust on _every_ car when they get to be between 10-12 years old. You _do_ see cars older than that on the road, but that's only because we don't have mandatory inspections in my state. The only exceptions here are the "toys" that people buy for summer use only. (Sports cars, vintage cars, etc.) Once in a while I see repair videos on cars from mechanics in Florida, Texas, Arizona, or Southern California. The car will be 15 years old and everything underneath will look entirely brand-new (minus some dust and scratches) compared to a brand-new car here that has seen only a winter or two.

_yb2s 2y ago
As someone that loves old cars that sounds terrible. Are you sure every car? Some of the higher end European cars have a hot dipped galvanized frame. Volvo advertised pretty heavily that the 1980s 740s were galvanized… I’m pretty sure I’ve seen some that ended up out here on the west coast from the midwest and you can’t undo a suspension bolt, but the chassis was fine. You could always buy a used car out of state and drive it back.
- bityard 2y ago
  I haven't seen a hot-dipped galvanized frame here myself, but I would certainly be an interested buyer if any are still be made. The only cars with aluminum frames are luxury/sports cars, and the Honda Insight from like 20 years ago. Some newer cars have aluminum bodies (F-150?) but not aluminum frames which makes no sense to me. Steel car bodies last a _very_ long time these days, compared to the frames.

hagbard_c 2y ago

> pay maybe $1000-2000 every year to stay on top of stuff, and it stays reliable indefinitely. ...and then they implement some new laws which state that cars older than year X are no longer allowed within zone Y because of emissions (think 'ULEZ' in London or variations on the 'Milieuzone' in several Dutch cities). A few years later they update X to (X + a few years) and expand Y to (Y + the rest of where you want to go). They'll also write into law that you can not adapt your car to abide by the required emissions standards, no no, buy a newer car you shall. This is common practice in many European countries, if there is no US equivalent yet there will be one soon enough.

jaredhallen 2y ago

I'm all in on keeping older rigs on the road, but my experience has been that the monetary and effort cost is higher than what I'm seeing described here. Sure, it's technically possible to keep an older car in like-new condition, but it doesn't happen with an annual $1k trip to the shop. Cars are neither boats nor airplanes. The amount of use they get is an order of magnitude more. Everything wears out. Seats, window regulators, body mounts, pedals, interior molding, etc. That's all on top of the normal wear items like drivetrain, suspension, and whatnot. My househould has three vehicles currently, with 280k, 310k, and 420k miles on their respective odometers. I'm glad to keep them going, but it's constant upkeep, and the parts bill alone is quite substantial. Works for me, but definitely isn't for everyone.