When should I get a new car?
March 18, 2009 10:25 AM   Subscribe

When is it no longer economical to repair a car instead of buying a newer one?

I have a 1997 Saturn with 1780000 miles on it, and I've had to do a few repairs on it, mostly for oil leaks, etc. I'm not making payments on the car.

When does it make more sense to just get a newer car instead of making repairs? I make roughly two or three repairs a year at about $250 a pop.
posted by elder18 to Work & Money (31 answers total)
 
Simple: When annual costs to repair exceed the costs of buying the new car (eg, monthly payments) plus its own repairs plus any insurance increases that would come with it. Right now, you've got a heck of a bargain.
posted by Tomorrowful at 10:30 AM on March 18, 2009 [3 favorites]


$500 - $750 per year for a 13 year old car with almost 2 million miles (is that a typo? is it supposed to be 200k?) is pretty close to amazing. Keep servicing the car until it needs a repair that is going to put you out more than the down payment on your next car.

Even with the uncertain future of the Saturn brand, parts will still be available for at least another decade.
posted by coryinabox at 10:30 AM on March 18, 2009


Now. 178k is a lot of miles, won't be long before you have some serious engine or transmission work that needs to be done. But don't buy a *NEW!* car, but a used one with like 30k or so miles. Best bang for your buck.
posted by lohmannn at 10:30 AM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


When you can get a new car for less than it costs to keep the old one.

But you also have to consider the implicit costs. You already know how the old one drives, so you'll have to learn a new car. I put a new radio in my '95 Explorer that plays MP3 discs and has a line in jack. I wouldn't want to lose those abilities.

Here' the big part though, you also want to get a new car before the old one is totally dead.
posted by theichibun at 10:32 AM on March 18, 2009


coryinabox, you're forgetting that once he encounters that repair, he won't be able to sell the car for much (unless he fixes it). you generally want to sell the car before it gets to that point.
posted by lohmannn at 10:32 AM on March 18, 2009


The Short Answer: Previously
posted by artdrectr at 10:33 AM on March 18, 2009


Response by poster: Haha. I don't think my Saturn will reach 1780000 miles. I'm hoping for 200,000.

I read that it was actually much cheaper to simply make repairs, but I wanted to get some other ideas.

Of course, one must consider sentimental value as well, as I have grown rather attached to my car throughout the years despite the occasional quirk, like my windshield wipers turning on whenever I start the car even if the switch is off.
posted by elder18 at 10:35 AM on March 18, 2009


I've heard the Car Talk guys say that old cars are virtually always cheaper than new ones when you consider the loan interest and depreciation that go with new ones. The tradeoff is reliability. Does this car's unreliability cramp your lifestyle, i.e. keep you from going places you'd otherwise go? Do trips to the garage take a lot of valuable time?
posted by jon1270 at 10:36 AM on March 18, 2009


I'm in almost the exact same situation, except my Saturn is a '96 with closer to 150k miles. I always look at it through the following lens - "if this $300 repair gets me another 6-12 months out of this car, then it's only costing me $25-$50/month to own the car." Pretty good deal, I think...I'll keep it going until I get into more costly/major repairs, where the monthly cost of owning my Saturn begins to approach or exceed the cost of a new car.
posted by brandman at 10:38 AM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


Just going by the numbers, if you wind up spending, say, $4000/yr in car payments for a new car, then as long as your repairs on your old car cost less than that, you're coming out ahead. This doesn't factor in the fact that insurance on a new car will cost more. You can further complicate things by working out how much you'll save/lose in gas money if you get a more/less efficient car.

Of course, it's never that simple. In my own case, I had a car that needed about $1500/yr in repair work. What pushed me over the edge was when I realized that I wasn't willing to take it on any trips that I couldn't walk home from in a pinch.
posted by adamrice at 10:40 AM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


My '95 Saturn is at 215000 miles and still going. I started to pick up the once/twice a year $3-500 repair a couple years ago (bearings, resealing headers to leak less oil), but it's still far cheaper than replacing it -- because I don't even bother insuring it beyond personal liability. Having no car payment and hyper-cheap insurance is a LOT of money saved.

I'm going to drive it until it explodes, just like my last car (which, literally, did explode).
posted by Pufferish at 10:42 AM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


The real issue is when is it typical for the tranny or engine to fail? At that point its a total loss. If you want to be proactive about this then you should consider selling it so you can recoup some of money. Whats a 97 Saturn worth if you sold it today? lets say $1200.

The decision you have to make is whether its better for you to get $1200 today and buy a new car and start making payments or wait until it dies completely, getting 20 dollars from the junk yard, and starting new payments with no trade-in.

Im in a similiar situation with my car. Its reached the point where either I sell it or decide to drive it into the ground. Im thinking that if I have enough cash on hand to make a down payment on a new car (or used car) then I might get a couple years more of use out of it, thus avoiding car payments for two years, but I lose the money I would make if i sold it right now and put that money down on a new car.

If you can afford car payments now, it might be a good idea to see how low the prices have gotten. Economic downturns are a buyers market. You might be able to get a fair trade-in value from the dealer and get a decent price on a new car.

Those little saturn engines are very sensitive to oil loss. The timing chain on them is delicate and if youve been starving your engine of oil then the day it breaks down may be sooner than you think. Losing a timing chain on the expressway is pretty much a totaled engine.
posted by damn dirty ape at 11:02 AM on March 18, 2009


Figure out how much the monthly payments would be on the new car you want, then figure out how much you're spending on fixing the old one (averaged per month), include future repairs to the old car, and servicing both. When the old car is >50% of what you would pay for a new car, you might want to trade it in and upgrade.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:03 AM on March 18, 2009


My experience has been that some cars - and I am not sure whether your Saturn will fit into this category or not - actually have fewer repair costs after ~150k miles. The stuff that is likely to actually break has already broken, and what happens after that is you have to repair parts that wear out rather than break, like the bearings and seals that Pufferfish replaced.
I think you'll wait a long time before repair costs on a beater approach half of the costs associated with a newer car. But you'll start thinking twice about taking your vacation in a car that old.
posted by Killick at 11:12 AM on March 18, 2009


i'm a stickler about reliability. a catastrophic failure can happen any time, in a car of any age, but it obviously gets more likely as time goes on. when calculating the relative merits of new car vs. old, consider the possibility of being far from home and having to tow/store/dispose of/fix the beater. that could quickly suck up a lot of the money you would have used to replace it.

my pathfinder was a shining tower of dependability (at 400,000km) until one day, it broke down on the highway without explanation. i had it towed home at significant cost and sometime later figured out what the problem was: oil was leaking into an wiring harness plug (from god knows where) and killing the injector. i could have fixed it with a paper towel on the side of the road, but it was an unlikely and frustrating problem. when that begins to happen regularly, it just stops being fun.
posted by klanawa at 11:22 AM on March 18, 2009


I have a 1996 Saturn SC2. It's got about 150,000 miles on it. I've been wondering the same thing, and for what it's worth I've pretty much decided to keep it until it gives up the engine.

My maintenance expenses are about the same as yours. It uses a little oil (I need to add one quart between oil changes), and that's about all that's wrong. With the low insurance, my total cost to run the car is so low... even with new car prices, it seems the best is to keep the old car.

From the beginning, I've been making "payments" to myself for a new car. You could do the same, in a way: Figure the difference between your annual car costs now, and the annual car costs for a new car. Take that difference and save it. It will still be there when you really, really need a new car.
posted by Houstonian at 11:24 AM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


I just traded in a 9 year old Dodge Intrepid with 150k on it about 2 weeks ago. I bought it new. I now drive 75 miles roundtrip daily to work. It came down to cost and reliability for us.

In the last year, I had probably dropped about $1800 into the car. As a month ago, heater core was gone which was going to be about $1000 to fix. The radiator was possibly going, at least that was the next logical explanation for it running hot since we replaced all the "smaller" stuff. The brakes also needed to be replaced (again!) soon. And remarkably, one day about 3 weeks ago, it just didn't start. Had it towed to the shop. The next day when the mechanic got there, it started without any issue. Couldn't figure out the no-start. Because of the high mileage on the car, it was also precariously close to being totaled with even a fender bender. I got rear ended in December 2007 and had to fight with the insurance company to not total it back then.

We were afraid of throwing $1000+ into a car that might not start tomorrow, and be a possibly bigger bill. My mechanic agreed that the car didn't owe me anything at that point and said it was rare to see that car model go as far as it did.

After evaluating the amount of miles we put on my car, the cost of used versus the cost of new, and the offered financing from the dealer, we decided to go with new.

We got a super gas efficient 4-cyl at an incredible price and great APR, and got what we realistically wanted for trade in as well.

If you're going to buy, it's a good time to do so. We did a ton of internet research on the actual car, invoice, how to spot all the car salesmen trickery and trade in values. Know what you want to pay overall, dig your heels into the ground and be a pain in the ass. They hate an informed buyer who doesn't play their games and man, do they need to sell some cars.
posted by jerseygirl at 11:45 AM on March 18, 2009


A 180K miles on a modern car isn't a lot really. The vast majority of cars made in the last ten years can reach 200K easy. Even if you could get $1200 bucks for the car now and it costs you $200 in aggravation when it blows up on the freeway $1400 is only a few months of payments and increased insurance.

Personally I'd drive it till it keeled over and I'd maintain a AAA membership incase kablooey. My Caravan has 280K on it now and it'll need a timing belt at about ~330K (non interference engine, you can drive it till it breaks). I'll start looking for a replacement when it reaches 320K because I don't feel like spending another entire day and $500 changing the timing belt and water pump (always change these at the same time on the 3L Mitsu block). Ya, she's starting to rust and the right rear power lock doesn't work but even three years of payments on a replacement is $7-8 thousand dollars plus the insurance. That's a lot of iron.
posted by Mitheral at 11:50 AM on March 18, 2009


Buying a new car is like making a major repair every month.

That said, things eventually get to a point where it's just emotionally exhausting and inconvenient to take a car in for frequent repairs. I had a crappy Neon that had two cracked cylinder heads, a broken sunroof, and a myriad of other problems before it hit 40,000 miles. I traded that POS in and don't regret that decision one bit.
posted by Ostara at 12:06 PM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


Keep it. Keep driving it; at 1000/year for repairs, that's cheap.

One thing to make absolutely damn sure of - make sure you change the oil regularly, and check the level when you fill up with gas. In the six months or so that I worked for my bro-in-law's shop, three Saturns of your vintage came in with connecting rods through the side of the block due to lackadaisical oil change schedules.
posted by notsnot at 12:07 PM on March 18, 2009


The short answer is that it's NEVER cheaper to buy a new car. Drive it into the ground, until it's impossible to get reasonably priced spare parts for it.
posted by randomstriker at 12:55 PM on March 18, 2009


We just spent a pile of money for major maintenance/repairs to our 93 Civic and 96 Corolla. Things like replacing a rusted out oil line (Corolla), timing belt (Honda) and new sparkplugs and wires (on both). The cars have cost almost nothing to run (knocking on wood) over the last decade since the loans were paid off, so I don't begrudge them the bit of money it'll take to keep them going. If they run reliably for another 3 years, I'll figure I'm still ahead.

Sometimes too, I figure it's better the devil you know... rather than take a chance on getting a replacement car with an uncertain history.
posted by bonobothegreat at 1:30 PM on March 18, 2009


The decision you have to make is whether its better for you to get $1200 today and buy a new car

The choice is definitely NOT between keeping your current car and buying a new car.

The sweet spot in car ownership is to buy a used car somewhere between maybe 50,000 and 100,000 miles--and then getting the next 100,000 miles out of it at a small fraction of the cost per mile the original owner paid.

Good roundup of the reasons (for most of us) to avoid a new car purchase here: Only buy a new car if you're filthy rich.
posted by flug at 1:31 PM on March 18, 2009


Personally I'd drive it till it keeled over and I'd maintain a AAA membership incase kablooey.

In point of fact, as a person who has driven multiple crappy vehicles into the ground, you can call AAA from the side of the road somewhere with a car that will never start again, pay however much for a premium membership ($50?), and have a tow truck on the way to get you in on their dime in around 15 minutes. AAA is awesome and they've paid for two (that I can remember) tow truck calls where I needed a tow of over 80 miles. No need to "maintain" a membership.
posted by jasondbarr at 1:33 PM on March 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


I suggest calculating the cost of your old car including:
* Average annual repair bill
* Insurance & registration
* Towing insurance (probably less than $20/year from your car insurance carrier)
* Cab fare in case the car breaks down
* A week or two of car rental in case the car breaks down
* Something for your inconvenience in case the car breaks down (say $1000)
* The cost of doing, in retrospect, one repair too many once you realize the car is dead

Compare that to the cost of a new car:
* car payment
* added insurance & registration
* depreciation
* Opportunity cost of your down payment.

Unless your place a really high value on your inconvenience if the car breaks down, the used car is pretty much always going to be way ahead.

That's probably even true if you have to rebuild the engine or transmission, unless your "new car" is really a newer used car.
posted by Good Brain at 1:49 PM on March 18, 2009


All other considerations acknowledged and aside, I'd be inclined to replace an older vehicle when the surprisingly expensive airbags or their various subsystems must be replaced. The lifespan on airbags is usually 12-15 years. At the time when there is a chance that they might not reliably deploy or deploy unexpectedly... well, that is when I get rid of the car.

Airbags and their subsystems (sensors, accelerometers, ECUs, etc.) can cost many hundreds and even thousands, depending on manufacturer, how many there are in a vehicle and the like.
posted by bz at 4:14 PM on March 18, 2009


Another thing to consider is how much of an inconvenience being without a car will be. It took me two weeks to buy a car when mine died, and it was possibly the most frustrating two weeks of my life. I could get a lift to and from work, and I could use the train for just about everything else, but getting to car lots and the suburbs to look at new cars was a logistical nightmare.

If you are going to find it difficult without a car, then I would suggest trading in before it dies.
posted by kjs4 at 4:28 PM on March 18, 2009


jasondbarr writes "you can call AAA from the side of the road somewhere with a car that will never start again, pay however much for a premium membership ($50?), and have a tow truck on the way to get you in on their dime in around 15 minutes."

AAA sounds a bit more reasonable than the local affiliate BCAA. They charge you the regular membership fee of $80 plus add on a join on arrival fee of $50.
posted by Mitheral at 4:55 PM on March 18, 2009


I concur with those who've indicated that it makes sense to drive the existing car into the ground, financially. If I can piggyback on this question, however, does anyone have a sense of how to take safety improvements in car design into account when trying to answer this question?

I have a '98 Corolla with low mileage and low repair costs, but the car lacks side curtain airbags and predates electronic stability control. The OP has a small car of a similar vintage which, I assume, has similar safety features. On a strict financial basis, we should keep our cars until the cost of repairing them outweighs the cost of replacing them. If the OP or I were in accidents in our cars, though, we'd be more likely to be at risk for serious injury or death compared to our being in a newer car. Is there any rule of thumb for factoring in safety improvements in car design?
posted by cheapskatebay at 7:47 AM on March 19, 2009


Cheapskatebay, here's my thinking: As I mentioned, I have 1996 Saturn. I thought about the new safety technology that it is missing, too. But then I thought: I've had this car for over a decade, and I've never had an accident in it. In fact, I've not had an accident since 1987, and that was not my fault. So, while you can't prevent any accident from occuring, you can drive defensively to lower your risk.

Airbags help mitigate damage during an accident. But, I balance that with things I can do to mitigate an accident at all (like, driving like a grandma). Anyway, I offer that as something to consider.
posted by Houstonian at 10:24 AM on March 19, 2009


If the AAA is $50, then towing insurance is a lot cheaper, plus you aren't paying the rest for maps you probably wont use, and the AAA's lobying against public transportation, bicycles, etc.

As for the inconvenience of being without a car for an extended period if your old car breaks down, there is no reason to suffer like kjs4, just rent a car with part of the money you would have sunk into a new car.
posted by Good Brain at 5:14 PM on March 21, 2009


« Older SEO impact of migrating a site to WordPress?   |   Some question about converting a road frame to a... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.