Is Buying New Always A Mug's Game

Squink

Squink

Squink

Soldato
Joined
25 Apr 2007
Posts
5,255
As long as I've been in a position to buy cars (20+ years) I've always seen it as accepted 'wisdom' that buying new was a luxury reserved for people who simply wanted the pleasure of being the first to have it. People willing to accept a 1500 quid loss the second it was driven off the forecourt and sold on 3 years later at half the price that was paid for it.

Now I'm in a job doing 20-25k miles a year, where the car is simply a tool, to be reduced to the cheapest monthly outgoing possible, whilst not being a 1k shed to be run into the ground. Looking around, there seems to be a bit of competition amongst manufacturers to get you into a new car, where payments are spread over 4 years or so, with a modest final payment (though I'd be looking to move to another new car at that stage).

So am I missing a trick here? If I bought a new car and ran it for 4 years on low rate finance and traded it on with 100k miles on the clock for another model, am I still throwing more money away than I would be getting a 3-4 year old car with 30k on the clock and trading it in after only 3 years? Or does the added peace of mind of having a new car with full manufacturer's warranty make up for it, particularly when it comes to small, overstressed diesels?

I'd be interested to hear some viewpoints on it. For the records, I'm simply after the highest mpg car I can comfortably obtain and am happy sitting in a supermini.
 
Not always, no - sometimes it's sensible, ie buying a new Mini in 2001.

But if you are after 'the highest mpg you can comfortably obtain' then its fair to say low cost is a priority. Why throw away your low running cost advantage with huge depreciation when the same car at 12 months old is as good and loads cheaper?

The 'buy new' crowd always seem to think the choice is a nice new car or an unreliable banger. They ignore the obvious alternative - nearly new. The benefits of new without the disadvantages. The only credible thing you can't do with a nearly new is have your ideal spec but frankly thats irrelevent when buying some sort of diesel washing machine, it's hardly like you are sacrificing your dream day thumbing through the Aston Martin options catalouge is it.
 
Words of Wisdom

New is fine if you can afford or are inclined to take the hit, for me personally if i was ever to buy new, i'd like to be buying something a bit special, like a AMG C63 or Aston or 911, for a standard diesel A to B car which i will just view as a tool to do a job, a couple of years old seems like better sense, unless your swimming in pots of money and dont have anything to better to spend it on

The depreciation on the first couple of years is huge and will vastly outweigh any other saving, on buying a slightly older car
 
There are times buying new is so close to buying used in terms of cost that it would be silly to buy second hand. For models that have not been out for very long for example.

And there are times where you will save a packet comparing a well looked after used example versus a new vehicle.

Depreciation data is available for most cars so you can make an informed choice as to what path you'd prefer.
 
I think buying new would make sense if it was a car you wanted to keep forever.

Say in 1994 skyline r32 gtr buy it new and keep forever. Or an nsx. Basically anything you want to keep for a while and cherish without concerning yourself if the guy before you waited till hot to engage boost or whether he polished it weekly or did some nasty downshifts etc. Otherwise i don't see why to not just buy nearly new.
 
The Running Man said:
I think buying new would make sense if it was a car you wanted to keep forever.

Say in 1994 skyline r32 gtr buy it new and keep forever. Or an nsx. Basically anything you want to keep for a while and cherish without concerning yourself if the guy before you waited till hot to engage boost or whether he polished it weekly or did some nasty downshifts etc. Otherwise i don't see why to not just buy nearly new.
Click to expand...

The only reason I would consider new over nearly new is if the dealer was doing some kind of mental offer. Which they sometimes do.
 
Its very dependant on the overall deal and what is being offered. My XF for instance with the discounts I was given and the finance deal through Jaguar worked out cheaper than buying a used car of the same spec. You need to compare the overal cost of the deal on a new and used car and see how much the difference ends up being, sometimes it can be a lot less than you'd think.
 
J1nxy said:
Its very dependant on the overall deal and what is being offered. My XF for instance with the discounts I was given and the finance deal through Jaguar worked out cheaper than buying a used car of the same spec. You need to compare the overal cost of the deal on a new and used car and see how much the difference ends up being, sometimes it can be a lot less than you'd think.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't you negotiate down the used price based on this quote for a new car?
 
If it get's you the car you want (i.e. colour @ options) then buy new, also if it's a new model then there are no used.

2 reasons me and my girlfriend bought new. Otherwise we would've bought 6months-1year old with a couple of years warranty.
 
The Running Man said:
But wouldn't you negotiate down the used price based on this quote for a new car?
Click to expand...

Yes, but then you also have to take into account the fiance and other offers that get support from the manufacturer. So its the deal as a whole you need to compare not just the base price of the car.
 
Once you've started thinking cars as white goods there are very few that are not simply money pits. Exceptions that come to mind were the new mini and Audi A3 when launched, more recently the fiat 500, all of which have depreciation inline with a s/h car. Unfortunately I wouldn't use any for high mileages, which is where your 3 year old Mondeo is a good choice because of its white cliffs of Dover depreciation.
 
It's the same when buying most things new - expect to lose a significant amount of cash. People spend £2k-3k on desktop and laptop computers and after 3 years they are worth a couple hundred pounds.

It just one of those things in life that you can't keep worrying about.
 
SDK^ said:
It's the same when buying most things new - expect to lose a significant amount of cash. People spend £2k-3k on desktop and laptop computers and after 3 years they are worth a couple hundred pounds.

It just one of those things in life that you can't keep worrying about.
Click to expand...

Computers are a slightly different kettle of fish imho.
 
SDK^ said:
It's the same when buying most things new - expect to lose a significant amount of cash. People spend £2k-3k on desktop and laptop computers and after 3 years they are worth a couple hundred pounds.

It just one of those things in life that you can't keep worrying about.
Click to expand...

Most people don't spend 3k on computers, so this is a fairly odd point.
 
I hate to be the one that says Mondeo again but 20-25k miles/year while wanting to keep costs low screams Mondeo to me. They depreciate a lot so getting one brand new would be pretty silly imo as they don't cost a lot to fix so the comparative benefit of the free warranty is limited. Ford are also more reliable than the German brand cars as multiple surveys/studies have shown.

They are simply a bargain after they've taken most of their depreciation hit. Some of the work being required would've been done by the previous owner under warranty anyway so someone's basically given the car a "bedding-in" for you.

<off-topic>
Computers are cheaper and longer lasting (as in offer acceptable/good performance) now than they ever were. I've had my current one for over 5 years and have only upgraded the GPU (~£200) in that time and that's only because I game exclusively on PCs.
</off-topic>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom