Amazing what you can buy for sub £500 these days.

[ttaskmaster]

Mileage increases do not increase the value of a vehicle.

I didn't say it did.
Just that those of some higher mileages* are well past the point they'd have needed the common failures fixing, so are more likely to be in better order than the lower mileage ones, will therefore cost less in maintenance (because it's already been done) and will be worth more to the buyer than the lower mileage one that's likely about to cost him another 50-400% in a very short space of time.

I'm more familiar with the Golfs, but other cars and motorcycles work the same way.

What does increase the value of old or specialist cars, is an excellent history with documented replacement parts and common failure points being addressed.

Yes, but on certain cars those failure points are so common past X mileage that it's considered almost guaranteed to have failed, so any car still on the road and running fine well beyond X is even more certain to have had those parts fixed and be in far better condition with much more life left (an thus is worth more) than the car that is getting close to X, even though the latter has lower mileage.
We actually do the same when assessing our assets at work, pretty much, although ours do tend to be more of a Trigger's Broom these days.

Is that clearer?



*Up to a point. There will be an upper limit too!!

 

[[TW]Fox]

Yes, but on certain cars those failure points are so common past X mileage that it's considered almost guaranteed to have failed, so any car still on the road and running fine well beyond X is even more certain to have had those parts fixed and be in far better condition

So 130k = no, but 200k = yes. So the life of these parts is what? They get tired at about 120k? Oops, 40k to go until its time to go again on the 200k miler then

much more life left (an thus is worth more) than the car that is getting close to X, even though the latter has lower mileage.

This makes no sense, how is there more life left? The cars life doesn't end when it requires a new thingy, it gets a new thingy. If the cars life ended when it required a new thingy then the 200k mile examples with freshly replaced thingys wouldn't exist, would they?

What you are saying is that buying a car based purely on mileage alone is daft, and there are more important factors to consider - like the fact that a 200k mile car that has recently had a full suspension overhaul and a new DMF and clutch is probably a better buy than a 120k mile car that has had none of these things. This is completely true, and I agree. But you initially said that the higher mileage versions of certain models of car are 'worth more'. This is a general statement and is simply not true. Your point is sound - just don't blanket link it to mileage because then it becomes unsound.

 

[Iamzod]

Also if you look, the same ARB failure has come up (Aug15 and Jul16) suggesting it isn't actually getting fixed.

It's just the drop link, it's a 20 minute job to swap them once you have the car on axle stands and they only cost about £8 a corner.

I picked up a set of Bilstein ones for £15 for mine earlier this year.

 

[[TW]Fox]

It's just the drop link, it's a 20 minute job to swap them once you have the car on axle stands and they only cost about £8 a corner.

I picked up a set of Bilstein ones for £15 for mine earlier this year.

So then the story becomes 'The owner is so lazy and has such a bad attitude to car maintenance even a 20 minute job at £8 is simply too much to bother with',

Sounds like a great ownership prospect. Sign me up

 

[Akagi]

Bearing noise when operating the clutch? Probably the clutch release bearing, and OP says the clutch has been replaced, so if it was a 3 part kit which was changed, then that should have been rectified.
Rattle with the engine running? Its a diesel? Could be a tensioner which is worn, engine mount, something loose in the bay, etc. As long as the engine itself doesn't sound like a bag of spanners (moreso than usual) it shouldn't be a massive issue.
Loads of brake advisories, but they have supposedly been done.

The rest of it isn't that bad aside from the tyre advisories which have been rectified.

I know I'm incredibly poorly positioned to take this angle D) but come on, it was £440! Its probably been abused and not looked after properly, but its probably got more than £440 of new/nearly new stuff on it anyway.

Would I buy it? No... I'm far too scared to consider a car like this after my past endeavours, but it might not be all that bad...

 

[Iamzod]

So then the story becomes 'The owner is so lazy and has such a bad attitude to car maintenance even a 20 minute job at £8 is simply too much to bother with',

Sounds like a great ownership prospect. Sign me up

Never said it was a good idea

I would have ran away for the exact same reason, but if it aint fixed it is a cheap job for the OP to do.

But yeah, I wouldn't touch a car that has been presented for MOT with low brake fluid, bald tyres & bulbs out as I would be worried about being stuck on the hard shoulder of the A1 one morning. It's obviously been neglected.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Can you not see that you are making two completely different points and confusing them as one?

I'm really not... re-read what I wrote.

The 40k car is less desirable than the 80k car because it needs a huge pile of work doing, not because it has 40k and the other one has 80k.

Depends on the car.
In this case it most likely needs the work at the 40k mark. Those at 80k have most likely had it done already.
If you don't understand this point, then I have a nice Mercedes you may wish to buy off me...

If neither needs the work doing, the 40k car is more valuable. If both need the work doing, the 40k car is more valuable.

But in this case, the 40k car is far more likely to need the work doing, while the 80k is very likely to have already been there and had the work done.
Once again - Depends on the car.

It is simply wrong to imply that the average 200k mile Car X is worth more than the average 130k mile Car X, all things being equal.

It is simply wrong to assume that I am using one example of knowing what a specific model of car is like and applying that to every single car in existence as a 100% guaranteed foolproof method of valuation.

If nothing else demand drops off a cliff because rightly or wrongly the vast majority of car buyers run a mile, screaming, when they see 200,000 miles.

That's their loss then and my gain, which once again depends on the car and knowing what it's like.
This is also why I pointed out the increase in demand and price for higher mileage Golfs, because that *is* what people are learning, that *is* what's happening in the market and that *is* what people are putting their money toward, specifically with those mileages as markers.

 

[[TW]Fox]

It's pub talk and owners club echo chamber stuff. Take a sound idea, get the wrong end of the stick and suddenly the depreciation curve on a Golf turns into a mileage bathtub curve. Ridiculous.

If the Golf needs expensive work every 40k then the 80k one is about ready to need it all over again?

 

[Akagi]

A 50K mile car which has a long list of stuff which has been replaced may well be *worth* more than a 40K mile car which has all that stuff due, but a lot of buyers aren't savvy enough to realise that.

The 40K vs 80K argument doesn't work at all, for the reason Fox stated though!

 

[[TW]Fox]

There are loads of 170k mile cars out that which, for whatever reason, have limped to 170k with very little in the way of suspension overhauls or whatever. The notion that these would be worth more than one with less miles because there is a 'better chance' its all minty fresh underneath is surely flawed.

Of course when you do find a 170k'er with minty fresh suspension etc then obviously its appealing, but not because it has 170k on it, but because its just had an overhaul. People replace the suspension at 70k, or 150k, or 300k too.

 

[ttaskmaster]

[QUOTE='[TW]Fox]So the life of these parts is what? They get tired at about 120k? [/quote]
It depends on how the car has been treated. The general finding is that they tend to need watching and planning for replacement around the 130k mark and almost always fail before 200k. On that basis your 200k would get to 330k before they need looking at again. Assuming 10k a year, that's easily another decade of good solid running!

[QUOTE='[TW]Fox]The cars life doesn't end when it requires a new thingy, it gets a new thingy. [/quote]
Not according to the car, no, but it's up to the owner, isn't it?
It dies when the the owner CBA to replace it, or that cost then gets added to the price of the car and it's immediately worth less.

[QUOTE='[TW]Fox]If the cars life ended when it required a new thingy then the 200k mile examples with freshly replaced thingys wouldn't exist, would they?[/quote]
The car's life ends when the owner won't give it a new thingy and no buyer wants to pay for that on top of the car.
Where having wheels is worth more to the owner, they buy it a new thingy and it carries on.

[QUOTE='[TW]Fox]But you initially said that the higher mileage versions of certain models of car are 'worth more'. [/quote]
Yes, and in that very same sentence I qualified that with an explanation as to why. It was NEVER a blanket statement.

 

[Akagi]

I bought my car supposedly with new shocks on one end, but I can't remember which end, still feels more boaty than some boats.

Most of it is still original despite its high mileage. 2003 / 174,000 miles and still on mostly original suspension, clutch, DMF, turbo, injectors, exhaust, etc. A few bushes have been done here and there in its past, and that sort of thing, but not much major stuff has been done. I've done a tensioner, and it needs a wheel bearing.

A high mileage car which has been treated and driven well, will quite often have less new stuff on it, because it hasn't worn out yet. There are too many variables.

For example - some drivers could probably make a clutch in the same Mondeo last 300,000 miles if it has been used for lots of motorway work and is generally driven sympathetically, but the clutch in this one was ruined at 145,000 miles because it has been owned by someone who had it re-mapped and probably treated it with little kindness. The clutch in this one is in better nick than the one in the 300,000 mile car with the original clutch.

 

[[TW]Fox]

It depends on how the car has been treated.

Exactly.

 

[ttaskmaster]

A 50K mile car which has a long list of stuff which has been replaced may well be *worth* more than a 40K mile car which has all that stuff due, but a lot of buyers aren't savvy enough to realise that.

That's what Parkers, Honest John, Reliability Index and all the other review sites are for. The buyer's own stupid fault for not doing their research, just as if they buy a car that's a known complete crock.

The 40K vs 80K argument doesn't work at all, for the reason Fox stated though!

Mathematically, no.
Replace '40k vs 80k' with 130-180k vs 200k, though, and re-run the model...

It's pub talk and owners club echo chamber stuff.

Mechanics too, but what the hell do they know, right...?

There are loads of 170k mile cars out that which, for whatever reason, have limped to 170k with very little in the way of suspension overhauls or whatever.

Yep, we're selling one such car right now and it's gonna need a new fan belt, ball joints and injector refurb before the next 6 months are up. If the damn owner had done these when she was told, we'd be looking at almost double the selling price.

The notion that these would be worth more than one with less miles because there is a 'better chance' its all minty fresh underneath is surely flawed.

DEPENDS ON THE CAR...
You guys not hearing this part in the cheap seats?

People replace the suspension at 70k, or 150k, or 300k too.

Far less people and usually only when there's a problem.

 

[Scania]

Oh how I wish I'd not sold my old 2 owner 275k mile 528i (with huge documented history) for ~£450, I'd not realised its huge mileage increases it's value....

The very fact that it stayed on the askmid database until just prior to its MOT expiry and never resurfaced since tells me I actually did well getting £450 for something a few months from the scrappy.

Brand specific forums are full of people who kid themselves,VW ones especially it seems!

 

[silversurfer]

Petrol is maybe a different scenario for star ship miles, worth more in parts ?

 

[Scania]

Petrol is maybe a different scenario for star ship miles, worth more in parts ?

If your referring to my post, I can't see any value in a 275k mile M52 lump, nor its gearbox, running gear or interior although the latter was in pretty damn good condition given the age / miles its a generic interior that most other e39's have, thus no realistic value nor desirability.

Excluding rarity's or exotics (neither of which are likely to exceed 250k miles anyway) I don't see value in anything at this sort of mileage either complete nor in bits.

The steptronic 'box was running fine prior to selling mine, that said, had it not been, would I have considered a replacement from a similar mileage breaker car? of course not, same could be said of the engine, suspension, whatever.

At this mileage ,in a car at least, its scrap having served its purpose well, nothing more.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Brand specific forums are full of people who kid themselves,VW ones especially it seems!

Don't forget the owners from more general life, who "just happen" to find the results predicted by the brand forums and the manufacturers very closely match their own experiences.... and the mechanics who don't give a toss what car you have, when giving advice on what cars are good and what work needs doing at which intervals....
How do you cope with your life, when so many people up their own backsides turn out to be right?

Why do you think your car even has things like Service Intervals, if it's nothing to do with mileage?

 

[helpimcrap]

You check the MOT history?

I just did

https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/

Also if you look, the same ARB failure has come up (Aug15 and Jul16) suggesting it isn't actually getting fixed.

edit:

On a separate note I think they should give the MOT Test Centre Number on the website as well which would help.

I just checked mine - nowhere near accurate as it didn't fail on lights ever! I've only been told it's failed once! lol

 

[Akagi]

If you have a nice friendly MOT tester, they might fill out the fail sheet for lights, then adjust/replace the bulb, then pass it. Mine has done that for me a couple of times. Nice bloke.

Saves wasting everyones time taking it away, fixing it yourself, booking it back in, going back, and them having to do the partial re-test etc.