Cost of Ownership "Sweet Spot"

My experience is that VW quality declined in the mid-90s, and I don't know if it recovered. My '90 Jetta GLI was excellent, with 39000 miles without trouble until it was totalled. My '93 Passat GLX was similarly good for 141,000 miles, with some parts failures later on: a $900 sunroof motivated me to look for a trade-in. However, my '95 Passat GLX was a POS, especially since the dealer could not diagnose effectively. I blame this on VW as well, because car companies are responsible for providing accurate, specific, and usable diagnostics with tools and training to dealers. Bought from a dealer with 50,000 miles, it needed window lifts, suspension, harnesses, and an engine controller before 100,000, when I sold it. My '92 BMW 325i has been much better at 140,000 miles (bought at 89,000): some repairs, but nothing critical, and never failed to transport me. Could always schedule the work as I needed.

However, back to the topic of the thread, it is about COST of ownership, not COST plus CONVENIENCE. Getting into the cost of inconvenience opens the door to discussing the consequences of for example, a car not starting at a time of emergency, and that can lead to unlimited costs. However, they are not the costs of ownership.

Granted this may not be what the "busy businessperson" sees as critical, and it isn't what I as a "busy engineer" need, but it is the discussion.

Ken

absolutely

sunroof!) and

election. To

professional,

businessperson or

professional

Reply to
Ken Freeman
Loading thread data ...

My '98 Audi A4 Avant 2.8 brought the same grief. It was traded in at

49,000mi and just shy of 5 years.

I had spend at least 1 morning a week at the dealer for the preceeding few months (literally) and the list of chronic,seemingly unsolvable problems was growing.

15 months into a 2003 IS300... 2 oil changes. That's it.

I still miss the Audi and prefer it in [almost] every way but it will be my last.

Reply to
Cary Scheck

I loved my Passats and had a similar sense of loss, but it was cured by the 3-series. You need to try a BMW next - you'll forget all your previous loves!

Ken

preceeding few

problems was

Reply to
Ken Freeman

"Derek A. Bill" wrote in message news:171220031821197028% snipped-for-privacy@allsummerlong.com...

Well, the truth of this matter is difficult to accept. When it comes to motor vehicles it is pretty much a lose, lose situation. There are a FEW rare exceptions. We all would like to think that we "got a great deal" on our latest purchase, but nearly all cars plummet in value very badly as soon as you drive them off of the dealership's lot. Some do hold their resale values better than others, but it usually costs quite a bit more up front to get into one of these types of rides. So it's like pay now or pay later. Choose your medicine. Buy new and pay more per month, unless of course you can pay cash, and you should spend a whole lot less on parts and maintenance the first few years of ownership. At least in theory. But even buying new you could end up with a real lemon of a vehicle. It happens to people on a regular basis. This can be a vehicle owner's worst nightmare. They go out and pay top dollar for a brand new vehicle and it turns out to be a major dog--just after the warranty expires! HUGE financial losses can occur whenever this happens. On the flip side, you can search the world over for that "super clean, still pristine" used car, purchase it, and then realize that you probably paid too much for it and also immediately start having to replace very expensive parts that require a whole lot of labor and corresponding costs to install. And in many cases when we buy used, there's no remaining warranty whatsoever. Just because a car APPEARS to be in great condition, that's not always the case. The engine and/or transmission could be on the brink of failure. Again, the 'car thing' is a lose, lose situation. There is no "Sweet Spot" for cost of ownership. At least not by my definition.

Payments vs. regular parts and/or labor expenses, or New vs. Used. Whichever you prefer to call it. The really scary thing is that you could end up with payments AND regular parts and/or expenses while driving a 3-yr. old vehicle. :-( I absolutely adore motor vehicles and have just accepted the fact that car ownership and driving for me is like a combination of entertainment, necessary transportation and a hobby. So I just consider the major expense of me owning, maintaining and driving nice sports sedans and sports coupes to be the price I have to pay for something I truly enjoy tinkering around with. I don't even remotely consider my particular vehicle purchases to be an investment. Because they're not. People that dabble in the buying and selling of vintage Ferraris and Vettes do, but that's another story altogether. I drive my cars, and don't show them or store them long term in hopes that they will someday appreciate in value. Some are taken better care of than others, depending on what they cost me. But even these get driven on a regular basis.

Right off of the top of my head, I can't think of any particular vehicle that jumps out at me for being the least expensive to own and operate the first few years of ownership.

S.T.

Reply to
S.T.

Isn't that the one plagued by Nikasil engine problems... I can see why it was so affordable.

Reply to
Bob

No, it's not. The V12 never had that problem.

-Russ.

Reply to
Somebody

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.