Nope. You'd get a diminishing return on the depreciation.
American cars take a HUGE hit at 2 years. After that, they don't depreciate at nearly the rate.
A 2 year old decently maintained American car that someone else is tired of is a gold mine.
It's sorta like buying computers...if you see one you like and say "I'll wait six months and get it much cheaper", but by then something else will be out that's even nicer, ete etc. :)
The only way to do it is lash out and buy, then STOP LOOKING!...
Top Posting because Mike apparently doesn't scroll down to read before responding...
Mike,
You should read what others posted before responding.
I asked you in 2 different posts which Lexus model you were considering when you got the Lincoln LS and your response has been the same both times, which is why you think the Lincoln LS or Ford is a better buy than a Lexus or Toyota and ignoring my question.
I happen to agree with you to a certain extent if someone is looking to purchase a car purely on the basis of lowest cash outlay over the life of the car, a Ford make sense, as it does to fleet buyers.
On the other hand, when you take intangibles into account, then other brands like Toyota and Lexus make sense.
I know you consider intangibles in some of your decisions, otherwise, you would not have enjoyed the TR or Ford GT rides - 2 cars that do not make economic sense for daily transportation, and instead of staying married and paying to keep your wife happy and comfortable, it would be cheaper to hire someone to accompany you to dinner or do whatever.
That may be your opinion but if you actually LOOK at the depreciation of American cars, as a percentage of the real purchase price, you are mistaken. NADA list a two year old V6 Camry as worth $4,000 more retail than a two year old V6 Taurus, but the Camry cost at least $5,000 more to dive home two year ago. A loss of $1,000 if you chose the Camry. When one compares domestic cars that actually sold at near the price of a new V6 Camry two years ago, like the larger V8 Crown Vic, it is worth MORE than the Camry. ;)
mike hunt
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote:
I guess I assumed too much. For a Lexus guy I figured you would KNOW which Lexus' were RWD V8s and which one sold for
55K in 1999. ;)mike hunt
Ray O wrote:
The Lincoln LS is a piece of garbage compared to the Lexus that you're referring to. The Lincoln LS is nothing more than a dressed up Ford Contour that sold for $15K. As a Lincoln, it's okay to be sold for $40k? Talk about being overpriced.
I'm not a Lexus guy. I'm guessing that in 1999, RWD V8's in that price range were a loaded GS 400 and moderately equipped LS 400, more likely the LS 400. To me, the LS 400 competes more with a Town Car with an emphasis on comfort and the GS 400 competes more with the Lincoln LS with an emphasis on sportiness.
FYI, the new Camry is coming out next year... along with the new IS. They are both much bolder and sportier than they are now.
Ford just lost $1.2 billion dollars (quarter announced this week). Toyota is in the black, with huge profits. I would rather be with a company that does not cut corners to make a comeback. Ford is on too shaky grounds to buy the brand name. Now it will be worse than ever. They will be forced to cut every corner they have not. Part manufacturers are already taking a huge hit and cant cut more. Mike, I would love to support Ford, but in reality they were screwing all of us 30 years ago when they made utter crap. Now they deserve what they get.
It's not this. It's their Wal-Mart type tactics with 5% mandatory price reductions per year. Their suppliers eventually did what any company that's being ruthlessly squeezed does to stay alive - they lowered Q.C. and outsourced as much as they could.
See, in retail, it works - you sell a product and that's it - as the retailer, your hands are washed. Problems are dealt with through the maker. But as an automobile maker, you can't make disposeable retail mentality cars. You sell and make the same product, so it comes back to bite you as quality slips. It was a fatal mistake that the directors of Ford took in their greed and arrogance. Never satisfied with a good bottom-line, they wanted more and more profits.
The more they cut, the worse it will get. Then they implode. IMO, they have already crossed the point of no return. GM, though, is probably salvageable. Their problems are purely due to bloat and inefficiency, much like how Chrysler's were in the past. Ford, though, is beyond fixing.
Actually Ford had a profit, not a loss. GM was the US manufacture with the loss. Toyota earns high profits in the US because they build more of their vehicles in low wage countries, use primarily lower cost foreign parts in the few cars and trucks they do assemble in the US, pay lower wages and offer fewer benefits to their workers in the US and charge 20% to 30% more for their products in the US than does Ford for similarly sized and equipped vehicle because some people think they are "better" than their ten year old car. In addition Toyota does not pay a penny in US corporate income tax and Ford pay millions in US corporate income tax. Personally I have never owed a bad Ford of Toyota product.
mike hunt
"Dan J.S." wrote:
Toyota does not pay a
I don't know where you get this statistic. I know the Canadian/Ontario government has given hundreds of millions to both Ford and GM this year to keep those plants going rather than to see them close down. It's called corporate welfare or if you or I were doing it, blackmail. You're right about the big 3's paying more to employees but this has to do with having to honor their pension and health care contracts, unless of course Ford and GM could declare bankruptcy and wipe out all their financial obligations - and I think that's exactly where they want to go. There was once a cloud of shame in bankruptcy but shame and pride appears to get short shrift with the latest converts from the halls of Harvard and Yale. If the airlines can get away with it why can't they?
Robert
From the IRS but I THINK it has nothing to do with Canada ;)
mike hunt
Robert wrote:
manufacture with the loss. Toyota earns high profits in the US because they build more of their vehicles in low wage countries, use primarily lower cost foreign parts in the few cars and trucks they do assemble in the US, pay lower wages and offer fewer benefits to their workers in the US and charge 20% to 30% more for their products in the US than does Ford for similarly sized and equipped vehicle because some people think they are "better" than their ten year old car. In addition Toyota does not pay a penny in US corporate income tax and Ford pay millions in US corporate income tax. Personally I have never owed a bad Ford of Toyota product.
Toyota does not pay a
Yeah but my Nokians only lasted 2 seasons (14000 miles, total) on my Lexus LS430.
Which Nokians did you use?
I'm on the all-season WR. Different beast entirely than the dedicated snow/winter tires.
A $57000 Lexus LS430 is not a comparable car to a Lincoln LS...the Lexus ES is more comparable.
Only in price. The ES comes with a V6 with only 225 HP @/only
249 FP of torque that comes on at too high of RPMs, that is driving the WRONG end of what is supposed to be a sporty sedan. One must buy a Lexus LS or the Lincoln LS to get a V8 that is driving the correct set of wheels for a sporty sedan.mike hunt
"D.D. Palmer" wrote:
Not true. Lexus sells other V8 RWD vehicles.
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.