That reminds me of when a lady friend asked me for advise when buying a
new car in 1994.
She liked both the Taurus and Honda Accord which cost a bit more, but
she told me the Honda dealer told her the Taurus would be worth much
less in 3 years.
I asked her how long she intended to keep the car, she replied about 10
years. Then I said there will be little difference in value.
She bought the '94 Taurus which has served her very well and which she
still drives daily.
1994 Accord EX $2736
1994 Taurus LX $754
These are the current private-party values for those 2 cars. The Honda
is still worth significantly more. If she were to trade in her Ford right
now, she'd get a paltry $323 for it from the dealer.
You realize you are comparing the mid-line Taurus to the top of the
line Accord - right? Hardly seems fair. And I think your numbers are
I just went to KBB.COM and got the follwoing numbers:
1994 Taurus LX 3.0L V-6 (base engine) with popular options (PW. PB,
PS, PL, AC, Cloth Seats), 96000 miles, good condition - Private Party
Value - $2,210 (the bottom of the line GL with similar equipment is
worth around $300 less, the top of the line SHO is worth about $600
more, which makes it worth more than the top of the line Acccord EX
according to your numbers).
1994 Honda Accord LX 2.2L four (base engine) with popular options (PW.
PB, PS, PL, AC, Cloth Seats), 96000 miles, good condition - Private
Party Value - $3,825 (and the LX is the mid grade Accord, the bottom
of the line DX with similar equipment is about $400 less).
Edmunds.com has a "true cost to own" calcualtor. I doubt it is a great
predictor of the future, but it is fun to play with. See
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/cto/CTOintroController . They don't let
you go back more than 4 years with used cars, but here are the
caluculations for a 2003 Taurus vs a 2003 Accord -
2003 Taurus LX - $0.36 per mile
2003 Accord LX - $0.37 per mile
They include depreciation, financing, insurance, etc in the
For a new car here are the numbers:
2007 Ford Fusion S Sedan - $0.45 per mile (total depreciation in five
2007 Honda Accord LX - $0.43 (total depreciation in five years
2007 Toyota Camry CE - $0.43 (total depreciation in five years
This is based on buying the car new and keeping it for 5 years and
driving 15,000 miles per year. Clearly the lower depreciation rate
predicition for the Accord makes the Accord cheaper to own if you only
keep your car for 5 years or less. However, if you keep it for 13
years or more, the situation will reverse and the Ford will be
cheaper. Edmunds also makes assumptions on maintenance costs and
repair costs that may or may not be accurate. For instance, they show
the mainenance cost for the Accord to be slightly less than for the
Fusion and a lot less than for the Camry). I assume this is based
mostly on Honda's recommended service intervasl that allows for much
longer oil change intervals. I am not sure that most Honda owners
actually go with the long oil change intervals, so I am not sure this
I think the more important point is that if you are going for cheap -
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:51:17 -0400, C. E. White wrote:
I used Edmunds numbers and just picked the middle car in each line...
Around here, Edmunds numbers always seem closer than KBB's.
Even in your numbers (which are highly inflated for the Ford, IMO, you'd
never get that price around here), the Accord is worth nearly 50% more
than the Ford.
Well you did a poor job of using the Edmunds tool. I used the Edmunds
site to get figures for similar 1994 Accords and Tauri, with similar
equipment and mileage (96,000). The Accord came in with a "True Market
Value" Private Party sales price of $2,040 and the Taurus had TMV
Private Party price of $1,294.
Next time you want to rip Ford, at least do it right, instead of doing
an unfair comparison. The Accord EX is the top of the line model.
Edmunds does not treart the Taurus LX fairly since they force you to
select options that are standard on the LX model in the "option"
section. So, go back and redo your calculations by using a reasonable
mileage (96,000 seems fair to me), add in the Taurus "options" that
are really part of the LX package, and compare it to a Honda Accord
LX. The Accord will still come out as worth more, but the difference
is much less than the difference in initial purchase price.
I think she couldn't care less. Old people usually have
a good idea how hard money are to get (for most people anyway)
and are pretty stingy as a result.
For her probably it matters only if she can get another
5 or 10 years out of it. Won't be surprised if she could.
Heck, my old boss has a 10 y.o. taurus that was stinking
(literally) pretty badly and despite making about $1/4mil (US) a year
among himself and his wife he just could not let go.
His secretary is driving LS400 though :-D
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.