Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off

andre1969 · October 2013

First I would like to know what is the average age of ownership for the cars on the road. I would guess that a lot of cars that have been on the road for 11.4 years have had more than one owner.

I think I read somewhere that the used car market is something like 3-5X the new car market so yeah, many of those 11.4 year old cars have definitely had more than one owner.

Like you, I'd be curious to know how long the average new-car buyer keeps their car. I've only had two new cars...my 2000 Intrepid, which I had for just over 10 years until it got totaled, and my 2012 Ram, which I've had just over a year. Most of my family members...grandparents, parents, etc, often bought every 3-5 years when they were younger, but as they got older those intervals stretched out. Not sure if that's a result of more reliable cars, not driving as much, or just not putting as much emphasis on having the latest thing.

crkyolfrt · October 2013

OTOH, maybe because of our incessant desire for tech toys in the office..err..car, and our increasing reliance on shifting questionable driving abilities..(including basic parking) to the safety tech the car possesses, rather than owning these responsibilities ourselves, that manufacturers are possibly finally back in a position to ensure they sell you a new car more frequently. They hold all the (repair-ability) cards now. A simple (not) electronic PC board somewhere can total the car if you can't find the problem. OR if the mfgr manipulates the ability to 'service' (or not).. that board by deliberate obsoleteness.

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

I think statistical probability also limits a car's ultimate age on the road, in everyday use I mean (anyone can KEEP a car stored for XX years).

Sooner or later, it will be in an accident, or excessive mileage will start to cause structural weaknesses----or climate will get to it, etc.

Then there are mechanical limits---even the most modern cars are pretty worn out at 175,000--200,000, and even if still "nice", they have plenty of needs at those mileages.

So I think 12 years is really pushing what is realistically possible.

stever · October 2013

It's fun being a bit of an outlier.

4 cars since we got married in '84, three new, still driving two of them. Only drove the '89 Voyager a decade/~90,000 miles. '82 Tercel, 17 years, 114k, '99 Quest is at 194k, 14 years, and the used '97 Outback is at 92k, 16 years.

Apologies for bringing the averages down, Detroit.

xwesx · October 2013

Oh, you know, I wasn't considering this from the multiple-owner perspective. So, while there may certainly be a tendency for a sizable portion of the population to switch cars more frequently (and into new vehicles), there's also going to be someone lined up to drive their old car.

The "income gap" mentioned between these two posts is no joke. Things will get much worse before they ever get appreciably better.

So, yes, I'm probably way off in my estimation. But, I don't mind being the nay-sayer. :-P

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

Well you really aren't an outlier, because having multiple cars means you don't use them all up as fast. I think we'd have to toss people like you out of the database and stick with those car owners who drive the national average # of miles per year....which for (ahem) middle aged people (up to age 54) is about 15K per year. After age 65 it drops to almost half, unless you are a host at edmunds

stever · October 2013

Well, that's four cars for two of us. We did share one car for a total of ~9 years over that 29 years. But I only commuted for one year. During that same time period, we had four homes. Not to worry though, we had a least a dozen canoes in there and 8 or 10 bikes. :-)

The only time we broke the national average was when we did the year road trip when the Quest was new (one more reason to hang on to it - lots of sentimental value).

Adding it up, we've spend $55,000 buying cars since '84. The real green part of it has been the dollars saved. The only one that had problems was the Voyager, and the three head gaskets only cost $100 thanks to a 7/70 warranty and some out of warranty assistance on the last one.

hpmctorque · October 2013

Every time your seven older vehicles age one year it's the equivalent of one car aging seven years, so collectors like you drive (sorry for the bad pun) up the average age. I sometimes do too, but at the moment our three cars are 14, 6 and 6 months old.

I'm very familiar with premature scrapping of cars involved in accidents. In April our '99 TL was rear ended. My wife was stopped at a traffic light when the driver behind her, who was also stopped, but was also texting, hit the gas pedal of her BMW X5. Damage to our car was estimated by Geico, the X5 driver's insurer, to be $4,700. Geico declared our TL totaled and offered us $3,400. I felt that our car had a lot of useful life left, and wanted to keep it. Long story short, I got an estimate to get it repaired for $4,100, and after two weeks of back and forth Geico agreed to pay to have our TL repaired.

The owner of the body shop that repaired our car showed me three cars on his premise that had been declared totaled, none of which looked too badly damaged. He said that he wants to cry when he sees cars declared totaled, that could be repaired, because of a stupid Maryland law that was passed by the powerful dealer and salvage yard lobbies. I'm not sure exactly what the law states, but it's something to the effect that a vehicle MUST be totaled if the damage is some percentage (75%, maybe, or something well below 100%) of the used value. I don't know whether the value used is wholesale or retail. Anyway, other states have variations of this law on the books, and it doesn't favor the consumer.

hpmctorque · October 2013

"...one more reason to hang on to it - lots of sentimental value..."

I wonder how much of a factor sentimental value influences the average years of ownership. Some people compulsively trade their cars while others drive them 'til the wheels fall off, as the two contrasting Edmunds discussions demonstrate.

stever · October 2013

Probably inertia as much as anything for those of us who drive 'em forever. :-)

That, and dread of going to a dealer.

Hm, when the van dies, maybe I should have it made into one of those cube coffee tables. Or maybe a breakfast nook....

andre1969 · October 2013

He said that he wants to cry when he sees cars declared totaled, that could be repaired, because of a stupid Maryland law that was passed by the powerful dealer and salvage yard lobbies. I'm not sure exactly what the law states, but it's something to the effect that a vehicle MUST be totaled if the damage is some percentage (75%, maybe, or something well below 100%) of the used value. I don't know whether the value used is wholesale or retail. Anyway, other states have variations of this law on the books, and it doesn't favor the consumer.

Unless things have changed since 1998 when my '86 Monte Carlo got t-boned, it only takes a crash that's estimated at 60% of the car's retail value to get it totaled.

I think where the aggravation with the new law comes in is this, though: If you decide to keep your car and fix it, you have 90 days to get it fixed, and inspected, and you're only issued a salvage title. So, you have to hustle to get the car fixed. And even if you do it all yourself, you still have to get the car inspected, so a repair shop is going to profit...and they're going to inspect the whole car, not just the repair. And, with a salvage title, I'd imagine your car is pretty much worthless.

Initially, I was going to try and fix my Intrepid myself. I was in the process of splicing the wiring harness back together, and was planning on buying another headlight assembly, either from a junkyard or a dealer if necessary. I was willing to live with the slight damage to the hood and fender, and the front fascia could be reattached. Oh, and a reservoir bottle had also been broken...windshield fluid, I think.

But, when the insurance adjuster said I'd have to get it inspected and the car would just get a salvage title, I decided to let it go. At that point, it was ten years old and had 150,000 miles on it. It could have lasted for years, but who knows? It could have lost the transmission a couple months later, or the engine could have sludged up, or it might have developed some serious electrical problems from an amateurishly spliced together wiring harness. So, I took the $1988 and bidded the car a fond farewell.

lemko · October 2013

...I'll probably be keeping my Grand Marquis until the wheels fall off. I have no doubt it will endure mechanically, but it's getting beat to heck being in the city and parked out on the street. My wife's LaCrosse looks like it'll be around a while, but it's only got 71K on it.

snakeweasel · October 2013

So I think 12 years is really pushing what is realistically possible.

I would have to argue that point. I would think that it would be easy to get a car past 200K these days with little work outside regular maintence. Not to mention that at 12 years a typical driver would be at 150K to 160K give or take. I would think that what is realistically possible is closer to 15 years.

stever · October 2013

Ruking1 came up with an interesting angle that could be affecting our increased car sales - the European makers can't sell their cars at home and that's probably helping to keep our car prices attractive and helping to pump sales a bit.

xwesx · October 2013

I wonder how much of a factor sentimental value influences the average years of ownership.

It certainly influences me. I have four vehicles that I (or a family member) have owned for a long, long time. The fewest years of ownership on any of those is 16 years, and the newest of the vehicles is 37 years old.

But, that sentimentality is also tempered by my personal requirement that each vehicle be in good operating condition for its purpose. So, if I'm not willing to put in the effort to keep it there, then it is time for the vehicle to go. As such, my daily drivers (which are quite new in comparison, even when I do buy one that is 10+ years of age) tend to be cycled through rather than retained.

Even so, I've only sold four cars thus far (with a fifth one having been destroyed in a crash), and I have purchased seven (three new, four used) and acquired all of my others (the four old ones) by other means.

I think part of the purchases were due to a growing family. Had we never had my daughter, for example, I think my vehicle purchases would be at least three fewer.

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

15 years is certainly possible for a modern car but between cosmetic damage, environmental wear and tear, and the continually escalating costs of car repair, keeping a car that long could turn out to be a rather grim determination rather than something rational.

stever · October 2013

Ah, but they're "disposable" at that point. And after 15 years, you could have saved enough to buy a new or used one to replace it if it dies and the repair price exceeds your pain point.

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

I'm kinda fussy. I don't like to drive some worn out crap car. If it looks sharp, drove well and was safe, I wouldn't mind how old it was--but I don't do shabby. Dents, faded paint, rust spots--are intolerable.

You can often tell how well off a person is if you see little orange flecks of seat stuffing on their jacket

xwesx · October 2013

Dents, faded paint, rust spots--are intolerable.

That's funny! I have never had any issues with these (though haven't needed to deal with rust on any of my cars), but I am fussy about interiors and mechanical health. If the interior doesn't clean up well and I can't get it running right, I don't want it.

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

What I meant was rust holes. As for some faded clear coat, I could live with that.

Interiors have to be clean and fresh though. I can't drive inside a dumpster.

slorenzen · October 2013

re: your wife's Lacrosse,

What year is it, and what motor does it have?

I've been considering a used one, and I see them with different motor options.

I'm tired of the road noise in my Honda...

Might even get a used Lucerne.

andre1969 · October 2013

From time to time, I've thought about a used Lucerne, as well, to replace my 2000 Park Avenue Ultra. I just worry about the engines, though. I've heard the 3.8 is pushing its limit in these cars, and the 3.9 isn't much better. I'd have to get the Northstar to get the performance of my old Ultra, but fuel economy will suffer. And I do wonder about the long-term reliability and repair cost of the Northstar, as it ages.

Another issue is that I got used to the stretch-out room in the Park Ave, and they just don't make 'em that big anymore. The Lucerne feels smaller inside. Even the Ford Panthers feel smaller inside...more shoulder room, but legroom and headroom are tighter. So, I'm just going to have to resign myself to the fact that any newer car I get is going to be smaller inside. I'd have to go for one of those long-wheelbase BMW 7-series or something equivalent from the Germans to get something that feels that big, I'm afraid. And, those are a bit too blue for my blood!

Oh, as for Lemko's wife's Lacrosse, he'll probably answer soon, but it's a 2005 and has the regular 200 hp 3.8. I think the Lacrosse was offered with the 200 hp 3.8, the supercharged 3.8 (had 240 hp in my Park Ave, not sure about the Lacrosse), and a handful of them had a 5.3 V-8! I don't think the Chevy 3.9 ever got put in the Lacrosse, but I could be wrong.

lemko · October 2013

My wife's car is a 2005 model in Sapphire Blue Metallic with beige cloth interior. We bought it new on March 12, 2005. It's got the 3.8 litre V-6 and is very good on fuel economy. You can get them with a 3.6 V-6. The car has been extremely reliable.

andre1969 · October 2013

That's right, I totally forgot about the 3.6 V-6. Thanks for reminding me, Lemko! And now that I think back on it, could you get the supercharged V-6 in a Lacrosse? Or was it gone by then?

hpmctorque · October 2013

The supercharged 3.8 was never offered in the Lacrosse.

slorenzen · October 2013

Yeah, that 3.8 is a solid engine, though a little raspy to some folks.

I guess the later ones have the 3.6(same as the Impala engine)?

I'm not as tall as Andre, but I'm 6'2 and 210 lbs., and I'm tired of shoehorning into the Honda.

I took early retirement, and don't commute anymore, so mileage isn't the issue it once was.

snakeweasel · October 2013

Well as for cosmetic damage all I can say is you are not paying attention when you drive. By that I mean there are plenty of cars with cosmetic damage and that doesn't see to deter their owners.

As for for environmental wear and tear and escalating costs of repair I have taken that into account. Cars built today car withstand the environment much better these days. I am near Chicago and I hardly see the rust buckets that I saw when I first was driving well over 30 years ago. And for repairs your repair bills for the first 200K miles should be minimal if you keep up the maintence.

I do see 15 years as realistic but that does not mean we would ever reach it. We are a consumer driven society.

ohenryx · October 2013

I also see a lot of cosmetic damage. Primarily from very minor wrecks, scrapes down the side from brushing up against another car, dent in a rear quarter panel from someone backing into you in a parking lot -- you can always tell those at a glance, no way that a person could drive into an object and create that dent, had to be someone driving into you.

I don't see as much of it as I used to, though. I think that's because more people have insurance. Once people were forced to buy liability, I think most of them went ahead and got full coverage.

Here in SE Texas, land of no snow, we never did see a lot of rusted out cars. And even though the average age of cars on the road is much higher than it used to be, the paint seems to hold up much better than it did when I was young.

Mr_Shiftright · October 2013

I meant cosmetic damage caused by other people. I can assure you that if you parked on the streets of San Francisco, your car would look pretty bad after 5-6 years.

stever · February 2014

"A rising number of smaller, more powerful but troublesome four-cylinder engines led to the first decline in vehicle dependability in 15 years, according to J.D. Power & Associates' U.S. Vehicle Dependability Study released Wednesday.

The rise in complaints was led mostly by engine and transmission problems and among four-cylinder engines — which now account for more than 53 percent of new-vehicle sales in the U.S. and could account for two-thirds of sales by the end of the decade."

J.D. Power: 4-cylinder engines lead to 1st dependability decline in 15 years (Detroit News)

stever · February 2014

Better get a truck or SUV.

Top 10: Which vehicles will last 200,000 miles? (Detroit Free Press)

Mr_Shiftright · February 2014

The question is not whether a car or truck can get to 200K but rather: can the owner afford to get it there?

stever · February 2014

Either that or monthly payments of $350 to $500+ a month. And often the term of the loan is longer than the warranty.

stever · April 2014

explorerx4 · April 2014

Almost there!
If your trip odometer was reset at last fill up, it looks like you can drive a long way on a tank of gas.
My Explorer was binding in turns, so I played with the tire pressures, and it seems to be better.
The recommended pressure is 30 psi front, 35 psi rear.

stever · April 2014

In theory, I could go around 400 miles on a tank but I rarely go much more than 300. This morning we went cruising 50 miles away (to car shop, among other things) and the trip odometer was on 350 when we hopped in the van. The gauge drops fast once it hits the last quarter. I didn't want to worry about getting there on fumes so I gassed up at home.

But I would have saved twenty cents a gallon had I risked it.

The Ford guy told me to keep driving it, bragging that he was pushing 300k on his F-150. He was my age and remembers when hitting 100k would have made the front page of a small town paper. My wife wasn't buying it (keeping the van much longer).

Mr_Shiftright · April 2014

I think at 300K all kinds of weird scary things can start happening to a vehicle---structural weaknesses, suddenly failures.

I remember a friend's old Plymouth Valiant, great old car, with some 300K+ plus on it---and ONE DAY.....the steering post just snapped in half-----YIKES!

No, he didn't crash because it happened while he was cranking on the non-power steering to get out of a parking space. Suddenly his steering wheel started spinning. His eyes were seeing it but it took a while for his brain to register what was happening.

Took him a while to find a used part, but he got it back on the road. His wifey was also none too pleased.

thebean · April 2014

This is a great topic - I'm glad I found it. After some flirtations with a new car, I've pretty much decided to drive my 2002 Honda Civic (87K miles) until it won't go any further. It's a bit rough on the road, but I don't take it on any long trips, so it will suit the "going to work and around town" usage nicely. My wife drives a 2001 Lexus ES300 with 60K trouble-free miles that I know I won't be able to pry from her hands. She loves this car more than any other she has ever had, including a Merc C-Class. We should be able to easily get 10+ more years out of both of these vehicles, with hers aging more gracefully than mine. Regular maintenance, waxed twice a year, always garaged is our regimen. Living in Texas, we don't see salt on the roads, so very little in the way of rust worries.

Thanks to all for their comments in this topic. Interesting reading.

nippononly · April 2014

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
I think at 300K all kinds of weird scary things can start happening to a vehicle---structural weaknesses, suddenly failures.

I remember a friend's old Plymouth Valiant, great old car, with some 300K+ plus on it---and ONE DAY.....the steering post just snapped in half-----YIKES!

Was that just because it was also really OLD in years though? What about a frequent driver like me that could put 300K on a car in ten years? Would you have less concern about that?

The person I gave my Echo to is right around 200K miles now, still has had no repairs to do, intends for it to be his commute car for the foreseeable future. That car is now 11.5 years old. I could see him getting another five years of use out of it (knock wood), although he won't get to 300K in that time. The only thing that concerns me about him doing that is it doesn't have ABS and he has a freeway commute. But certainly nothing about the age of the car.

hpmctorque · April 2014

@nippononly said:

In my opinion, that Echo should be good for another 100,000+ miles over the next five years, if it's properly maintained and not abused. As we know, Toyotas, in particular, are known for their reliability and long life.

andre1969 · April 2014

@nippononly said:
Was that just because it was also really OLD in years though? What about a frequent driver like me that could put 300K on a car in ten years? Would you have less concern about that?

I would think that failures such as rubber/plastic going bad, parts rusting, electronics failing, and so forth would be a result of old age, but things breaking, such as suspension components, steering columns, and so forth would be more a function of use and stress.

However, HOW those miles are accumulated are key. If you're doing a lot of highway driving, on fairly smooth roads, those miles aren't that brutal. But go pounding the city streets in stop and go traffic, dodging crater-sized potholes, and so on, and your car is more likely to get beat up.

My Mom and stepdad had a 1999 Altima that made it to around 320,000 miles when they sold it just last year. It still looked good, even, and ran well. However, it was also their daily commuter for years, logging about 130 miles a day of mostly highway driving back and forth to work. And they took a lot of trips in it as well. So that mileage was a lot less stressful on the car than, say, when I used to put 3-4,000 miles a month on a car delivering pizzas.

Mr_Shiftright · April 2014

Of course, all cars are different in how they accrue miles, but generally speaking, I would regard any car with 300,000 miles on it as a hand grenade with a loose pin. It may run another 50K. It may implode in the next 5 miles. You just don't know because all the parts have exceeded their life expectancy.

What I mean is, I'm fine with driving a car with 300K on it, but a) I consider it worth nothing and b) I expect it to die at any moment and c) I would do rigorous safety checks at every oil change.

@nippononly said:

stever · May 2014

This could be my last post in here.

nippononly · May 2014

You're not going for 300K??!! ;-)

andre1969 · May 2014

I have a ways to go to catch up to some of you guys, but my Ram finally did this, on 4/26 (which incidentally, is National Hemi Day )

fintail · May 2014

Congrats. It certainly owes you nothing. At 200001 did the doors fall off?

Funny, as I haven't had a daily driver with a mechanical odometer for about 10 years now, the mechanical digits look kind of quaint.

@Stever@Edmunds said:
This could be my last post in here.

stever · May 2014

The blower fan died last week and I'm going to replace it next week. But my wife isn't driving it out west when we move (that said, she may follow me out there in her new car. )

hpmctorque · May 2014

@Stever@Edmunds said:
The blower fan died last week and I'm going to replace it next week. But my wife isn't driving it out west when we move (that said, she may follow me out there in her new car. )

Some of us bond with our cars, but most people (women, in particular, I think) don't. You do, she doesn't.

stever · May 2014

Follow the money. I like to leave mine in "bonds" LOL. Doesn't sound like most of those are much of an investment either though.

stever · May 2014

One thing about living in the boonies is that people learn to make do.

Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles