Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

snakeweasel · September 2016

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

Mr_Shiftright said:
Well with no speed limits you could end up with fewer accidents but more deaths. It goes without saying that people are more likely to die in a 100 mph collision than in a 55 mph collision. I think actual Autobahn statistics would back this up.

I don't think your average American driver has the competence to drive much beyond 85 mph, nor are many "beaters" on the road safe to drive at those speeds. In Germany, they don't allow the piles of crap on the road that we do.

there have been multiple studies that support that increase speeds increase your likelihood of being in a fatal accident. Some suggest that it increases by as much as 5% per 1 MPH increase.

Man, if that 5% per 1 MPH holds any credibility, we all ought to vote immediately on reducing speed limits to Beijing's 7.5 MPH average travel speed. Their fatality rates must be non-existent then since their average travel speed is so slow. I imagine on average that would lower speed limits by nearly 60 MPH on our highways. That should be a solid 300% decrease in fatalities based on your figures and numbers. Why aren't we voting to do this today?

First off all these studies show little change in fatalities until speeds of about 37 or 40 MPH (depending on if the study was done in kPH or MPH). Secondly there is the risk/benefit equation to consider.

Now mind you I am not stating that we should all drive real slow, just that increasing speed increases risk and those like you that promote the myth that it doesn't are [non-permissible content removed]. I will drive fast but when I do I understand that I am greatly increasing my risks associated with it and will take appropriate precautions when doing so.

snakeweasel · September 2016

andres3 said:

Leaving a mile of space between cars such as air traffic does is absurd, as cars going 100 MPH isn't anywhere near flight travel speed.

I am backing out of this discussion because I have read ahead and people are getting tire of it but I will address a few more things including this.

Yes I know that 100 MPH isn't anywhere near flight speed travel. That's why I mentioned one mile and not the 5.7 or more miles typically used in air travel. Also if two planes are on the same flight path it's anywhere between 10 and 15 minutes between planes (a lot more than your two seconds for cars) that would make one plane following the other anywhere from 65 to 125 miles.

Convert that to your 100MPH car and you're anywhere between 17 and 25 miles behind the car in front of you.

oldfarmer50 · September 2016

stickguy said:
Farmer, want a wagon? Anytime I see something domestic below $3k, and well under 100k miles, I think of you.

http://www.royaleasing.com/detail-2002-ford-taurus-4dr_wagon_se_standard-used-15486023.html

That sounds nice and if it were for me I might consider it. I've found a few low mile wagons locally as well but this is for my son and he likes old man cars not old lady cars.

oldfarmer50 · September 2016

Posted on this puzzler before. 2015 mustang GT premium "demo". Sticker $42k. Web site said only $900 off on a 2 year old car with ??? miles.

Now has a big sign on the windshield that says $35,999.

$6k off on a two year old car? Seems pretty lean to me. I'd say $10-15k depending on miles. What's your thoughts?

http://www.lathamfordmotors.com/wholesale-new/Ford/2015-Ford-Mustang-744ebc910a0a00654f919aa347bf6110.htm?searchDepth=11:15

stickguy · September 2016

I think I would be angling to get a left over 2016 for that price.

explorerx4 · September 2016

@oldfarmer50,
I made a pass on a 2015 MKZ(2017's are on the lot). The offer wasn't even remotely in the ballpark.
I guess the dealer thinks it looks good in the dirt lot.

stickguy · September 2016

I deal with regular drives of about 270 miles (to visit family in NY) and 440 miles (daughter in college in NC). basically all highway. so on normal trips, about 4.25 hours and 7.25 hours (traffic cooperating). so being able to average 75 instead of 65 can make a big difference, especially going south, where it is about an extra hour actual drive time. On a trip that length, it makes a difference.

stickguy · September 2016

Snake, leasing these days, is not always a bad deal. there are some extra fees, but usually there is a lot of lease cash (at least on the leases you want!), and the interest rate is usually so low as to be almost irrelevant.

True though that often the residual is higher than what you might be able to buy a different car for (but at least you know the one you had), but not always. Some people dodged a bullet leasing a big SUV right before gas prices went through the roof!

cars are so expensive, that most people are financing a lot of it, and often for 5 years now. so if you lease, buy it out after 3, and pay out the residual in 2 years, you pretty much came out the same.

oldfarmer50 · September 2016

andres3 said:
the IIHS is hilariously biased; they actually publish this drivel:

What are radar detectors?
Radar detectors are radio receivers tuned to the frequency range used by police radar guns. Radar detectors are bought and sold for the sole purpose of helping speeders avoid speeding tickets.

As a radar detector owner I can categorically state they are 100% wrong. The detector is an informational device giving a driver greater information about his surroundings (that could and do impact the driving around them), thereby increasing my own personal safety levels.

For example, I will often hear radar (that can't be seen) with the detector, which alerts me to the fact that cars may bunch up and brake in front of me for no other reason than there is a cop ahead. I'm given an early warning system. It is simply another tool and gauge to better inform the driver about their surroundings; a definite safety device.

Some drivers choose to be informed, educated, and welcome devices that give them additional information. Others like the IIHS, prefer drivers remain ignorant, and just stick their heads in the sand, and pay for the speeding ticket.

LOL and do you also sell bridges in Brooklyn on the side?

oldfarmer50 · September 2016

explorerx4 said:
@oldfarmer50,
I made a pass on a 2015 MKZ(2017's are on the lot). The offer wasn't even remotely in the ballpark.
I guess the dealer thinks it looks good in the dirt lot.

I need someone to explain the logic of keeping these aged units forever and ever. Does Ford offer continuing floor plan support until the vehicles rust into the lot? Edmunds says that 2015 Mustang is only worth $31k.

qbrozen · September 2016

oldfarmer50 said:

Posted on this puzzler before. 2015 mustang GT premium "demo". Sticker $42k. Web site said only $900 off on a 2 year old car with ??? miles. Now has a big sign on the windshield that says $35,999. $6k off on a two year old car? Seems pretty lean to me. I'd say $10-15k depending on miles. What's your thoughts? http://www.lathamfordmotors.com/wholesale-new/Ford/2015-Ford-Mustang-744ebc910a0a00654f919aa347bf6110.htm?searchDepth=11:15

Examples with 1k or under and auto trans are around $30k at auction, so $33k retail TOPS. 1k-5k miles are $29k.

Mr_Shiftright · September 2016

I would like to build an amusement park called Anarchy World, wherein anyone who doesn't think society should have rules can go there and hang out for a few days. Get it out of their system.

ab348 · September 2016

fintail said:
Did you lose your shirt on any of the new cars? I imagine the LaCrosse was either a bargain new, or they gave you something good in trade to move the Regal.

Actually I just remembered that the MR2 was a lease. That was probably the worst deal of the bunch but with a caveat. I remember the buyout at the end was $6K on an original $16K purchase price. I bought it at lease end (the leasing guy had a just-introduced Miata there to try to tempt me to re-up) and drove it for a while before selling it for $9K.

The Intrigue was a CPO, 1 year old with about 15K miles, $32K sticker, I bought it for $16K so no issue there and it was a good car. The LaCrosse was the only stinker, lovely interior, quiet, nice ride, but it was the one with the chronically bad transmission 2 dealers could never fix for long. But I bought it in the throes of the GM bankruptcy so the out the door price was like $24K and I got $17K for it on trade 2 years later and was glad to be rid of it. The Regal was a revelation after that one. I would have really taken a bath on the LaCrosse if I had bought it at anything close to the original $35K sticker.

jmonroe · September 2016

Michaell said:

jmonroe said:

explorerx4 said:
@snakeweasel,
In the past, leasing is more expensive than buying, was true.
Now, it's a bit fuzzier with 84 and 96 month loans.
If the guys in the back room can convince anybody to lease a new car for 96 months, I guess that explains why a 60 month lease for a CPO luxo ain't so far away.

jmonroe
No, those would be traditional finance terms.

Most leases don't go beyond 48 months - and, we recommend nothing more than 36 months unless there is a compelling reason to go longer.

OK, I didn't understand what @explorerx4 was saying but even still, if someone can be talked into financing a new car for 96 months they are truly a payment buyer and from what I know of them, they are the first ones to fall out of love with a car much sooner than most people. Hence the underwater problem that so many car buyers have today. They are not living with those poor financial decisions, they are dying with them.

jmonroe

Mr_Shiftright · September 2016

to say nothing of paying at least $1500 more interest versus a 60 month note. On a $30,000 car, you would have forked over around $3800 in interest in those 96 months.

Michaell · September 2016

oldfarmer50 said:

explorerx4 said:
@oldfarmer50,
I made a pass on a 2015 MKZ(2017's are on the lot). The offer wasn't even remotely in the ballpark.
I guess the dealer thinks it looks good in the dirt lot.
I need someone to explain the logic of keeping these aged units forever and ever. Does Ford offer continuing floor plan support until the vehicles rust into the lot? Edmunds says that 2015 Mustang is only worth $31k.

Nope - at some point, Ford made a final inventory payout for all remaining 2015's

nyccarguy · September 2016

@stickguy - people aren't using the lease as you describe. They stay on the leasing hampster wheel as @isellhondas says. Leasing the same car again 3 years later. Many times for a cheaper payment and with more equipment due to higher residuals, lower interest rates, & lots of lease cash.

I have a customer who just leased (maybe 2 months ago) a 2016 Accord Sport for 3 years. The salesman already planted the "next car seed" when they were signing the paperwork. "These cars hold their value so well, you won't even have to finish the lease. We'll get you out of the lease and into something nicer for not that much more per month."

If I would have leased our Pilot back in 2011 (which I didn't because the programs were not competitive), I'd be in the 3rd year of the second lease (if I had ridden out the 1st lease). Now I'm sure the payment on the second lease (a 2014) would be A LOT less. Not to mention the fact that my wife would have her coveted power lift gate. I've got an SUV that's paid off (and worth about $15K) with about 85K miles on it that's been maintained to last as long as I want to keep it going.

nyccarguy · September 2016

@oldfarmer50 - I saw a dark grey Mustang GT today. Black wheels & the vanity plate 302COYTE.

fintail · September 2016

The context was to say that a little extra speed can result in significant time spent doing something else. About 2/3rds of my mileage is made up of road trips, so more often than you might think. I am out west, where people and places can be some distance.

A few years ago I drove from Jacksonville to Atlanta, and deliberately planned a route that didn't touch an interstate, literally not one mile. I wanted peace, not traffic. It was interesting, but definitely used more time. It was cruising to me, rather than intently driving. Fill up the tank, set the nav, watch the scenery roll by.

snakeweasel said:

How often do you drive for 6 hours at a time? Most people drive an average of less than 50 miles a day, which would translate into a 5 minute savings.

That being said every year we have a family reunion in the Dells. It's just under 200 miles from me, all but 5 miles Interstate highways and takes under 3 hours. doing 75 will save you maybe 20-22 minutes over 65. Now one year I decided to take it slow, no interstate highways all back roads. All my starts were very mellow and I stayed within a few miles of the speed limit. Just relaxed and enjoyed a slow ride. It took me an extra hour but taking it easy and not rushing myself made the trip more relaxing and I arrived more relaxed tham I did when I was rushing there.

There is a zen in driving that you must experience.

stickguy · September 2016

oh, I know that most people turn it in and lease again. Heck, I might do the same thing. But that is a ST approach for me.

we are doing the same thing with the MDX. one more year of payments, and we own it. so probably close to 15K in equity at this point (helps to only have 35K on the clock at 4 years old.) Will be nice to have it paid off finally. Assuming we keep it (still a chance it gets traded in when my lease is up!)

fintail · September 2016

You probably made out like a bandit on that LaCrosse. I would have imagined they depreciated a lot worse.

I've never won a lottery selling or trading in my prior cars, but I've enjoyed them, so no complaints.

ab348 said:

Actually I just remembered that the MR2 was a lease. That was probably the worst deal of the bunch but with a caveat. I remember the buyout at the end was $6K on an original $16K purchase price. I bought it at lease end (the leasing guy had a just-introduced Miata there to try to tempt me to re-up) and drove it for a while before selling it for $9K.

The Intrigue was a CPO, 1 year old with about 15K miles, $32K sticker, I bought it for $16K so no issue there and it was a good car. The LaCrosse was the only stinker, lovely interior, quiet, nice ride, but it was the one with the chronically bad transmission 2 dealers could never fix for long. But I bought it in the throes of the GM bankruptcy so the out the door price was like $24K and I got $17K for it on trade 2 years later and was glad to be rid of it. The Regal was a revelation after that one. I would have really taken a bath on the LaCrosse if I had bought it at anything close to the original $35K sticker.

nyccarguy · September 2016

Good way to look at it @fintail. Cars are for enjoyment & pleasure. Not to be measured in financial gain or loss.

stever · September 2016

I'm that way about houses. Cars are more like appliances, kind of a sunk cost from the get go.

berri · September 2016

I would like to build an amusement park called Anarchy World, wherein anyone who doesn't think society should have rules can go there and hang out for a few days. Get it out of their system.

Oh, I think we're coming to that in sections of some cities in the US already.

berri · September 2016

What makes me leery of a lease is that things like oem tires probably won't make it 36 months, getting gouged for minor parking lot dings, dents and scratches at turn in, disposal fees, etc. That stuff can add up in a hurry. I'm thinking buying and holding a new car these days for 5 or 6 years may be the sweet spot. Most will still drive and look decent, as well as not being totally technically obsolete. Also depreciation is spread out better than owning it for only a few years.

stickguy · September 2016

Berri, I agree, get a good car that you like, and 6 years should be painless. Works real well for me now, with the miles I don't put on. Our Acura just turned 4 (today I think) and is at 35k miles. quite possible at 6 years it will still be barely at 50K. So, lots of life left, or a good sell candidate.

berri · September 2016

MY BIL loves his MDX

stickguy · September 2016

my wife keeps mumbling about how it would be nice to have the extra room. Not that we actually need it, but she believes in keeping everything, "just in case", so I guess more room in the car makes sense.

driver100 · September 2016

oldfarmer50 said:

explorerx4 said:
@oldfarmer50,
I made a pass on a 2015 MKZ(2017's are on the lot). The offer wasn't even remotely in the ballpark.
I guess the dealer thinks it looks good in the dirt lot.
I need someone to explain the logic of keeping these aged units forever and ever. Does Ford offer continuing floor plan support until the vehicles rust into the lot? Edmunds says that 2015 Mustang is only worth $31k.

Logic is "There is a suckered born every minute".

driver100 · September 2016

Went from Innsbrook to Strasburg Austria yesterday, on the Autobahn. Trucks and buses can only go maximum 65 m.p.g. (100 k.p.h.). Cars any speed. Everyone stays to right except to pass, few go really fast.....Over 75.

Lots of repair work so big slow downs, 2 hour trip took four hours.

cdnpinhead · September 2016

driver100 said:
Went from Innsbrook to Strasburg Austria yesterday, on the Autobahn. Trucks and buses can only go maximum 65 m.p.g. (100 k.p.h.). Cars any speed. Everyone stays to right except to pass, few go really fast.....Over 75.

Lots of repair work so big slow downs, 2 hour trip took four hours.

I spent last Tuesday night in Innsbrook, then drove through the Dolomites in Italy before heading over to Grindelwald (Switzerland) for Wednesday night. Hope you appreciate the beautiful weather; I've been over there a number of times and spent several of the trips peering through the clouds at the mountains, or putting up with fog and seeing almost nothing.

I trust you got your windshield vignette for the Austrian motorways -- huge fine if you don't have one. They're only good for 10 days, so if there's one already on the car it's probably expired. You need one in Switzerland as well, but at least it's good for the whole calendar year. I lucked out, as my rental car already had one.

As far as I know, only Germany has unlimited speeds (some places, many fewer than previously); Austria, Italy, Switzerland and France have a 130 kph max (~80 mph). As you've noted, the construction zones are killer. The drive from Frankfurt to Munich should have taken a little over four hours on the A3 and A9, but ended up taking
most of 6.

driver100 · September 2016

Cdnpinhead. I put a period there or Galaxy will convert your name into a real word.

I like these T shirts in Austria, they say WE DON'T HAVE KANGAROOS IN AUSTRIA!

I am glad you clarified the speed limits on the Autobahn, I wondered why cars weren't going 180 m.p.h. I don't have to worry about permits, we were on a bus. This will be last bus tour ever, too much time on the bus seeing things we don't want to see. Mrs Driver plans better trips doing it herself. We like hop on hop off buses, and walking through cities to see how people live. To took us to the oldest restaurant in Europe yesterday, it is in Salsberg, 1200 years old!

The weather has been unusually warm for this time of year....about 85 every day, no rain. Normal average would be around 60. I really like seeing car models we never see in North America.

karhill1 · September 2016

"The thing is is that leasing forces you into the new car every X number of years. Now if you trade your car in before your pay it off then yes you never outright own the car. But that's your choice, you could keep it but not with the lease."

Actually, a lease does not force a person into a new car every X number of years.

Nor does a lease inherently result in a person never owing the vehicle.

With a lease a person can do anything a person can do with a purchase. At any time, the lease can be bought out same as a purchase. At any time the leased vehicle can be traded, same as a purchase. At any time, the leased vehicle can be sold, same as a purchase.

These various options make any potential cost resulting from over mileage or even damage mute.

Unlike a purchase, a lease can be given back.

A lease presents some advantages. The obvious first advantage is it is a lower monthly payment. Another advantage is it allows a person to "test drive' the vehicle for a number of months.

Ultimately, if the money factor is relatively low, a lease presents almost no difference than a purchase.

For example, if a person buys a $20K vehicle and finances at 1.9 percent over 60 months, the total amount paid would be $21,000.

If that person leased that $20K vehicle for 36 months with a 55 percent residual and a money factor of .0008, the monthly lease payment would be about $292. This includes a $600 acquisition fee. The residual would be $11,000.

If the person bought the vehicle after the lease, the total amount paid would be about $21,500. Not really different than if the person had purchased the vehicle in the first place. The difference being the lease acquisition fee.

The only question is if the extra $500 is a good expenditure to gain the advantages of the lease.

Unfortunately most people have no knowledge of how a lease actually works. With the right knowledge, a person can make any lease work for them.

snakeweasel · September 2016

andres3 said:
Another thing the NHTSA is guilty of doing in order to blame speeding regardless of cause:

Most speeding-related fatalities occur in crashes on non-interstate highways. Of those who die in run-off-the-road crashes, consistently more were speeding on curves than not speeding. The greatest proportion of speeding-related fatal crashes occur between midnight and 3 a.m.

To me running off the road on a curve is a driver error and/or mechanical car failure unrelated to speeding (more like driving too fast for conditions). For example, you have either exceeded the car and/or the driver's capabilities for that turn, and that is a driver error unrelated to speeding. That same car with a professional driver could potentially navigate that turn safely at the same exact speed, and vice versa, that same turn could be navigated in my TTS at that speed with almost any driver, while a bus fully loaded during a thunderstorm downpour on bald tires might not regardless of the driver.

Running off a road on a curve is related to speed. The laws of physics come into play here, any curve will have a speed where drivers error and/or mechanical defects are completely forgiven and speeds where no car/driver combination can make it around the curve. Find a nice curve on a rural road, go through it at a nice comfortable speed, then go over it several times each time going 5 MPH faster, you will eventually run off the road. Face it, the faster you go the harder it is to make the curve.

imidazol97 · September 2016

Mr_Shiftright said:
I would like to build an amusement park called Anarchy World, wherein anyone who doesn't think society should have rules can go there and hang out for a few days. Get it out of their system.

Well said. LOL.
That "world" would be populated mostly by teenagers. It's a parallel to the Amish rumspringa.

karhill1 · September 2016

"What makes me leery of a lease is that things like oem tires probably won't make it 36 months, getting gouged for minor parking lot dings, dents and scratches at turn in, disposal fees, etc. That stuff can add up in a hurry. I'm thinking buying and holding a new car these days for 5 or 6 years may be the sweet spot. Most will still drive and look decent, as well as not being totally technically obsolete. Also depreciation is spread out better than owning it for only a few years."

Why would the fact the OEM tires will not make it to 36 months be important with a lease. With either a purchase or a lease a person would have to replace the tires. No difference.

Not all leases have a disposal fee. And most are only around $300 and they are waived if the person buys or leases the same brand.

Most of the leases I have had will waive up to $1,500 in minor dings and dents if I lease or buy the same brand.

It is interesting how people tend to focus on potential negatives to validate what they believe. For example, if a person believes leases are inherently bad they will focus only on the potential negative aspects of a lease while diminishing the real advantages of a lease. On the other hand if a person believes leases are great, they tend to diminish the negative aspects of a lease.

I have leased for years, always for 36 months. I recognize I probably pay a bit more with this approach than I would if I purchased a vehicle every six years. Never once have I had to pay a damage or over mileage fee. Nor have I paid disposal fee. One time I had to pay it because I leased a different brand but the dealer reduced the cap cost to entice me to lease.

I find the relatively minor extra cost worth every penny as I place much importance on driving a new vehicle. I spend up to two hours a day in the vehicle and I want that time to be fun.

In the end, the extra cost associated with driving a leased vehicle is largely offset by the increased maintenance and repair costs associated with any vehicle as it ages.

Of course, we are all different.

snakeweasel · September 2016

andres3 said:
the IIHS is hilariously biased; they actually publish this drivel:

What are radar detectors?
Radar detectors are radio receivers tuned to the frequency range used by police radar guns. Radar detectors are bought and sold for the sole purpose of helping speeders avoid speeding tickets.

As a radar detector owner I can categorically state they are 100% wrong. The detector is an informational device giving a driver greater information about his surroundings (that could and do impact the driving around them), thereby increasing my own personal safety levels.

For example, I will often hear radar (that can't be seen) with the detector, which alerts me to the fact that cars may bunch up and brake in front of me for no other reason than there is a cop ahead. I'm given an early warning system. It is simply another tool and gauge to better inform the driver about their surroundings; a definite safety device.

Some drivers choose to be informed, educated, and welcome devices that give them additional information. Others like the IIHS, prefer drivers remain ignorant, and just stick their heads in the sand, and pay for the speeding ticket.

BULL

snakeweasel · September 2016

Michaell said:

snakeweasel said:

stickguy said:
snake, actually you can keep the same car on a lease. Right there in the contract how much it costs to buy it out.

like I said, it is just a different way to finance vs. taking out a loan. Instead of a big DP then pay until you own, it is payments for a set period, then a balloon payment at the end. At least on the lease, all the figures are locked in up front. On a purchase, the buyer assumes all the market risk.
I have not worked out the numbers but my understanding is that's an expensive way to buy a car. My understanding is that it really extends the time you pay on the car and that increases the interest paid overall.
The point is you're not buying, you're renting.

I get that it's not for everybody. I lease my cars since I have "car ADD" (wife's term), but are buying hers as the plan is to keep it for 10+ years.

I agree, I can understand leasing if you want a new car every few years and don't do a lot of driving. If you drive a lot of miles leasing can add up, if you don't want that new car for many years buying outright is the way to go.

It's all up to the persons wants.

imidazol97 · September 2016

Saw a car with a vinyl roof yesterday morning. I didn't get a chance to study it because it was being driven recklessly changing lanes to pass--probably late for work. Brown with complementary color tan vinyl roof. Certainly not a monstrosity. But it was a Buick. A LaCrosse. The current edition. Looked like a raincoat glued onto a duck. Useless. But certainly not a monstrosity of a car. But it hurts me that it was on a Buick...

Within the last week I saw a Golf with a vinyl roof. There's something odd to the shape of a Gold in profile. It looks like a cartoonish car.

ab348 · September 2016

If a Buick dealer did that they should have their franchise revoked.

driver100 · September 2016

Leasing or buying?......There is no right or wrong, it is whichever suits your particular needs at the time.

Since my accident, here is a question to ponder. If you lease a car, your leased car is in an accident, the leased car is fixed up and repaired.........do you just hand it back in if everything else is good?

If you own the car they can give you less for it as a trade in. This could make a good advantage for leasing.

houdini1 · September 2016

Mr_Shiftright said:
I'd say that 95% of Americans are not competent enough to drive at 100 mph, and that 95% of Americans think they are.

Yes, I would suggest looking around at some of your fellow drivers when when traveling and stopped for a coffee, etc. at McDonalds. These are the people you assume are competent drivers, and routinely trust your life to.

graphicguy · September 2016

driver100 said:
Leasing or buying?......There is no right or wrong, it is whichever suits your particular needs at the time.

Since my accident, here is a question to ponder. If you lease a car, your leased car is in an accident, the leased car is fixed up and repaired.........do you just hand it back in if everything else is good?

If you own the car they can give you less for it as a trade in. This could make a good advantage for leasing.

My sister did a lease that way. She had a 36 month lease on a Camry. Guy slammed into her, both airbags went off. Outside and inside looked like hell....tons of damage! Other guy at fault, but like your insurance Driver, his insurance looked to cheap out. Anyway, she was only 3 mos away from the end of the lease. Took 6 weeks to fix it. So, she only had it another 6 weeks.

She took it for final inspection to the nearest Toyota dealer. The inspector immediately knew it had been wrecked. But, since he could not find anything wrong with the repair work (aside from the usual paint overspray on it, new steering wheel cover, new welds, and bolts, and body shop smell throughout, etc).

They gave her the previously agreed amount on the lease agreement for the residual value.

This was on a Toyota Credit lease, though. Might be different with 3rd parties.

fintail · September 2016

Kind of a strawman, I think. Nobody is supporting the abolition of rules. But the modification of arbitrary rules, rules made to be a make work project or profit center, or rules with a tenuous connection to reality, is something everyone should support.

Mr_Shiftright said:
I would like to build an amusement park called Anarchy World, wherein anyone who doesn't think society should have rules can go there and hang out for a few days. Get it out of their system.

fintail · September 2016

Nothing wrong with a normal LaCrosse, but that one in the raincoat is at least some degree of monstrosity. It just needs curb feelers and whitewalls to be a "full Florida"

I've seen more than one Camry with that top, too. I think it's popular in a certain area also known for its bath salts and generally crazy society.

imidazol97 said:
Saw a car with a vinyl roof yesterday morning. I didn't get a chance to study it because it was being driven recklessly changing lanes to pass--probably late for work. Brown with complementary color tan vinyl roof. Certainly not a monstrosity. But it was a Buick. A LaCrosse. The current edition. Looked like a raincoat glued onto a duck. Useless. But certainly not a monstrosity of a car. But it hurts me that it was on a Buick...

Within the last week I saw a Golf with a vinyl roof. There's something odd to the shape of a Gold in profile. It looks like a cartoonish car.

nyccarguy · September 2016

karhill1 said:
"What makes me leery of a lease is that things like oem tires probably won't make it 36 months, getting gouged for minor parking lot dings, dents and scratches at turn in, disposal fees, etc. That stuff can add up in a hurry. I'm thinking buying and holding a new car these days for 5 or 6 years may be the sweet spot. Most will still drive and look decent, as well as not being totally technically obsolete. Also depreciation is spread out better than owning it for only a few years."

Why would the fact the OEM tires will not make it to 36 months be important with a lease. With either a purchase or a lease a person would have to replace the tires. No difference.

Not all leases have a disposal fee. And most are only around $300 and they are waived if the person buys or leases the same brand.

Most of the leases I have had will waive up to $1,500 in minor dings and dents if I lease or buy the same brand.

It is interesting how people tend to focus on potential negatives to validate what they believe. For example, if a person believes leases are inherently bad they will focus only on the potential negative aspects of a lease while diminishing the real advantages of a lease. On the other hand if a person believes leases are great, they tend to diminish the negative aspects of a lease.

I have leased for years, always for 36 months. I recognize I probably pay a bit more with this approach than I would if I purchased a vehicle every six years. Never once have I had to pay a damage or over mileage fee. Nor have I paid disposal fee. One time I had to pay it because I leased a different brand but the dealer reduced the cap cost to entice me to lease.

I find the relatively minor extra cost worth every penny as I place much importance on driving a new vehicle. I spend up to two hours a day in the vehicle and I want that time to be fun.

In the end, the extra cost associated with driving a leased vehicle is largely offset by the increased maintenance and repair costs associated with any vehicle as it ages.

Of course, we are all different.

Very well said @karhill1 You make some great points. People just perceive leasing differently. If they own a car, they replace the tires (even if there is a solid chance they will trade the car in anyway. If they are leasing the car they think, "well, the car goes back in X months or Y miles. I really don't want to put $1,000 into a car that's not mine."

Again, I agree with you that the $350 disposition fee charged by most leasing companies is minimal compared to the cost of the actual car. It does get waived if you lease again from the same manufacturer.

If people feel strongly toward something, they will always tend to focus on the positive. In turn, if they are against something they will solely focus on the negative. This applies to leasing as well as politics.

I had an issue with my wife's 2007 X3. There was a small chip in the windshield that was noted during the lease end inspection company. I had full glass coverage, so made a claim and had the chip fixed. I turned the car in and got a bill in the mail from BMWFS for a new windshield. I had to call up and fight with them that I had it repaired to perfection. I sent them a bill and eventually they agreed not to charge me.

I like driving new cars too. My average commute is 45 minutes in the AM & about an hour in the PM. I do about 20K per year. I LOVE CARS! Thinking back, the 2 vehicles I have leased were A LOT of fun (2007 BMW X3 & 2011 BMW 328xi). Aside from my Prelude (which I LOVE), the cars I have purchased were (are) definitely more for functional purposes. I bought my 2010 Acura TSX because I had a 1990 BMW 325i that was barely running, the government was going to give me $3,500 for it, and I was going to be WAY over the miles on the X3 we were leasing. We bought our Pilot because we were having a 3rd child and needed a bigger vehicle. I bought my Legacy because I was trying to cut my expenses and wanted something basic with AWD, Automatic, & Heated Seats.

I am forever being enticed by the forbidden fruit:)

nyccarguy · September 2016

@karhill1 - what cars are currently in your stable? What have you leased in the past? How many miles per year do you drive?

jmonroe · September 2016

imidazol97 said:
Saw a car with a vinyl roof yesterday morning. I didn't get a chance to study it because it was being driven recklessly changing lanes to pass--probably late for work. Brown with complementary color tan vinyl roof. Certainly not a monstrosity. But it was a Buick. A LaCrosse. The current edition. Looked like a raincoat glued onto a duck. Useless. But certainly not a monstrosity of a car. But it hurts me that it was on a Buick...

Within the last week I saw a Golf with a vinyl roof. There's something odd to the shape of a Gold in profile. It looks like a cartoonish car.

@imidazol97, I don't know why seeing a Buick with a vinyl roof is "hurtful" for you. Buicks are made for vinyl roofs. Go to South Florida and look for yourself if you don't believe me.

Hurtful would be if I were to ever see a Genny with a vinyl roof.

FWIW, cars in Southern Florida with vinyl roofs and tinted windows are cooler when left out in the sun for a while.

jmonroe

fintail · September 2016

Here's what I thought was a pretty shot in Innsbruck, last November. I was there during the Paris attack, and I remember a ramped up police presence the day before - something was in the air:

It was about 60F during the day, quite a warm spell, too. Reading of your trip makes me want to go back!

I ended up driving south from Innsbruck, probably along cdnpinhead's route. I stayed off the highway (also helps one avoid construction this time of year), and the scenery was like this:

This was my rental car, a practical compact perfect for bustling narrow streets. I spent several days in Italy, where the beast was able to keep away from swarms of scooters:

driver100 said:
Went from Innsbrook to Strasburg Austria yesterday, on the Autobahn. Trucks and buses can only go maximum 65 m.p.g. (100 k.p.h.). Cars any speed. Everyone stays to right except to pass, few go really fast.....Over 75.

Lots of repair work so big slow downs, 2 hour trip took four hours.

fintail · September 2016

You make good points. I have leased a few times, and I don't regret it. I worked the numbers, and it wasn't much more expensive than the high maintenance used car I had before, when I calculate the payment, interest, resale, and running costs. Driving a new car and playing with the new tech is worth it - it's fun. I might buy out the current lease, depending on how things look. Never had a problem with tires or damage either. They even forgave a bumper scuff (bad road conditions, under the bumper) if I was willing to lease again.

karhill1 said:
n

If the person bought the vehicle after the lease, the total amount paid would be about $21,500. Not really different than if the person had purchased the vehicle in the first place. The difference being the lease acquisition fee.

The only question is if the extra $500 is a good expenditure to gain the advantages of the lease.

Unfortunately most people have no knowledge of how a lease actually works. With the right knowledge, a person can make any lease work for them.

Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy