Financial Guru's out there...need help on which car to buy?

[Blessed_wth_Triplets]

Okay...so we've narrowed it down to a 2008 Suburban or a 2011 Suburban and can't figure out which is best in the long run financially.

The cars are pretty identical as far as options, but the 2008 has 56,000 miles and the 2011 has 13,000 miles. The 2008 is $30,000 and the 2011 is 40,000.

So...$10,000 more for the 2011, less miles, and essential would be able to drive for a couple more years. But...with a five year loan...our payment for the 2011 would be about $600 a month...and for the 2008 about $400.

What to do? Do we pay $200 more a month but get a newer car that will last us longer and have better resale value? Or do we save the money and buy the older car? Any advice appreciated!

 

[gifchick]

Check you Consumer reports, they can tell you what parts tend to break on what model years, that would give you some insight to repair costs.

The 2011 should still have some warranty left, so depending on your views that could be important.

Also think of insurence, the 2011 will also cost more there.

HTH

 

[sam_gordon]

If these are my only two options...

I get the 2008, and pay $600 a month toward it. That's an extra $2400/year.

Now, if it was me, I'd find something <$20K and pay cash.

 

[drewmer]

I think you also have to consider how long you keep a car. If you keep it untill it is dead go with the older one. If you trade often then the newer one may be a better deal because of resale.

I agree with an ealier post about goind less expensive. My house and 4 acres does not cost much more per month than teh 2011 and hopefully it will increase in value some day

 

[ceecee]

If these are my only two options...

I get the 2008, and pay $600 a month toward it. That's an extra $2400/year.

Now, if it was me, I'd find something <$20K and pay cash.

That's what I would do. Only it would be something that got better gas mileage.

 

[I-Bike]

I wouldn't buy either because they are both gas guzzlers but - another question to ask is if you have sales tax where you live and have you priced out insurance costs?

 

[Anne34]

Okay...so we've narrowed it down to a 2008 Suburban or a 2011 Suburban and can't figure out which is best in the long run financially.

The cars are pretty identical as far as options, but the 2008 has 56,000 miles and the 2011 has 13,000 miles. The 2008 is $30,000 and the 2011 is 40,000.

So...$10,000 more for the 2011, less miles, and essential would be able to drive for a couple more years. But...with a five year loan...our payment for the 2011 would be about $600 a month...and for the 2008 about $400.

What to do? Do we pay $200 more a month but get a newer car that will last us longer and have better resale value? Or do we save the money and buy the older car? Any advice appreciated!

I would buy the newer one -- less miles and a chance of better trade in value in 8-10 years.....even if you are keeping it forever. I currently have a 2002 suburban with 135,000 miles and it runs great. Just a couple minor repairs - nothing major.

 

[Shelly F - Ohio]

YIKES!!! I just looked up the mpg on both and 14 in the city and 20 on the highway. Hope you don't plan to drive far with these gas prices.

 

[mrodgers]

YIKES!!! I just looked up the mpg on both and 14 in the city and 20 on the highway. Hope you don't plan to drive far with these gas prices.

Problem is, mpg figures are useless. My wife's vehicle is 16 city and 20 highway and she averages 22

The funny thing is, before she started working and driving every day 29 miles to and from, she really only ran the kids now and then to school and grocery shopping once a week. She averaged 19, but since driving daily to work, she drives far more aggressively now and averages better.

 

[DawnM]

I don't think those figures make the averages useless. For one thing they aren't that far off. Getting 19 more locally stopping and starting a lot, etc...gets worse mileage than driving freeway or not stopping and starting as much.

I would not buy a car with anything less than 30mpg rating right now. I actually would like something more like a Prius.

Dawn

Problem is, mpg figures are useless. My wife's vehicle is 16 city and 20 highway and she averages 22

The funny thing is, before she started working and driving every day 29 miles to and from, she really only ran the kids now and then to school and grocery shopping once a week. She averaged 19, but since driving daily to work, she drives far more aggressively now and averages better.

 

[herdtoDisney]

Problem is, mpg figures are useless. My wife's vehicle is 16 city and 20 highway and she averages 22

The funny thing is, before she started working and driving every day 29 miles to and from, she really only ran the kids now and then to school and grocery shopping once a week. She averaged 19, but since driving daily to work, she drives far more aggressively now and averages better.

I don't think they are useless-they do give a ballpark idea. A lot also depends on your driving style, road conditions and other factors. I like to use the mpg figures that Consumer Reports publishes, because they test their cars not far from here so their driving conditions are like mine (hilly, weather, ect).

OP, I know you were asking about Suburbans, but I wanted to ask, have you guys considered AWD minivans? You'd get better mileage and still get traction. My Astrovan is AWD and pretty decent in the snow (but this van is not made any more) and it gets better mileage than a Suburban. I"m not sure which all vans now can be had with AWD.

I'd also negotiate heavily if I was buying a Suburban-with the price of gas, I imagine they're not flying off the lots and you might get a better price.