I wonder if the owner of the 240 shown in the article visits this site?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/23/automobiles/23JUNK.html

Brian K

re: The NYT is just about the last place I would ever look for serious automotive advice.

Oh, woo hoo!

It was just a story, after all. It reported, you decide.

Loyalty to a car is one thing, economics is another, and the article was mainly about the former.

The economics are simple--do you want to pay for value depreciation or pay for repairs? Either way, it's still money out of your pocket. And, you're paying for that new-car warranty, too. It's not "thrown in." Is cost of ownership higher in early years or later years. Personally, I think early years, but there is some return for this extra cost because of higher reliablity and consequently fewer hassles. Maybe you get what you pay for in either case, but it without doubt comes down to psychology, which is the gist of the artcle.

The fact is, the guy in the article paid for both, as he purchased the car new. Sounds like he decided along the way to avoid depreciation again and again.

For me, the interpretation of the economics is ... let the other guy pay for depreciation. Others may see it differently, assigning great psychological value to ownership of something "new." There is unquestionably economic return to you from developing DIY skills, whether you execute them yourself or you just know what you want from professional service providers. There is unquestionably a cost of ignorance. Ususally capital costs of owning tools need to be recovered over multiple uses of those tools, although I, for one, can get substantial psychological reward from just owning cool tools.

To me, the real losers are those who must have new cars, but somehow wind up with something like a Chevy Cavalier because that's all they think they can afford. When a car like that depreciates, there really is nothing left, because there is no inherent quality. A used Mercedes (or even a Volvo) is a much better economic bet than a new tin box. The poor get poorer.

Tried finding parts for Pintos or Chevettes? You know, you can even many times get respect from a new car dealer if you take your old Mercedes in. Pretty much never happens that an old Chevy goes to a dealer for service. Volvo is the middle, I suspect, although the ones I work with never see dealers, but they get dealer-sourced mail order parts.

In the end, it's all about rationalization. Economics is the dismal science.

"..although I, for one, can get substantial psychological reward from just owning cool tools."

AMEN!!!

I think this article was obviously written by somebody who know much about cars.

First of all, people who own older cars, and who indeed are paying FAR less than people who shell out three or four hundred bucks a month to own or lease a newer vehicle, tend to be people who do most of their own maintenance and repairs. The people in this article seem to be the kind to always bring it in the the garage. That indeed is not an intelligent way to own an older vehicle.

Further, I don't think that 20 years of owning a car is anything remotely newsworthy. Maybe on Park Avenue, but not on Main Street, USA. Virtually all the 240s I see on the road are in much better condition than the one in this article, leading me to believe that this guy just doesn't take good care of it, and doesn't make very intelligent decisions about maintaining it.

The only "point" this article seems to make is that a few owners of older vehicles aren't very intelligent. Hardly worth the ink in the Old York Times.

The NYT is just about the last place I would ever look for serious automotive advice.

--
don hodgdon '89 744ti, '81 242t, '71 D-35

If you don't want to register, try:
username: google
password: google
.
This is the combo that googlebot uses when crawling the web.
.
I sort of disagree with the article when it says that people are
fooling themselves because repairs are more expensive than car
payments. I mean, the guy with the Volvo had to spend ~$2500 twice
in a decade, which comes to $500 or so a year. (plus maintenence and
minor repair costs, I am sure). Even if you more than double that
figure to $1200/year, I don't know what kind of car you can finance
or lease for $100/month. Certainly not a fairly large, reliable,
durable, and safe 4-door sedan or wagon with RWD to boot. Not to
mention that if the car doesn't belong to you, you have to spring
for collision insurance, which would be at least $500/year for
me extra (yay NJ insurance rates).
.
Cheers,
-bosozoku

Having read the article my opinion is as follows;Keeping a superannuated car is ok as long as you have the skills to do a lot of the work yourself. I can do brakes,suspension,changed a harness,switched it with the kit to 134a,BLOWER MOTOR(the mechanic actually said that if I can do that I could have a job with him !) etc.If you have to call a tow for the little things like blown fuses & are in constant conference with mechanics & bodymen then it is too much of a bother .As a car approaches 150-200k many little things can nickel & dime you to death with the cost & bother unless you can do the work.. I keep mine because I can handle these issues in-house.I have only once (recently) had to have my car towed to a mechanic in the 12 & 1/2 years I have owned my car. Personally, if my ride got to the point that I had to spend $ 2400 to rebuild a floor (notice in the article he has other rust & body issues that will cost additional $$$$$ to fix) then at that point I feel the car is still a good parts car but is otherwise toast.While my ride ('82 244DL 159K miles 4spd+OD ) has some rust issues I still have a way to go before I get to that point. For $2400 + tax I can still get a good rust-free brick with a good body & floor.

Do keep in mind that the first $2400 was not the car's fault, but his wife's, who slid down some hill and mashed up the front end, so in a way, that bill should have never shown up in that article. The second, is arguable. Maybe he needed new floor boards or maybe not, but then again he could have done it for half the cost. Still the car is running 'like top'. And the gasoline smell could very easily be the fuel return line, which has a tendency to rust over time.....very easy to replace.

I agree with the rest of the guys, I wouldn't be taking car advise from some pencil pushers at NYT!!

Cheers,
SM
--
90 BMW 325is, 98 BMW 528i, 90 Volvo 240DL

Thanks for the tip! :-).