Where do you draw a line on keeping a car on the road?

[Kompresshun]

I was recently reading a thread on another forum where someone asked if they should restore their NA Miata or not, rather than dumping it and just buying a new one. Much to my surprise, considering the following the NA has - Most people recommended that he dump it and save up for a newer NC Miata instead of wasting his money on this one to restore it to it's former glory. It just needed some minor rust repair, paint, and maybe an engine refresh due to high mileage. All-in-all probably a $3,000-4,000 job depending on who does the work.

Sure, right now NA Miatas aren't really worth a whole lot unless they're in tip top condition, but I think if the car isn't a complete bucket it would still be worth saving. Even if you're not going to get your money back out it. I realize some people don't share the same sentiment though and look at the dollars invested versus the bigger picture..

Personally, I've dumped plenty of cars for various reasons that later I realized were rather silly, because they needed a little investment and work to make them good again. I chose to dump them for something newer, because I didn't want to deal with the "problems" and invest more money into it that I would never get back. Some cars you just get simply tired of and just don't want to mess with them anymore, because the problems never seem to end. You're ready to move on to something else - nothing wrong with that.

What about the cars we do care about though? Does the investment really matter if you plan on always keeping it?

My dad always used to tell me - "It's always cheaper to fix what you have than to sell it and buy something else, because the next one may have even more problems to fix."

I've owned enough vehicles to vouch for that statement. The grass isn't always greener on the other side with used vehicles.

I have a 90 Mazda Miata personally and it's still a fairly solid car. It doesn't "need" much at the moment - just a timing belt and install a new top. Both of which are already sitting in the garage waiting to be installed. Now, I do plan on completely going through it over the next couple of years. I want to repaint it, replace pretty much anything worn or broken, and upgrade a few things along the way. There's a good chance I may invest more money into it than it's worth at the current time, but I don't care because I like the car and it is special to me. I don't plan on getting rid of it and I want to see it become a nice vehicle again, since it was mistreated before I got it.

I have also been considering purchasing a nice used 4x4 SUV or truck with cash and going through it myself as well. My Five Hundred has been such a solid vehicle, that I don't really want to trade it in anytime soon but I could really use something to haul stuff with. I'm also really fond of the 90's and early 2000's SUVs more than the newer stuff(excluding the Xterra) and since I don't need a daily driver, there's no need to buy a newer one. I'd rather give an older one new life.

In addition to that, I really enjoy having the peace of mind that I know I went through it myself and it was done the way I expect it to be. You can't buy that peace of mind with something that someone else built before you. You don't know what corners they cut and what they overlooked along the way. I've traded plenty of good vehicles for plenty that "looked" better, but rarely did that ever turn out to be the case.

So what about you? How far would you really go with a vehicle in keeping it on the road? Do you go as far as rebuilding/replacing the drivetrain? Fully repainting and repairing the body? Replacing the suspension?

I'm not talking classic cars here either, because that's an obvious yes. I'm also not talking about your daily driver, because I fully realize that it's not always feasible to sink $3,000-5,000 into a car you drive daily and need to rely on.

I'm talking about your ragged out S13, Z32, Z33, G35 Coupe, Q45, Frontier, Xterra, Pathfinder, and so on. Does your vehicle matter enough to you that you would go through all of the steps to keep it like new or would you rather just dump it and move on to the next one?

[Bubba1]

You pose a question whose answer is going to be different for everyone. All the cars you listed are likely not to be considered collectible any time soon, especially an NA Miata. So it really boils down to the owner's passion versus economic reality, how long you plan to keep it and it's overall condition. If it's important enough to you to spend $3-$4000 refurbing a $3000 car you love and plan to keep a long time, recognizing you'll never recoup that money, then it's fine.

I tend keep cars longer than most folks. But there comes a point when you recognize it's simply not worth putting that much money into it despite being fond of it. My S13 was not worth much after 14 years, but she still had life left. I decided it was not worth my time/money to refurb it, so I let the next owner decide whether to refurb it or just run as is. I have zero regrets parting with it, and I ended up with an even better car (my Z, which I've had for about 11 years).

[frapjap]

You hit the two biggest questions I'd ask myself when/if I got rid of a car I liked and had sentimental attachment to.

I'm of the old school thought of repairing it is cheaper than replacing it. However, this comes with a clause. For instance, take my old '91 Corolla. Aesthetically, ugly as sin. Mechanically, good enough. Otherwise, a great car on its last fwe years before being put out to pasture. I kept it going with very little investment and would have continued to do so if it weren't for a harrowing drive home during a blizzard that made me decide that I should get a safe(er) car- IE something with AWD and air bags- especially because I could afford one. However, if I did continue to own the Corolla and it came to need a repair that would cost me more than $400 in parts, I'd be sending it off to the next person. Mainly because the car itself is only worth about $600 to an insurance company. I'd never recoup my investment if it were hit the next day.

On the flip side, if my '07 Legacy decided to grenade its engine or needed $1500-2000 in work, I'd probably (grudgingly) invest in keeping it going. Especially if I still owed on it at the time. At that point, whatever happened to it afterwards would be all my responsibility and I wouldn't give my (now) trouble free car to someone else.

To sum it up, its all about the value of the car to me. If a repair costs more than half of the value of the car if it was totaled tomorrow, I wouldn't keep it on the road.


*Note that I do not follow this principle on my Miata. However, it is a year away from classic car insurance and a stated value and with the modifications, I'd get my investment back.


Chris, you should look into classic insurance for your '90 if you can keep it under 8,000/yr.

[Kompresshun]

Ray, I added to my post above after your comments about the Corolla, because I realized I left that stipulation out too. I absolutely don't think this should apply to a daily driver in most cases, because it's really just not within reason for most people to sink money into something they drive daily and go over it with a fine tooth comb. This is more for those of us who own more than one vehicle and don't have to rely on one vehicle all the time.

Beaters typically do not fall under this type of discussion, because usually you buy it to drive until it is no longer usable and throw it away, then replace it with something else.

I probably wouldn't be happy about putting an engine or transmission in the Five Hundred, but I would likely do it because it's held up well so far. I highly doubt the engine will crap out in it though unless a catastrophic failure happened, but the transmission is a very real possibility. Again though, that's why I wouldn't always apply this to a daily driver. I care pretty well for the Five Hundred and have really given it a lot of TLC since buying it, but I do not intend to drive it forever - it will get replaced. I don't know when, but it's not something I plan on driving for forever.

I do agree that you're insurance company is likely not going to pay for the vehicles value if you total it and that is something you'd have to consider with your investment, unless you can find an insurer that will do a declared value policy on the vehicle.

In that scenario, I have put a vehicle back together and had the frame straightened before, but I never felt like it was the same after that. If it were to happen, i'd likely find a donor car and swap everything over. I think that is one place it would be hard to apply this to, because you have to decide if the vehicle is too totaled to rebuild or not. I've seen A LOT of vehicles totaled though that should never have been and usually you would just buy the vehicle back from the insurance company and rebuild it yourself.

I think you do have to realize that you're not likely to get a return on your investment if the vehicle is not a classic. That's honestly a scenario you face with any vehicle though, so why does it matter? You are going to lose money on most any new or used vehicle you buy, it's just a matter of how much you're going to lose.

I do realize for some people though, it's just not within their means to invest into a vehicle and I don't think this thought process can apply to everyone. I think that's why this really can't apply to most daily drivers too, because as I stated above - it's hard to properly go through a vehicle without another to drive. Some people also just don't have the ability to go through a vehicle either and when you have to pay someone to do almost all of the work for you, that also can really get far too costly.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Interesting question.

I wish I still had ALL of my previous cars back. Never owned a bad car. Well...The Cadillac is somewhat arguable I guess, thanks to the HT4100. But I never owned a car I didn't like.

The Q of DOOM is a great demonstration of my thoughts on the matter:

I loved the Hell out of that car. It was THE perfect car for me. It was me in car form. It made me smile endlessly.
3 years after getting rid of it, I still find myself feeling FURIOUS that I ever let it go. Then I remind myself why.
The car was amazing, but realistically I just COULD NOT have kept it. I had nowhere to store it. I was broke. I needed transportation to get to work (so I could become un-broke) immediately, if not sooner.
The car was also part of the reason I was broke. It was very needy and even with a reliable source of Q45 parts in my shed and local junkyards, I was getting sick of spending every saturday underneath it fixing something silly. Side-effect of all the hybridized mods and parts. It was the cost of the car being itself.

I still regret selling it, but the reality of the situation was that I had no choice.

Same deal with my Ranger, although I willingly sold it, not anticipating how much I'd miss having a small, efficient beater with a bed.
Same deal with the Maxima, except that one went for emissions reasons. I COULD STILL BE DRIVING IT TODAY if not for stupid @#$%ing emissions regulations. If I'd had a place to keep it, it could now be my daily beater in eastern Idaho (where we don't futz around with bullcrap like emissions laws).
Same deal with the DeVille, except that that one failed due to a trans issue that would have cost far more than the car was worth to fix.

My line is this:
I keep it until it's not practical/possible/realistic anymore. I am one guy, I don't need 5 cars. 2 or 3 would be nice (each with a different purpose). But I don't need a stable full of V8 luxboats (want, on the other hand, is a very different matter). One will do just fine.

[BusyBadger]

I've got a 350Z with a RevUp engine, I'm already planning on a ring job, if not full out rebuild sometime down the road.

The thing that most people say is that it's not worth to do X repair based on the car's current KBB value. My response is some form of,"But. how much would it cost to buy a car of similar quality?"

[Kompresshun]

The thing that most people say is that it's not worth to do X repair based on the car's current KBB value. My response is some form of,"But. how much would it cost to buy a car of similar quality?"

This is one point i'm trying to make with this too. Everyone has an argument to not repair a vehicle and most are valid, but none of them take into account what you realistically purchase a car of similar quality.

You can absolutely go out and replace that vehicle with another one that may have zero problems. The things you don't factor in is the future - you factor in the current situation. When you're frustrated with vehicle issues, spending a few thousand dollars to get away from those issues and start fresh seems like a great idea. The thing you don't think about is that you're spending a few thousand dollars AND likely picking up a whole new set of issues to deal with sooner or later.

Then you don't factor in things like maintenance. How long until the new car needs brakes, tires, belts, hoses, and other general repairs? When was the last transmission service? With a lot of vehicles you rarely get maintenance records, especially if you go and buy from a car lot.

So what it comes down to in this scenario is "What is it going to cost me right now?" rather than "What will it cost me later this year?'. I've been there and done that - I know what it's like to be tight on funds and really don't feel like there is any other option. If you have decent credit, it's easy to walk in somewhere, trade in your problems and get something new. Then all you end up with is maybe a small payment. Doesn't sound so bad does it?

That's because it eases the pain of a large expense all at once. Your vehicle needed $2,500 in repairs, but you traded it in on a $10,000 vehicle and you now only have a $200/mo payment. Even better, you don't have to make a payment for two months! Score! I'm practically gaining money at this point right? WRONG

1. You just financed a $10,000 vehicle over 5 years, paying roughly $200/mo. It's in much better shape than you're old car, but wait... 6 months later you transmission takes a crap. The shop just told me it will be $2,500 to fix it! Now you're paying $200/mo AND you have to pay $2,500 for a repair. Wait, since I had this extra $200/mo payment I haven't been able to save as much either so I don't have any extra cash for the repair!

2. You just financed a $10,000 vehicle over 5 years, paying roughly $200/mo. It's in much better shape than you're old car, but wait... 6 months later you transmission takes a crap. Thank God I got that warranty though! Now I just have to pay a $250 deductible and they will fix it. Fast forward 7 months and your warranty expires and your engine locks up. Wait, i'm still paying for that warranty for another 4 years and I can't even use it now! So i'm paying $225/mo and paying for a 1 year warranty for 5 years.

*I am aware these are extreme scenarios.

Now lets look at another scenario:

You pay yourself $200/mo for one year. That's $2,400 and that would've almost covered all of the repairs you needed on your previous vehicle interest free.

Now what if you pay yourself $200/mo for 5 years? That's $12,000. That's a whole lot of repairs or enough money to blow on your car, setting aside for the next vehicle, or just stockpiling for a real emergency.

Don't have the money for repairs lying around and haven't been saving before now? There are better ways than the first scenario above for sure. That seems like the best thing to do when you're in a bind, but if you don't have the money right now to pay for repairs, there's a good chance you won't have it when you're making a car payment AND have to pay for repairs on a new vehicle.

Don't get me wrong though - I've done all of these things over and over. My history of vehicle purchases prior to the Five Hundred contained a whole lot of stupid mistakes. I just didn't care about the bigger picture and how much money I was really spending, because it didn't seem important at the time - which I suspect is how a lot of people feel.

I also agree that this shouldn't apply if your car is an absolute worn out crap can. There are sometimes you really need a new vehicle and you have to do what you can do make that happen.

[Looneybomber]

I would be apt to putting more time and money in a traditional SUV with a ladder frame and transfer case than I would a car. It's so easy to replace a car with another car just like it since a similar car is there to replace it. How many SUVs are liftable these days? They're all unibodies anymore, except the FJ cruiser and Xterra. Because real SUVs are not made anymore, I appreciate their value more and thus why I would be willing to keep them longer.

Eventually I will replace my Explorer (based on Ranger frame) and will likely go with an FJ Cruiser, but not for a while. I will get a good MPG car before I replace my 'Sploder.

If I had a 20 y/o miata that needed body, engine, and other work, I'd probably just sell it off and buy something else. I do not have the time or tools to do extensive car repairs.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Eventually I will replace my Explorer (based on Ranger frame)

Interesting. I didn't realize 02 Sports were still Ranger-based. Neat. 02 4-doors moved to the bigger, separate platform with its silly IRS.

I wouldn't be too eager to let that one go, either.

[BusyBadger]

Eventually I will replace my Explorer (based on Ranger frame)

Interesting. I didn't realize 02 Sports were still Ranger-based. Neat. 02 4-doors moved to the bigger, separate platform with its silly IRS.

I wouldn't be too eager to let that one go, either.

For some reason I've always pictured you owning an Xterra. I think it's probably the finest vehicle Nissan currently makes, as far as doing what it's supposed to do and stacking up against the competition. It's a great, no-compromises, TRUE SUV...

... it's probably on the Ghosn / bean counters chopping block.

[nissangirl74]

The Frontier will be 9 years old this year. She's got 117K on the clock and Greg and I have agreed that she goes nowhere until either (1) the Earth reclaims her, or (2) some s*** hits her and totals her out. Yes, that will mean we will have to shell out some cash in order to keep her going but I'm more willing to do that versus trading her in on something that would generate a car payment. Bushings, brakes, tires, and oil won't cost as much as a year's worth of car payments. Ever. My goal is to drive her a million miles. It will probably take a REALLY long time to reach that goal since she is no longer a daily (or even weekly) driver but that's OK.

[Dattebayo]

Where I'm from, they draw the line in the middle so you can keep it on the road.

[Bubba1]

I think you do have to realize that you're not likely to get a return on your investment if the vehicle is not a classic. That's honestly a scenario you face with any vehicle though, so why does it matter? You are going to lose money on most any new or used vehicle you buy, it's just a matter of how much you're going to lose.

.

"Why does it matter?" is the $64,000 question. Of course car ownership is a money losing proposition. And if you base your refurb decision solely on common sense, you would not sink big money into refurbing such a common car like an NA Miata. But if you add enough passion to the equation, that can change everything. The trick is finding the right balance that works for you. And that balance is not something you can universally apply to others.

If you're seeking approval from others to justify spending that much money on a fun car, I'm sure you'd find it,, especially from others with whom you share the same passion. But don't forget, it's your money you're spending, not theirs. When I bought my first "fun" car, there were both people that supported me and criticized me for buying a new car for that purpose.
At the end of the day, it was my decision.

[Kompresshun]

Oh I'm not seeking anyone's approval on the Miata. That decision was made long ago Joel. I worked and waited too long to throw it away over a minor restoration and I knew what it needed when I brought it home. It honestly does not need much at all either.

I think passion for the vehicle is a real factor as well though, because I probably would've kept a lot of vehicles if common sense didn't take over.

Now I am considering doing the same thing again as I mentioned earlier with an SUV or truck. Trying to find a fairly well cared for example of something I like and going through it like I am with the Miata.

I'd honestly just like to have something like your 4 runner even. To me IF you can find one that body style still in good shape, that's one of the best SUVs money can buy. Obviously yours had treated you pretty well too considering how long you've had it.

[Bubba1]

Agree. If you're going to look for my generation 4Runner, pay close attention for frame rust. That's what will kill mine.
Hard to believe I've owned that truck for 17 years.

[Kompresshun]

Agree. If you're going to look for my generation 4Runner, pay close attention for frame rust. That's what will kill mine.
Hard to believe I've owned that truck for 17 years.

Yeah that would be my biggest concern with a Toyota too. Finding one without rust in general is not an easy task. If I did, i'm pretty sure that I would make my first project putting every rust preventative known to man underneath it.

I know a lot of us like to poke fun at Toyota, but I think a 4Runner or a Tacoma is one of the few that I would trust driving for 300,000+ miles. It seems like most of them rust out beyond repair before the drivetrain gives up in most cases.

[MinisterofDOOM]

For some reason I've always pictured you owning an Xterra. I think it's probably the finest vehicle Nissan currently makes, as far as doing what it's supposed to do and stacking up against the competition. It's a great, no-compromises, TRUE SUV...

... it's probably on the Ghosn / bean counters chopping block.

An LS3-swapped first-gen Xterra in yellow or black is on my list of cars to own before I die.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Everyone I know with an Xterra loves everything about it, except for the fuel economy.
They could easily extend the life of the Xterra if they offered diesel, or if they upgraded the aging VQ to something more efficient.

[MinisterofDOOM]

First-gens with the VG33 were no better economy-wise but a lot worse power-wise.

So just stick a V8 in there and make the 16mpg earn its keep through torque!

[Looneybomber]

Eventually I will replace my Explorer (based on Ranger frame)

Interesting. I didn't realize 02 Sports were still Ranger-based. Neat. 02 4-doors moved to the bigger, separate platform with its silly IRS.

I wouldn't be too eager to let that one go, either.

The 4dr 95-01 and 2dr 95-03 share the same chassis along with the 2nd gen ranger. The sports (at least the later ones) have independent front suspension like the 98-00 rangers. Not a fan of that IRS explorer. The new ones are a big bodied Taurus that excite me even less.

First-gens with the VG33 were no better economy-wise but a lot worse power-wise.

So just stick a V8 in there and make the 16mpg earn its keep through torque!

Yeah, at 16mpg, you better be a big vehicle, or make a lot of power. Case in point, Cherokee SRT8. 6.4L with 470hp and you get 19mpg hwy. That's what my 240hp explorer (of equal size) is rated at.

[Jesda]

I have an old Saab. I try to stay ahead of its aging process but it's costly.

Love is not rational.

[flohtingPoint]

I dont really get sentimental about cars, I more view them as tools. My criteria in keeping a car is the following:
-Is it a pain in the a**
-Is it useful

If it's outlived it's usefulness, it automatically goes. Useful can mean any (note: any, not all) of the following:
-Is it a competitive car
-Does it get good gas mileage
-Is it comfortable on a daily commute
-Do I need it to do a certain task

Is it a pain in the a** is a bit more lenient. I've kept a couple vehicles because they were competitive vehicles but still pains in the a** (shifter karts mainly but some road going vehicles also). If/when I reach that point when I look at the vehicle with total disgust and go "I dont want to work on this," it's time for the thing to go. I dont want to keep a mobile headache, and I want to keep an immobile headache even less.

[skydragoness]

IMO, if the NA Miata in question were a rare bird (like if you had a rare model like the "LE" that had a red interior and was all 'retro" or a very desirable R-package), then keeping it and doing repairs makes some sense.

Still, NAs are so plentiful that I just don't see the logic in keeping a rust bucket NA (for that thread you mentioned, that rocker panel rust is only HALF the story, it happens from the inside rain rail cracking and letting water in. So, you could potentially have a swiss cheese bulkhead which is pretty much the unibody structure of the car).

I'm actually having this quandry now, my RS is a rare car but it's high mileage and is displaying some signs of 'expensive repairs/rust repair to come', I bought it to be my daily and not for racing and it's excelling at that but the cost of keeping it tip-top is not making too much sense. Not sure what to do because I do enjoy it, I've even entertained trying to find a lower mileage model from a rust-free state but that entails fixing someone else's lack of maintenance probaby.

[Kompresshun]

I guess I didn't notice that the rust was that bad on that particular one. In that case, yeah i'd probably dump it or find another shell and swap everything over. Thankfully mine hasn't show any signs of rust, other than some surface rust underneath from scuffs and ect. The body is pretty solid on it overall. It also has stayed in the garage since I bought it and will stay in the garage as long as I own it.

NAs remind me a lot of S13's honestly. There all plenty of them out there, it's just getting harder and harder to find one that hasn't been thrashed and beaten to death or turned herrafrush. The great thing about that is parts are quite plentiful though. As long as the body is solid on mine, i'll always be able to get about any part I need and for cheap.

It is hard to make that decision to sink money into a vehicle, even if you really like it. I had that problem with my Maxima and I think when it's your primary vehicle, it makes it really tough to justify sinking the funds into it because you always wonder what will break next. If I spend $3,000 now, will I need to spend another $3,000 next year? It's much easier when it's a secondary vehicle and you can take your time repairing things, because you don't have to rely on it. Downing a primary vehicle for a major repair is never easy, which is why I think a lot of us put off things because it's inconvenient and annoying to be without a vehicle or have to rely on others while the vehicle is down.

At the time, I wanted to keep the Maxima and buy a new daily driver, but we just couldn't justify the expense at the time due to other large expenses and how much we had already invested into it. Plus my wife hated the car and wanted it gone, because it wouldn't quit breaking. If you have to spend $3,500 in repairs in less than 6 months and things keep breaking, I think you have a very good reason to dump a vehicle. Even then I knew keeping that car was not an option, because even though the body and interior were like a new car, the drivetrain was wearing out faster than I could replace parts on it.

[NolimitZ32]

I have owned 12 cars since I turned 16 (that's 12 years ago) of these I have only not regretted getting rid of one, it was a 1995 Chevy Blazer POS edition (like every other 95 blazer produced). Of the remaining 11, 4 were totaled, of the 7 left I still own 3, of the 4 I've sold all were in good or great running condition. One was sold out of absolute necessity as it was driven 25 miles in 3 months and I was no longer going to have a place to keep it. 2 were sold to upgrade, and 1 because after dumping $5000 into it in the preceding 4 months I had simply run out of money to keep it running (biggest mistake ever because the next owner spent $300 and it ran for a long time after). Looking back on all this, I must say that I do not acquire vehicles which I do not instantly get attached to so I would go to very great lengths to keep a car running but then I would never buy a car with bad body damage or rust because those things to me ruin an irreplaceable portion of the car and make it not worthwhile to keep.

[elwesso]

For me, I think the major deal breaker for getting rid of a car is RUST. That's 99% of the reason I'm looking to get a new vehicle to replace my Q. I love driving my Q, it's really everything I want in a car, but rust is something (especially on a uni-body car) that can't be fixed exactly right.

If I lived out west where interiors and exteriors just get baked to death by the sun/heat, I'd be a lot more likely to dump some money into paint and interior work than I would a car with rust on it.

Anything mechanical, especially on older cars, I'm not scared of.

One thing I've noticed looking especially at old Q's, it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to dump money into one that's beat up, because you can buy a clean replacement car that's minty for way less than it would to fix a sketchy one. A decent paint job will run 5k on my 94 Q, but you should be able to find a mint 94 Q (when you can find them) for $4k or less......

[skydragoness]

For me, I think the major deal breaker for getting rid of a car is RUST. That's 99% of the reason I'm looking to get a new vehicle to replace my Q. I love driving my Q, it's really everything I want in a car, but rust is something (especially on a uni-body car) that can't be fixed exactly right.

If I lived out west where interiors and exteriors just get baked to death by the sun/heat, I'd be a lot more likely to dump some money into paint and interior work than I would a car with rust on it.

Anything mechanical, especially on older cars, I'm not scared of.

One thing I've noticed looking especially at old Q's, it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to dump money into one that's beat up, because you can buy a clean replacement car that's minty for way less than it would to fix a sketchy one. A decent paint job will run 5k on my 94 Q, but you should be able to find a mint 94 Q (when you can find them) for $4k or less......

Rust is the biggest dealbreaker of all. My Subaru has the typical quarter rust starting to come through the other side (like 90's Accords/Civics get) and that's pretty much prompting me to want to sell it. That and a slew of other things on the horizon. But essentially rust trumps everything else.

[jbracy7]

I have had problems with this for years ,the cause of many headaches

[bcar240]

Over the last few years, my view has started shifting on this. The main driver is that I have been in two "not at fault" accidents in the last 2 years that totaled cars I have lovingly and irrationally kept running for long periods of time by throwing time and money at them, only to get paid blue book and left with no car. My last car was totaled by a red light runner on the test drive after spending an afternoon installing $300 in parts. With my first car, I hadn't learned the lesson yet, so I bought back my old S13 (faithful for last for 10 years, never had a "major" issue), insurance still gave me $1500, but I repaired it for less than $500. Currently it's in long-term limbo at a family friend's shop for unrelated sheet metal work and paint. This will be my new daily/beater when I get it back. I am not even sure I would want to build another car at this point, with that much money and effort into something I am not sure I could justify the risk of driving it on the streets. I probably need a newer vehicle, but a lot of them just don't do it for me as much, often are harder to work on and so many computers so I am scared to buy used for fear of inheriting problems I am unable to fix.

My old truck ('95) is a different story, because a lot of what I have done to it has been either expected routine maintenance or an upgrade. So although I have spent the value of the truck over again, there is likely not another truck out there like this one I could get for anywhere near my investment. And I have a specific need/want for a vehicle of that type (4x4), so I will probably keep this thing on the road until it falls apart.

[skydragoness]

Over the last few years, my view has started shifting on this. The main driver is that I have been in two "not at fault" accidents in the last 2 years that totaled cars I have lovingly and irrationally kept running for long periods of time by throwing time and money at them, only to get paid blue book and left with no car. My last car was totaled by a red light runner on the test drive after spending an afternoon installing $300 in parts. With my first car, I hadn't learned the lesson yet, so I bought back my old S13 (faithful for last for 10 years, never had a "major" issue), insurance still gave me $1500, but I repaired it for less than $500. Currently it's in long-term limbo at a family friend's shop for unrelated sheet metal work and paint. This will be my new daily/beater when I get it back. I am not even sure I would want to build another car at this point, with that much money and effort into something I am not sure I could justify the risk of driving it on the streets. I probably need a newer vehicle, but a lot of them just don't do it for me as much, often are harder to work on and so many computers so I am scared to buy used for fear of inheriting problems I am unable to fix.

My old truck ('95) is a different story, because a lot of what I have done to it has been either expected routine maintenance or an upgrade. So although I have spent the value of the truck over again, there is likely not another truck out there like this one I could get for anywhere near my investment. And I have a specific need/want for a vehicle of that type (4x4), so I will probably keep this thing on the road until it falls apart.

You really have to compare cost of upkeep for a paid-for vehicle vs. a newish car that you're making payments on, paying a higher insurance rate, plus have to pay maintenance on. I look at it that way. Also depends on the rarity of the car too.