The Sam Vimes “Boots” theory of socioeconomic unfairness, often called simply the boots theory, is an economic theory that people in poverty have to buy cheap and subpar products that need to be replaced repeatedly, proving more expensive in the long run than more expensive items.
This is usually not true. Consumer reports came to the conclusion that on average, older cars are cheaper than new ones to drive.
Buy used car for 1500$, spend 4000$ to keep it running, broken beyond repair stuff the end of the year, rinse and repeat.
Get new car, 3k/year in payments, 600$/year for insurance, always works when you get in.
Buy one slightly used with a good interest rate and it’s even more true (in general, the market’s been fucked up since COVID)
The worst used car i bought cost 2k to fix and 2k to buy. It lasted 5 years. I can do anecdotes too. I trust consumer reports actual data over my own experience and yours.
As for insurance, older cars are going to be cheaper because you should be liability only. Which you CANNOT do with a new car loan.
OP asked “When have your done this to yourself”, I gave my example and explained how that happened. Never did I say it applies in all cases, don’t put words in my mouth.
I already included insurance in my calculation by the way.
BRUH… how about a third-party pre-purchase inspection? You really need to do this thing called “due diligence” before dropping money on such a big-ticket item, and that involves having an expert eye that is not in cahoots with the seller look it over for red flags.
The only time I ever got dinged like you have, is when I was poor and needed a vehicle two weeks previously, and couldn’t wait for or even afford the cost of said inspection. Sucker fell apart within two years. But that was all on my own head, for failing to do my due diligence.
Every other time I’ve gotten an inspection done, they’ve found issues that warned me away from lemons. Those that passed decently well have gone on to be rather reliable vehicles that cost me much less than anything less than a decade old.
Older vehicles may not be sexy, and unless it’s a restored classic it’s unlikely to get the girl. But so long as you have a good mechanic that can warn you away from lemons, you aren’t (statistically speaking) going to get hit like you have.
When you pay 1500$ for a car you don’t have the money for a pre-purchase inspection BRUH.
I also never said it applies to everyone, I said that was my experience as that’s what OP asked.
I have no clue where he’s buying his cars, or what shysters are conning him into buying junk without due diligence (get a third-party pre-purchase inspection done, folks!), but my experience matches your assertion.
I have a 2002 Mazda 626 and a 2003 F-150 7700, and together they’ve costed me less than $3k in repair and maintenance costs in the last half a decade.
Now granted, the F-150 needs AC work (a complete replacement… I live in a desert region with ridiculous summer temps) and the 626 could really use a complete engine rebuild (leaking oil like a sieve, compression no longer optimal, etc.), but even with both of those included I’m still well ahead of what even a single new vehicle would have cost me.
Anything less than a decade old just doesn’t make any financial sense unless you’re relying on it as a fundamental cog of a business and you can amortize it against taxes payable.
Work minimum wage as a student and only be able to afford cars close to 1k$, drive about 30k miles a year and tell me how that goes as far as maintenance is concerned 🤷