A couple of weeks ago we were loaned an SLK200 Komp by our local dealership. My wife, Angie, was quite smitten by it and is now considering replacing her R56 MINI Cooper S with one. Personally I though the 200K was a bit feeble for a sports car - apologies to anyone who is a happy owner of a 200K: it was nice enough to drive, but I'd prefer a bit more go - so if we have one it'll be a 280 or 350 (more likely a 280). I will retain the W204 220 CDI whatever happens as my high-mileage transport, and the SLK will repace the MINI as a second and less used car. The SLK would be spec'd as an auto, with leather, airscarf, parktronic and memory package so that it's easier for both of us to drive it. Any other options are nice to have rather than a need. So, the conundrum is either: a) Buy new as we can get a better deal on a new, rather than nearly new car, or... b) Go for something a little older with relatively high mileage The rationale for choice (a) is simple: nice new car, get exactly the spec we want + 36-month warranty and a low-rate finance deal. Downside is depreciation. A cash purchase is feasible on a new SLK, but we'd rather do something else with the money. The rationale for choice (b) is to to go for a late, higher mileage, example as Angie tends to do only 5-6k mile per year. After 3 years ownership the average mileage per year would be lower hence it would become a more "average" car mileage-wise and suffer lower depreciation. Obvious downside is the difficulty of finding the spec Angie wants, and it probably being a pre-facelift car. Finance would be cash purchase. However, having looked around the market a bit, the major flaw in option (b) seems to be that most SLK's seem to be kept as second cars and therefore 5k miles pa seems more like the average than exception. Also, I have no knowledge of what mileage the average SLK turns into a money pit. So, what does the team think? All advice and suggestions gratefully received.