Would you spend more than a car's value to keep it?

[saff]

Hi
Just out of interest, how much would you spend to keep your car before you bought a replacement?
For example, my 2006 S211 E220cdi has 134K miles and is in really good condition. Has full MB s/h up to me getting it 6 years ago. I've serviced it since. Much work done with fairly recent transmission service and front suspension work. There are no faults, rust or issues, (fingers crossed). It's probably worth about £2k?

Now here's the rub, it will at some time need SBC work doing, I'm pretty sure its not been replaced. Also the rear air springs are, I believe original so may be required in time. I guess £3k would be required for all of that. I think the car is actually worth it. I've looked at whats for sale and to get anything similar with much less mileage and years would probably cost maybe £10K
I'm just going to keep running it and sort things as required. I only cover about 3K miles a year so should get a while yet. Besides, I know this car unlike buying someone else's problems. Has anyone been here or is in a similar position. Views would be interesting.

 

[John]

It's a decision I'm sure many have faced no doubt.

My logic is, as long as you still like the car, it still does what you need and it is reliable, I would stick with it on the basis the car now 6 years of provenance which other cars may not have.

I kept my E55K for 5.5 years and I only moved it on because I kept mis-behaving with it and I did get sick to the back teeth of it in the end.

Had either of those not been the case, I would have kept it running and that meant a potential 4 air spring and SBC replacement at some stage.

However, it was worth the money as it was such a great car.

Whereas I've had other cars and I given up on them because they were shyte to start with and it felt like good money after bad.

You could change cars and be lucky. You could also change cars, pay that £10k, be unlucky and have to pay more out on top and regret it!

So my advice to people is as long as the three conditions above still apply, I would hang on to it.

EDIT: Forgot to mention... value is not just the intrinsic value of the car with regard to selling, it's also it's value to you.

 

[m80]

I think you're undervaluing your mo mo.
I would spend the dosh

 

[Teego]

I keep mine until an MoT failure would cost more to fix than scrap value of the car.

 

[ChipChop]

Hi
Just out of interest, how much would you spend to keep your car before you bought a replacement?
For example, my 2006 S211 E220cdi has 134K miles and is in really good condition. Has full MB s/h up to me getting it 6 years ago. I've serviced it since. Much work done with fairly recent transmission service and front suspension work. There are no faults, rust or issues, (fingers crossed). It's probably worth about £2k?

Now here's the rub, it will at some time need SBC work doing, I'm pretty sure its not been replaced. Also the rear air springs are, I believe original so may be required in time. I guess £3k would be required for all of that. I think the car is actually worth it. I've looked at whats for sale and to get anything similar with much less mileage and years would probably cost maybe £10K
I'm just going to keep running it and sort things as required. I only cover about 3K miles a year so should get a while yet. Besides, I know this car unlike buying someone else's problems. Has anyone been here or is in a similar position. Views would be interesting.

S211's are great cars. Spend the money then you know you have a good reliable car you can depend on. With the ownership model for vehicles changing (PCP) many if not most modern cars are not cared for by their renters anymore.

 

[xjrferret]

you could spend 10.000 on a new car and have loads of problems .If you still like the car I would keep it.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

Asset value is irrelevant. Your focus should be on 2-3 year expected operating cost ((including depreciation and financing)).

Take a pad of paper and add up your likely costs from your alternatives, including depreciation and financing.

Then do whatever you fancy.

I run a very low mileage, two decades old MX5. It doesn’t depreciate and ithe servicing cost is peanuts.

For 3,000 miles a year it makes more financial sense than running even a six year old equivalent, which would lose at least 10% pa in annual depreciation and 5% in financing costs.

But we run it because we like it.

 

[saff]

Asset value is irrelevant. Your focus should be on 2-3 year expected operating cost ((including depreciation and financing)).

Take a pad of paper and add up your likely costs from your alternatives, including depreciation and financing.

Then do whatever you fancy.

I run a very low mileage, two decades old MX5. It doesn’t depreciate and ithe servicing cost is peanuts.

For 3,000 miles a year it makes more financial sense than running even a six year old equivalent, which would lose at least 10% pa in annual depreciation and 5% in financing costs.

But we run it because we like it.

There are some great words of wisdom on here, thanks to all for that. It's good to see that opinions are pretty well aligned, along with my own to keep the car and pay the money when required.
Unless something goes catastrophically wrong I will keep.

Steve.

 

[Skd884]

Keep it, new cars are shite.

 

[saff]

Love it

 

[merc85]

it's very rare that you buy a car and nothing needs doing, Better the devil you know.

Re Costs,

i've spent thousands maintaining my cars no point having a car you cannot afford to run, do the problems when they 1st crop up dont lem them mount up.

211's are great cars, i can see me having yet another soon,

 

[Smart320]

Asset value is irrelevant. Your focus should be on 2-3 year expected operating cost ((including depreciation and financing)).

Take a pad of paper and add up your likely costs from your alternatives, including depreciation and financing.

Then do whatever you fancy.

I run a very low mileage, two decades old MX5. It doesn’t depreciate and ithe servicing cost is peanuts.

For 3,000 miles a year it makes more financial sense than running even a six year old equivalent, which would lose at least 10% pa in annual depreciation and 5% in financing costs.

But we run it because we like it.

We are now just running a 2004 3 door Rav automatic, it’s only done 80 k miles , excellent body and mechanically it seems pretty bombproof , has low overall running costs, negligible depreciation and even more importantly it does everything we need from going to the tip to motorway runs.
As they stopped making the 3 door model in 2006 and we don’t want a 5 door version
we would probably spend £2-3k if it needed a major repair such as an replacement auto box. There isn’t a current small 4x4 of similar quality on the market so we will keep it until we switch to an EV hopefully in about 3-4 years tine

 

[Londonscottish]

Asset value is irrelevant. Your focus should be on 2-3 year expected operating cost ((including depreciation and financing)).

Take a pad of paper and add up your likely costs from your alternatives, including depreciation and financing.

Then do whatever you fancy.

I run a very low mileage, two decades old MX5. It doesn’t depreciate and ithe servicing cost is peanuts.

For 3,000 miles a year it makes more financial sense than running even a six year old equivalent, which would lose at least 10% pa in annual depreciation and 5% in financing costs.

But we run it because we like it.

This, 100%. My wife's last car, a Clio, ceased to even register £0 on WBAC for the last few years of its life. But it was a perfect little city car, fit for purpose and known to me. Plus we both liked it.

Every year I'd get it serviced and MOT'd and would occasionally have to change tyres, balljoints, springs WHY but it made financial sense to do so.

When I finally scrapped it, the average cost of depreciation was under £250 pa.

Doing something similar with a Fiat 500 now.

 

[saff]

We are now just running a 2004 3 door Rav automatic, it’s only done 80 k miles , excellent body and mechanically it seems pretty bombproof , has low overall running costs, negligible depreciation and even more importantly it does everything we need from going to the tip to motorway runs.
As they stopped making the 3 door model in 2006 and we don’t want a 5 door version
we would probably spend £2-3k if it needed a major repair such as an replacement auto box. There isn’t a current small 4x4 of similar quality on the market so we will keep it until we switch to an EV hopefully in about 3-4 years tine

Mrs Saff had a 2004 Rav manual 5 door for many years and it was a great car. She replaced it for a new-ish B180 cdi. Although the B is fine she does actually regret selling the Rav. I'm inclined to agree with her.

 

[ChipChop]

Keep it, new cars are shite.

This. Imagine selling your s211 and getting a newer Mercedes diesel in a private sale and then the NoX sensors go phut. How much are they each? New cars really are shite.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Asset value is irrelevant. Your focus should be on 2-3 year expected operating cost ((including depreciation and financing)).

Take a pad of paper and add up your likely costs from your alternatives, including depreciation and financing.

Then do whatever you fancy.

I run a very low mileage, two decades old MX5. It doesn’t depreciate and ithe servicing cost is peanuts.

For 3,000 miles a year it makes more financial sense than running even a six year old equivalent, which would lose at least 10% pa in annual depreciation and 5% in financing costs.

But we run it because we like it.

Wise words.

 

[Tonygw]

The cheapest car to buy is the one you already own.

You know the car well and know what might need doing... Any new car is a massive gamble and may end up costing you in the long run.

Spend the money, keep it in nice condition and relax! ;-)

 

[G7Wagen]

keep the car... better the devil you know.... we have had my wife's car 12 years, from new.. spent on a few bits.. overall its been the best car we've owned , so the loss in P x to change plus the extra 20k for a new car.. doesn't seem a worthwhile use of money at present.. as opposed to servcing and repairs.
My G wagen I have loved and owned 8 years( so far)... I have spent a lot on it..suspension brakes etc as its now 32 years old... but its actually gone up in value.... by quite some margin.. so the expense is offset.. new ones are out of the question financially!

My SL is a pure indulgence... so I may be spending a lot on it over the years... its all about how you feel about the car... if you love it.. keep it... if it makes you sad sell it... if it makes you angry breaking down.. sell it... cars are rarely more than an emotional decision or a financial one.... for me anyway..

 

[190]

Just out of interest, how much would you spend to keep your car before you bought a replacement?

I tested out this question fairly thoroughly by running my 190e for 21 years. In the end it was more than one thing that persuaded me to move on, There was some serious underbody rust, the head gasket was just beginning to fail, it need new tyres shocks and a battery. All together it would have cost several times the cars value to put right. And even that wasn't the only monetary consideration. Running costs of an old car are higher. The W204 replacement has saved £000's over the last 7 years in running costs by using 25% less fuel and over £1000 alone in lower Road fund tax. The economic case to move on was overwhelming. If that wasn't enough, I wouldn't be able to transport my grandchildren unless my car had iso fix baby seat anchors.

I do sometimes wish I'd kept the 190e but only as a 2nd car that never saw rain and salt. It had passed it's suitability to withstand every day use.

 

[DrNick]

I tested out this question fairly thoroughly by running my 190e for 21 years. In the end it was more than one thing that persuaded me to move on, There was some serious underbody rust, the head gasket was just beginning to fail, it need new tyres shocks and a battery. All together it would have cost several times the cars value to put right. And even that wasn't the only monetary consideration. Running costs of an old car are higher. The W204 replacement has saved £000's over the last 7 years in running costs by using 25% less fuel and over £1000 alone in lower Road fund tax. The economic case to move on was overwhelming. If that wasn't enough, I wouldn't be able to transport my grandchildren unless my car had iso fix baby seat anchors.

I do sometimes wish I'd kept the 190e but only as a 2nd car that never saw rain and salt. It had passed it's suitability to withstand every day use.

There are some good points here. Why do cars depreciate in the first place? Because things are more likely to go wrong the older the car.
There are other factors as well but a lot of those are emotional and can be overcome with changing financial outlook! Second hand cars are now worth a lot more than they were only a short while ago. They haven't suddenly become more reliable, but maybe they are now reflecting more their true value. A lot of this is caused by the supply or not of new cars, but I'm not sure older cars are any less reliable than new cars over a sensible lifetime (other than the odd disaster which we get to read about on forums).
For me the need to replace a car would depend on the scope of any visible repairs. Most mechanical things, once repaired are effectively new and so will then last a long time. However, fixing an expensive problem with visibility of probably more expensive problems in the near future would mean its time to look around out of necessity eg rust starting to spread, and indications of a mechanical failure such as blue smoke.
Emotionally, (or if I came into a big pile of cash) I might look around earlier if I fancied a change.

But for cars that have depreciated a lot, its easy to spend more than the cars worth to fix it but the investment is probably wise, depending on its overall condition. Just look at some of the reports on cars that are written off by insurance companies that are only cosmetically damaged.