[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=svelte]
There is no denying that an older car is more apt to break down…that’s what drives the decision, not the trappings of middle-class prosperity.[/quote]
Older cars do break down more… but stranded on the road is an old urban legend more reminiscent of the 1980s.
spd is right that anything after 2000 is a lot more reliable. And if you spend $1000 each year maintaining it, it will run for a long time. A Toyota or Honda, but not a BMW or a Ford.
Plus, car buyers generally are not buying basic cars like Corollas or Camrys. They are buying much fancier cars.
So yes, for the vast majority of Americans, succumbing to the trappings of middle-class prosperity does result in no pot to piss in, so to speak. Or self-induced stress due to keeping up.
But, hey, I’m perfectly OK with that… They do make the economy move vibrant for me. Just an academic observation, nothing more.[/quote]
If you’re spending $1000/year on maintenance for your beater car. You are totally doing it wrong.
The point of a beater car is to skip every non-safety related maintenance and get 7-8 years out of the car, driving it into the ground, at which point it would be far more economical to buy another beater car and then sell your now dead beater car as parts/scrap metal then it is to actually spend $1000/year doing every “recommended” maintenance item.
Pretty much, all you need for a beater car is
1. Oil changes every 6 month/5k or 1 year/10k if you’re doing synthetic… longer interval if you really dont care
2. Brake pads and maybe rotors (maybe every 2 years for pads, every 4 for rotors)
3. Tires (every 5 years)
4. Smog inspection (every other year)
5. battery maybe
Most good reliable car will maintain most of their reliability even if you neglect most of the recommended service. It’s a beater car, you don’t need to do everything that shops tell you need to do to fatten their profits. You drive that car until it breaks, which surprisingly will be a lot longer than most people think.
