Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



Throatwarbler posted:


The biggest problem I see is that you're treating used cars as a commodity. They aren't. If you end up returning your car, you are not going to find a used one in the same condition. If nothing else, you don't have as solid of an idea of maintenance and pre-existing problems on the used car you replace it with. Even if you were able to do that through some miracle, you'd still have to pay all the costs of getting the car reregistered. That will put you behind, though the significance depends on where you live.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



Throatwarbler posted:

Those problems with the Honda continued beyond the warranty. The owners had to launch a class action against Honda to get anything, and even then not everyone did - many models that had similar problems were not covered. How about the leaking LIM gaskets on the GM 3.1/3.4l V6? The owners eventually won the law suit just in time for GM to be nationalized and all their obligations written off.


NO. The option to rid yourself of the car CAN be worth a lot, but as I have shown above, even if you don't exercise it, you still don't end up spending any more money in NPV terms than you do with a purchase. There really is no reason to buy a car versus leasing it. None.


I don't even know how to respond to this anymore without snark. Yes, 2 year old cars are cheaper than brand new cars, I get it. If you don't want a brand new car, don't buy one. Move on.

You're assuming that the dealer's depreciation follows market depreciation. A 2007 Honda Civic DX runs around $10,300 from a dealer (according to edmunds). A 2010 Civic DX runs $17,200 MSRP. That means that depreciation on a Civic DX across 3 years is around $6900 at most (since your price for a new one is going to be below MSRP). They list the lease at $347.44 for 36 months, which is $12,400 total. 3 years interest on the loan (assuming 5% across 60 months) is around $1,900. $1,900 plus $6900 is NOT greater than $12,400. Guess what the extra's for.

Hint: it's the risk premium for the dealer. Which yes, they do gently caress up. But not every single time.

Edit: then again this does depend on the buyout price. Anyone actually have data on that?

Lyesh fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jun 13, 2010

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



shredswithpiks posted:

Can we assume we don't take out a loan to buy the car so we can ignore that $1900 as well?

No, because you have to find the value of the use of that $17000. The financier could have loaned out their money and gotten $1900 instead of what they're getting from the lease.

source: go here, click the DX automatic, and click the "Monthly Payments" button.

If you use the special offer you're assuming that you'll qualify, you also have to figure out how the capital cost reduction figures in (not that much, probably about $2000 after three years at a 5% discount rate), and you probably face restrictions in terms of what model you can get. Additionally, the buyback is a vital number.

I actually agree that leases can be great if you like new car smell a lot; my issue is with the assertion that the depreciation a dealer charges is going to always be less than the market depreciation.

edit: gently caress no, I've had my (used) car for about four years and am planning on keeping it for at least four more.

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



hobbesmaster posted:

Probably restricted to a model better than the no AC DX you linked.

That's quite true.

I'm starting to think that we need to know what lease buyouts typically are to say anything for certain about whether leasing makes any sense for somebody intending to drive their car into the ground.

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



Throatwarbler posted:

I want you to take a step back and consider what has been posted so far. The Mazda3 that we just talked about MSRPed at about $17k, the same as this Civic you are talking about. The lease is $199/month/36month 0 down. Honda itself has a lease offer on a Civic DX for $159/month/36month/$1700 or so down.

Now you are telling us with a straight face that it costs $347/month to lease a Honda Civic DX.

Sure, in the same way that it costs MSRP to buy one. We also have to consider how likely it is for somebody to get the promo lease (I mean, do you need an 800 credit score or something) and whether or not that lease is a borderline bait-and-switch tactic.

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



Throatwarbler posted:

Yes, because if your credit score is below 800, it actually costs you $35k to buy a base model Honda Civic with a MSRP of $15k. :gun:

As it turns out, I'm dumb and didn't read all the fine print on the special lease offer. Here's the relevant bit:

quote:

2010 Civic Sedan 5 Speed Automatic VP (Model FA1F3AEW) for $159.00 per month for 36 months with a $1,240.00 capitalized cost reduction available to customers who qualify for the HFS Super Preferred credit tier.

...

Total monthly payments $5,724.00. Option to purchase at lease end $10,770.45.

Adding the $5724 in payments to the $1240 cap cost reduction gives us $6964, which is around the $7k in depreciation that the market would give us.

So, yeah, special lease offers can be better than buying outright v :) v, assuming that you can't get that car much below $16,400 if you're taking out a loan.

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



Leperflesh posted:

This is it exactly. I cannot fathom why this is such a big deal for some folks; it's a cheap little part that you replace and then the thing never happens again, and it's on recall so you can go to a dealer and have it done for free at any point.

It's a window regulator. It's not like the transmission blows up or the engine catches on fire or the tires spontaneously disintegrate.

The big question that raises for me is, "did they also cut costs in other areas that are less obvious and more unsafe?" It's not problematic on its own; I just don't want to trust my safety to a car company that can't even keep the windows up.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lyesh
Apr 9, 2003



CornHolio posted:

And unless they have electric brake assist and electric power steering this is incredibly dangerous and I don't recommend it to anybody ever.

More or less everything hypermilers do (drafting behind trucks!) is incredibly dangerous so it's not like this is a shock.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply