Mint.com: 5 of the least expensive cars to own ... for $24.6k or more!

[Badass by 41]

Really?  A car costing between $24k and $35k is the least expensive car to own?  ROTFL!

This kind of double standard always amazes me.  Preach budgets on the one hand, but push consumerist spending on the other.  Classic.

https://www.mint.com/blog/consumer-iq/the-5-least-expensive-cars-to-own-0514/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MyMint+%28Mint+Personal+Finance+Blog%29

[Jack]

Hmm... Mint is hotlinking images from Wikimedia. It almost makes me want to go mess with them (maybe change the pic of the Prius C to one of a really cheap car like a Geo Metro or Honda CRX)...

[beltim]

You left out the part of article where they only considered new cars.

[grantmeaname]

no I think that was OP's point

[beltim]

Then it's just a problem with editing, as the Consumer Reports article that the Mint article uses for all its data is specifically only about new cars.  Consumer Reports also has best and worst lists for used cars.

[LalsConstant]

The problem is you can't really write an article like this for used cars because there's too much inconsistency.  With new cars you at least know what models are made, how they compare, etc.

If you open it up to used cars, you get survivor bias (say the K car is really the greatest car ever but their owners tend to wreck them 95% of the time) and way too many models to compare and way too many issues to compare and contrast.

That said they could have put "new" in the title.   Still a useful article, these "new" will be "slightly used" hopefully by the next time I go car shopping.

[SnackDog]

Cheapest car to own may be one which appreciates in value, like a Tesla or 1996 Porsche Turbo.

[ketchup]

I like how $35,000 is their cutoff for "ripoff".  The value of every car I've ever driven combined (including ones I didn't/don't own) is probably barely that.

[grantmeaname]

It's hard to believe a Tesla will appreciate given how remarkably fast the technology is improving. Why would buyers pay a premium for your Model S when in five years they can have a brand new lighter, faster, safer equivalent with twice the range?

[ketchup]

It's hard to believe a Tesla will appreciate given how remarkably fast the technology is improving. Why would buyers pay a premium for your Model S when in five years they can have a brand new lighter, faster, safer equivalent with twice the range?

I think SnackDog was referring to how currently Model S cars can be sold second-hand at above MSRP because of the inability to meet current demand.  Like how when Playstation 3 ($599) came out and they were selling for $2,000 on eBay the day after release.

[grantmeaname]

I thought not because of the reference to the '96 Porsche, but that could be what he was going for I suppose.

[SnackDog]

I thought not because of the reference to the '96 Porsche, but that could be what he was going for I suppose.

If you bought either car in the last couple years you would find it worth more today than you paid for it.

[grantmeaname]

And I'm arguing that's not a trend with any meaningful persistence in the case of the Tesla - certainly not to the degree that you can declare depreciation negligible and move on with life.