downside of "old" used cars?

[pigpen]

Non-car guy here. So, we're looking for a used car and hoping to keep down the cost. Our highest priorities are safety and reliability. I'm looking online, and I'm seeing a few cars that look like they'd suit us well (Hondas specifically, although that's not a requirement). There seems to be a sweet spot when the car is old by many people's standards but also has low mileage.

For example, a 2010 Honda Civic with 35,000 miles for $10k, or a 2011 Civic LX with 52,000 miles for $12,000. If the mileage is low and the car is in good shape, is there a downside to the car being 10+ years old? For example, will certain parts have been discontinued and be harder to find? Anything else I might not be thinking of?

[JLee]

I've found parts availability to become a problem at the 20, 25 year mark with less common cars (e.g. Toyota MR2) -- no issues yet with my 2005 Lexus GX470.  For something as popular/common as a Civic, I expect parts will be available for a very long time.

As far as age, take a look at rubber components - things like ball joint boots, suspension bushings, etc that are usually ok on a 35k mile car might not be ok if they're 10-15 years old.  Also note that some services are mileage and/or age based, e.g. if a vehicle needs a timing belt service at 90k miles, it's probably 90k miles or ~seven years, whichever comes first.

[GilesMM]

For a Toyota or Honda I would see no issue with 100,000 miles. We bought both our cars with just over 100K.  There seems to be a dip in value when the sixth digit rolls over.  The cars are fine for 200k miles or more.

[reeshau]

Our highest priorities are safety and reliability.

Certainly you are looking in the right place for 2010 safety and reliability.  There will be features and differences, though.

2016 was the first year that the Civic had ADAS across all models.  (Can't find specific info on what had it before)

Phone connectivity will be much different.  The precedes Apple Car Play and Google Drive.  Of course, I had phone connectivity in my 2009 Chevy Malibu; but much more limited.

And, all cars have gotten more reliable in the last decade.

[ChpBstrd]

I too like older cars with low or reasonable mileage.

Rubber parts like window trim, belts, gaskets, hoses, and interior trim pieces may have dry rotted as a car reaches the decade old mark.

An older car with a timing belt should probably have the belt replaced even if the mileage doesn't indicate it. Expect the engine to develop a few oil leaks around the oil pan or valve cover, just from seal deterioration.

A particular concern is whether the coolant has rusted out the head gasket inside the engine. Coolant breaks down over time and becomes more corrosive. If you open the radiator (before test driving the car and warming up the engine, of course) and see a lot of rust inside, the head gasket is probably at risk. A car that has been owned by someone who didn't drive it much (e.g. grandma) might not have been maintained much either, so the coolant could be original. Some older cars end up requiring a top end rebuild at <100k miles because it has sat rusting from the inside.

Low mileage old cars may also have old tires. At about 5 years of age, the rubber becomes brittle and develops cracks. Even if they have good tread, old tires can start to seep out air and due to the brittleness they don't have as good traction. Expect to replace the tires before they wear out if you see lots of cracking.

Beware of otherwise nice cars that have "been sitting" and won't start because the fuel in the gas tank, fuel lines, filter, and injectors can go bad after 6-12 months. It can be very expensive to flush a fuel system and there's towing involved.

At the 15-20 year old mark, it's not a bad idea to buy a bunch of bulk rubber tubing and replace all the vaccum lines, one at a time. These can develop tiny dry rot cracks and cause perplexing and hard to diagnose issues. Some preventative maintenance here can head off some of the most common car problems later. Also not a bad idea to clean the air flow sensors with a spray can you can buy from the auto parts store. This job takes 15 minutes for an untrained monkey to perform.

Finally, THE most common reason to find an older car with low mileage is because the car was wrecked, stored for a long time, auctioned, and repaired. This process can take years to complete and in the meantime the car isn't racking up any mileage. I do not shy away from cars with previous damage or salvage titles. In fact they're usually a great deal because you can expect to pay 25% less. But if you're looking to pay full retail price, inquire about the title status or do a carfax before making your offer! It's awkward to back out when people or dealers spring this detail on you, but if that ever happens you should back out or lower your offer 25%. If they say "but you just committed to this price!" take a walk and never come back.

[snic]

If the mileage is low and the car is in good shape, is there a downside to the car being 10+ years old? For example, will certain parts have been discontinued and be harder to find? Anything else I might not be thinking of?

Parts availability depends on how many were made. You'll be fine if you stick with the bigger brands and popular models. Things WILL break, so it pays (literally and figuratively) to find a good mechanic who won't cheat you. They are rare, but they do exist. If you're new to owning and maintaining cars, it might be a good idea to get a mechanic to look over the car you plan to buy.

[pigpen]

Thanks, everyone. That's good information.

We're still trying to decide whether to pull the trigger. We currently have a 2008 Honda Fit with around 145,000 miles with no major issues (other than looking like crap due to oxidation, etc.). I may start another WWYD/mini-case-study thread on the overall decision, just for fun.

Reeshau, thanks for the link to the study. Kias and Hyundais also look like they score well in general, so that's another couple kinds to consider.

[ChpBstrd]

Thanks, everyone. That's good information.

We're still trying to decide whether to pull the trigger. We currently have a 2008 Honda Fit with around 145,000 miles with no major issues (other than looking like crap due to oxidation, etc.). I may start another WWYD/mini-case-study thread on the overall decision, just for fun.

Reeshau, thanks for the link to the study. Kias and Hyundais also look like they score well in general, so that's another couple kinds to consider.

Custom metal flake flame paint job is WWYD.

[JLee]

Thanks, everyone. That's good information.

We're still trying to decide whether to pull the trigger. We currently have a 2008 Honda Fit with around 145,000 miles with no major issues (other than looking like crap due to oxidation, etc.). I may start another WWYD/mini-case-study thread on the overall decision, just for fun.

Reeshau, thanks for the link to the study. Kias and Hyundais also look like they score well in general, so that's another couple kinds to consider.

In Honda/Toyota world that is still reasonably low mileage.  You could learn how to vinyl wrap it and cover it up - it'd take some time but is a lot cheaper than having it painted or professionally wrapped.

[pigpen]

Custom metal flake flame paint job is WWYD.

Done!

[Greystache]

Others have mentioned that the rubber parts are at risk with age. In my experience you should also be ready for plastic and electrical issues.  I have 18 and 21 year old cars and in the past few years I have seen plastic gears break in the air handling system. Not expensive to fix but you need to be a contortionist to do it. I have seen the plastic clips that attach the window glass to the regulator get brittle and fail.  The back lights for the instrument panel burned out.  The fuel level sensor failed.  All of these are inexpensive parts but some are very hard to get at.  The fuel sensor was especially bad because it involved dropping the fuel tank.

[rothwem]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'm not sure I'd pay a premium for low miles.  I prefer a car that has been driven and taken care of accordingly.  Low miles on a "regular car", to me, means a lot of short trips which aren't awesome for a car. 

I think I'd just keep the cosmetically ugly Fit, it doesn't seem like an upgrade to go with the 2010 Civic, even if its low miles. 

[pigpen]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'm not sure I'd pay a premium for low miles.  I prefer a car that has been driven and taken care of accordingly.  Low miles on a "regular car", to me, means a lot of short trips which aren't awesome for a car. 

I think I'd just keep the cosmetically ugly Fit, it doesn't seem like an upgrade to go with the 2010 Civic, even if its low miles.

The cosmetic part isn't really the prime motivator. We can always do something about that. It's more the sense/fear that at some point, it's going to start having bigger, more expensive issues or become unsafe. My wife particularly worries about the transmission and the possibility of that conking out.

For my part, I worry about something failing and leaving her at the side of the road somewhere.

Maybe these fears aren't logical for this make/model at 146,000 miles?

[JupiterGreen]

For a Toyota or Honda I would see no issue with 100,000 miles. We bought both our cars with just over 100K.  There seems to be a dip in value when the sixth digit rolls over.  The cars are fine for 200k miles or more.

Agreed. I've only had these two brands and always driven older cars. I have only owned three cars in my entire life (aside from one I shared with a sibling). The first toyota I drove until it was over 200k then someone hit me, the car was totaled, and I was forced to get a new one. The second toyota went for almost 200k it was something like 180k, had tons of dings and stuff and looked like crap but ran beautifully. Someone did hit my second car but I duct taped it back together and put the insurance claim in my investment account. I only sold it when I inherited a Honda. Honda is going strong, I've had it now for about ten or so years it is about 15 years old. If I had the choice, I prefer Toyotas because I don't like how low the Honda rides but that's a personal preference. Of the three I've owned they've ALL only had basic maintenance issues (the occasional small issue, changing break pads, oil changes). These suckers last and they are great on gas. The insurance is low, people think you're poor AF, and nobody wants to steal your car. 

But you asked about downsides. The only reason why I may change cars in the next five years is for the safety issues. None of my cars have backup cameras or the additional safety items that newer cars have. To a lesser degree, it would be nice to have bluetooth but I wouldn't buy a new car just for that reason. I live in (what I think is) a terrible state, no car inspections here (I've literally had pieces of other cars hit my car on the highway. I know I mentioned my duct taped car, but it was also " red-neck riveted" together with metal so nothing ever flew off the thing. Point is I don't think the no inspection thing is good) so depending on if you need to pass inspection this might be an issue with an older car. Also if it matters to you, your old car is probably not going to turn any heads (unless it's a classic of course). 

[Tasse]

But you asked about downsides. The only reason why I may change cars in the next five years is for the safety issues. None of my cars have backup cameras or the additional safety items that newer cars have. To a lesser degree, it would be nice to have bluetooth but I wouldn't buy a new car just for that reason. I live in (what I think is) a terrible state, no car inspections here (I've literally had pieces of other cars hit my car on the highway, so I don't think the no inspection thing is good) so depending on if you need to pass inspection this might be an issue with an older car. Also if it matters to you, your old car is probably not going to turn any heads (unless it's a classic of course). 

Not sure precisely what inspections you are talking about, but my 2001, 150-180k mile Toyota passed California smog tests several times, although once I did have to replace the catalytic converter first. (I consider that routine maintenance.) It passed its first Colorado smog test this year as well.

[JupiterGreen]

But you asked about downsides. The only reason why I may change cars in the next five years is for the safety issues. None of my cars have backup cameras or the additional safety items that newer cars have. To a lesser degree, it would be nice to have bluetooth but I wouldn't buy a new car just for that reason. I live in (what I think is) a terrible state, no car inspections here (I've literally had pieces of other cars hit my car on the highway, so I don't think the no inspection thing is good) so depending on if you need to pass inspection this might be an issue with an older car. Also if it matters to you, your old car is probably not going to turn any heads (unless it's a classic of course). 

Not sure precisely what inspections you are talking about, but my 2001, 150-180k mile Toyota passed California smog tests several times, although once I did have to replace the catalytic converter first. (I consider that routine maintenance.) It passed its first Colorado smog test this year as well.

Car inspections, there are some states that don't require it.
edit: I looked it up, I guess this varies. Some states only test emissions, others also look at the safety and emissions. My states does not require ANYTHING. If you can get insurance and get it rolling, you're good to go

[BlueMR2]

I've found parts availability to become a problem at the 20, 25 year mark with less common cars (e.g. Toyota MR2) -- no issues yet with my 2005 Lexus GX470.  For something as popular/common as a Civic, I expect parts will be available for a very long time.

Yeah, parts availability can become an issue even before rust does.  When I sold my '95 Mitsubishi, it needed a new engine and they simply are not available anymore.  They used to be everywhere and cheap.  Now there's a handful of restorers that seem to be hoarding them all and if you don't already have a spare you're not getting one...  Sold the car to a kid that did happen to have a spare already...  A few years before that I had to convert the car to a different set of rear brakes as you could no longer buy discs for the stock configuration (yet brake pads were still widely available)...  Right about that time I had the transmission rebuilt too and got the last set of something (maybe synchros?) in the system for North America for that specific transmission.

Fortunately the MR2 parts that are going discontinued are less important (cruise control speed sensor, power steering brushes, etc).  That one also has different brakes now as the prior type were discontinued and is now riding on coilovers as nobody had any struts available when mine failed.  Worst part was for a couple years you couldn't get any radiators, but third parties eventually stepped up.

[RetireOrDieTrying]

The cosmetic part isn't really the prime motivator. We can always do something about that. It's more the sense/fear that at some point, it's going to start having bigger, more expensive issues or become unsafe. My wife particularly worries about the transmission and the possibility of that conking out.

For my part, I worry about something failing and leaving her at the side of the road somewhere.

Maybe these fears aren't logical for this make/model at 146,000 miles?

Any car can - and will at some point - break down. It's like death and taxes. Make your peace with it, or you're going to drive  yourself nuts worrying about every eventuality. There IS a line between prudent contemplation and worrywarting.

My more contextual response would be that I would take a 146k mile Honda anywhere, at any time (I'm presuming it doesn't have a history of issues or known problems).

Get it painted, keep it serviced, and drive that thang. Keep the savings working for you.

[rothwem]

The cosmetic part isn't really the prime motivator. We can always do something about that. It's more the sense/fear that at some point, it's going to start having bigger, more expensive issues or become unsafe. My wife particularly worries about the transmission and the possibility of that conking out.

For my part, I worry about something failing and leaving her at the side of the road somewhere.

Maybe these fears aren't logical for this make/model at 146,000 miles?

Any car can - and will at some point - break down. It's like death and taxes. Make your peace with it, or you're going to drive  yourself nuts worrying about every eventuality. There IS a line between prudent contemplation and worrywarting.

My more contextual response would be that I would take a 146k mile Honda anywhere, at any time (I'm presuming it doesn't have a history of issues or known problems).

Get it painted, keep it serviced, and drive that thang. Keep the savings working for you.

Yeah, and usually a transmission gives a LOOOOT of warning before it fails.  Things like unusual whining sounds, clunks when you engage gear, shift flare (revving up between shifts), delayed engagement (where you put it in gear and step on the gas and it revs a bit before jerking forward), shuddering as you take off, etc are things to look for.  And if it does fail, they made a zillion Honda Fits, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get it rebuilt for ~$2000, dramatically cheaper than a new car.