'Scrappage' Schemes

[Rossi-fan]

I would rather spend my hard earned cash on other things than take out a second mortgage on a car. I believe keeping an older car is less expensive than buying new. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. They can shove their new cars cos I don't give a sh!t about the emmision's.

[Thorn]

The last secondhand car I got, in 1977, needed a new engine in 1978. And I never got the smell of the previous owner's cigarettes out of it. It was only about three years old when I got it. I'd rather take the depreciation, and drive something that I know hasn't been abused by anyone but me.
That said, I keep my cars for about ten years, and have plenty of time to save for the next.
I got my first car, an Austin A30, in 1966, and have only had nine in my life.

[volvo always]

I have had 4 cars since passing my test in 1999.

Drove grandparents 1985 340GL for 3 years.

Bought my first car a 1986 Volvo 740GLE estate for £425.00. Owned for 5 years and having trouble with it and so after 5 years use bought a new:

2007 Toyota corolla Linea techno spec 1.4 D4D. Hatchback. They gave 2,000 euro discount/ scrappage and the car still cost 21,500 euro. Living in France and Grandfather insisted on brand new! I even said buy one a year old in the UK! Nope!
30 months later selling up in France and moving to Southern Ireland, Sold the LHD Toyota for 8K!!
Bought in late 2009 a 1989 240GLT for £350. Still got it and it's been the best used cheap car I have ever had.

October last year bought a 1996 940 SE LPT estate For £250 and spent around £1,000 on it bringing it up to scratch. I have to say I really like the comfort and luxuries like ac.

I certainly like to own the car and don't believe in finance. The cars I have got do their job perfectly and so far they owe me nothing and been reliable, so why buy newer. You can have serious issues with new.

James

[Das boot]

I read somewhere that the highest proportion of emissions associated with vehicles is in their manufacture. Scrapping perfectly viable motors before they reach the end of their normal lifespan makes zero environmental sense. This like the previous scrappage schemes is purely a marketing ploy, dressed up as a green initiative.

[Ryan69]

Would I want at this time to swap my leather comfort and every button working Volvo that cost me £700 and costs me zilch a month in repayments, so Ford can shift some number fast as the sale of new cars has tanked and they are probably facing slowly down production lines does Ford care about the environment do the F*Ck....its the bottom line.

[Bill_56]

Well over 40 years ago, but I do recall a University lecturer presenting an analysis of car running costs, based on assumption of fixed period of ownership, maybe 3 years. He then illustrated how these costs differed, depending on whether it was a brand new car sold after 3 years, or a 1 year old use car, or a 2 year old etc, all the way up to 7 years (which was about as long as cars lasted then).

There was very little difference in costs, it transpired. Buy it new, you take a bigger hit on depreciation, but unlikely to have big repair bill. Buy it used and it depreciates less, but may well cost in repairs. They pretty much balanced out.

Wish I could remember what the class was, and what he was actually teaching us, sounds a lot more fun than most of the stuff we were taught

Another factor nowadays is of course you'll usually get a big discount off a new car, so any depreciation measured against list price is meaningless.

My current car was aged 2 when I purchased it, but I have bought 4 brand new cars in my career, never regretted it, and not convinced I lost any £££ on them.

[Prufrock]

Originally Posted by Prufrock

Amortise the £13000* my Wife's Dad paid for his near new 745 (that we still have) in 1986 - what it is worth in 2017 after 31.5 years is no longer relevant.

Quoting myself to reinforce the point.

Jon.

*that's £35000 today.

[Angie]

Built-in obsolescence of any number of consumer goods has gradually crept up during the last two or three decades, the result being that many things are either uneconomical to repair or more or less unrepairable.

Motor vehicles have become ever more complicated, partly, I suggest, because many people like 'gadgets' to play with. Of course many, if not most, of the gadgets that are worth having can be retro-fitted at less cost than the depreciation of a new car, and I certainly wouldn't want to saddle myself with years of a finance scheme just so that I could go a bit faster (possibly) or accelerate a bit more quickly (possibly). My 25 year old Torslanda isn't exactly a sparkling performer but it's very quick where it matters, at junctions for example, and will comfortably cruise, should I be so inclined, at well above the national speed limit. It cost me £600 seven years ago, and apart from a new clutch and head gasket (total cost around £600), other expenses have been normal maintenance items. I chose to spend around £2,000 on some non-essential but sensible bodywork repairs which will with luck extend the life of the car to a point when I either shuffle off or have to cease driving.

So let's say a capital outlay of around £3,200 over seven years and, more importantly nearly 75,000 miles, has left me with something with an increasing value and in the meantime I really enjoy driving it!

Scrappage schemes make my blood boil, they are promoted as 'green' but, as others have said, they are quite the opposite. Keeping and maintaining an older vehicle, or any other piece of machinery (such as my ancient but beautiful and supremely functional Kenwood Chef) is by far the greenest policy.

[Rossi-fan]

Originally Posted by Angie

Built-in obsolescence of any number of consumer goods has gradually crept up during the last two or three decades, the result being that many things are either uneconomical to repair or more or less unrepairable.

Motor vehicles have become ever more complicated, partly, I suggest, because many people like 'gadgets' to play with. Of course many, if not most, of the gadgets that are worth having can be retro-fitted at less cost than the depreciation of a new car, and I certainly wouldn't want to saddle myself with years of a finance scheme just so that I could go a bit faster (possibly) or accelerate a bit more quickly (possibly). My 25 year old Torslanda isn't exactly a sparkling performer but it's very quick where it matters, at junctions for example, and will comfortably cruise, should I be so inclined, at well above the national speed limit. It cost me £600 seven years ago, and apart from a new clutch and head gasket (total cost around £600), other expenses have been normal maintenance items. I chose to spend around £2,000 on some non-essential but sensible bodywork repairs which will with luck extend the life of the car to a point when I either shuffle off or have to cease driving.

So let's say a capital outlay of around £3,200 over seven years and, more importantly nearly 75,000 miles, has left me with something with an increasing value and in the meantime I really enjoy driving it!

Scrappage schemes make my blood boil, they are promoted as 'green' but, as others have said, they are quite the opposite. Keeping and maintaining an older vehicle, or any other piece of machinery (such as my ancient but beautiful and supremely functional Kenwood Chef) is by far the greenest policy.

Couldn't have put it better myself Angie

I noticed on that Mercedes Benz ad last night (possibly business use, I'm not sure) that after an initial payment of over £7,000, then with 36 monthly payments starting from £299, that comes to around £18,000 over 3 years, with NO ownership option. Wow that's just crazy to me

[Rossi-fan]

I'm not sure why people want new cars, other than the obvious status symbol, fashion item thing, and of course all the new gadgets like reverse camera's because most people can't reverse without them, they just seem so problematic to me