My next vehicle purchase - fun vs responsibility vs stupid

[JulesMaximus]

A Mercedes out of warranty scares me more than a little.

Buy another Civic.

My Mother-In-Law had two E-class sedans and had very little trouble with either of them. I have 2 more years of factory warranty on my E550 plus another year CPO warranty through Mercedes.

 

[Herr Kutz]

Volvo is about the lowest cost of ownership of the luxury brands. Well, Volvo and Acura. Get one of those if you're worried about cost but still want luxo options.

Lower than Lexus?

 

[tortillasoup]

Volvo is about the lowest cost of ownership of the luxury brands. Well, Volvo and Acura. Get one of those if you're worried about cost but still want luxo options.

Is this a joke? Volvo, Low cost luxury? HA! I own two Lexus and one Volvo... guess which one was the most expensive/unreliable vehicle we have owned.... Lexus is about the least expensive luxury brand as it is related to Toyota which is the lowest cost to own brand out there.

 

[agent00f]

While doing some research, I, unfortunately, lost interest in one car: the E90/E92/E93 M3. I knew it would be overly costly to maintain but $2500 (the new design rod bearings are $600 alone) plus the possibility of having to rebuild/purchase two throttle actuators out of the gate is insane. (And then rebuild them possibly every 50k)

It would already be $1k+/month to just drive the car a thousand miles a month. ($600+ car payment, $200+ insurance, $200+ gas)

Ain't no way, brah. Here's a pretty comprehensive review of someone who purchased it recently. Really great review/overview IMO.

I'll look into the 2011+ 135i. Only reason I am not big on it though is that it's so small and seems impractical. Also, soft top being the only convertible type is not big for me. At that point, I'd get the coupe.

That's a pretty informative video, which ultimately demonstrates the perils of bmw (& german "luxury") ownership; it's kind of a crapshot.

It used to be somewhat better when the cars were simpler and the competition were further behind. But IMO we've reached the point where their cars are just as numb as everyone else, and older models are falling apart. Even if you luck out and get a good one, the bushing & such start drying/wearing out resulting in a crummier drive without sinking a lot of money.

 

[z1ggy]

Has this dude even bought the car yet? We are going on 13 pages of this crap.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Has this dude even bought the car yet? We are going on 13 pages of this crap.

And 2 years this February...

Lock and ban for the OP!

 

[z1ggy]

And 2 years this February...

Lock and ban for the OP!

He's known for this.

I'm all for updating threads that are neco if stuff is relevant, but if the dude has a 13 page thread about buying a car, and hasn't actually purchased said vehicle, wtf are we doing? But I'm too lazy to read pages and pages of old material to see what he actually did. I just notice we are getting into that age old debate of the quality of lux brands Heeeere we go...

 

[Bubbleawsome]

Try to find a super-cheap 5 series BMW and then dump the extra money into repairs?

 

[agent00f]

He's known for this.

I'm all for updating threads that are neco if stuff is relevant, but if the dude has a 13 page thread about buying a car, and hasn't actually purchased said vehicle, wtf are we doing? But I'm too lazy to read pages and pages of old material to see what he actually did. I just notice we are getting into that age old debate of the quality of lux brands Heeeere we go...

In fairness, we've all played the what car to get next hypothetical. I didn't read this particular one much, but suffice to say if it's been 2 years it's more of a wishful thinking exercise than timely decision-making, and folks should adjust their expectations accordingly.

 

[JCH13]

Is this a joke? Volvo, Low cost luxury? HA! I own two Lexus and one Volvo... guess which one was the most expensive/unreliable vehicle we have owned.... Lexus is about the least expensive luxury brand as it is related to Toyota which is the lowest cost to own brand out there.

I spaced on Lexus.

However, your singular experience does not define an entire brand of reliability and cost of ownership.

Looking at new cars TCO, KBB lists a Volvo as the lowest cost-to-own luxury car from 2015MY.

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/total-cost-of-ownership/

Also check out: http://www.edmunds.com/tco.html

Looking at the Volvo S80 it costs $45,408 for 5 years with $5515 in maintenance and repairs. The Lexus IS 350, the S80's counterpart, costs $46,207 over 5 years, with $7,810 in maintenance and repairs. This happened to be the first pair of vehicles I looked at, feel free to argue it the other way, I'd be interested to see numbers drawn from a broad source that support your case.

Furthermore, reliability does not define cost of ownership. Reliability/maintenance costs != TCO. A car that's cheap to repair might have high insurance and registration costs, cost/depreciate more, or consume more fuel than the less reliable car. The costs may be more visible, or feel higher, if they're related to repairs, but that in and of itself doesn't mean that the car is cheaper to own.

 

[tortillasoup]

I spaced on Lexus.

However, your singular experience does not define an entire brand of reliability and cost of ownership.

Looking at new cars TCO, KBB lists a Volvo as the lowest cost-to-own luxury car from 2015MY.

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/total-cost-of-ownership/

Also check out: http://www.edmunds.com/tco.html

Looking at the Volvo S80 it costs $45,408 for 5 years with $5515 in maintenance and repairs. The Lexus IS 350, the S80's counterpart, costs $46,207 over 5 years, with $7,810 in maintenance and repairs. This happened to be the first pair of vehicles I looked at, feel free to argue it the other way, I'd be interested to see numbers drawn from a broad source that support your case.

Furthermore, reliability does not define cost of ownership. Reliability/maintenance costs != TCO. A car that's cheap to repair might have high insurance and registration costs, cost/depreciate more, or consume more fuel than the less reliable car. The costs may be more visible, or feel higher, if they're related to repairs, but that in and of itself doesn't mean that the car is cheaper to own.

The KBB TCO tool is completely worthless. It insinuates repair costs for the Prius that are non existent and makes the Lexus vehicles more expensive than they ought to be. If you look at the 5 year cost estimate for repairs, we don't know exactly what "repairs" this vehicle would need but yet it assumes they are there.

The best part is, if you look at the resale value of a 2011 IS350 and a 2011 Volvo S80, the S80 is worth about $5K less than the IS350. That along with it being a more difficult car to sell should be enough to tell you the Volvo is not the cheapest luxury car to own.

 

[MongGrel]

I dunno, I just know I've known many that people have regretted buying a BMW over time and constantly bitch about them.

One guy that sounds about like TridenT even blew up the engine on an M3.

 

[JCH13]

The KBB TCO tool is completely worthless. It insinuates repair costs for the Prius that are non existent and makes the Lexus vehicles more expensive than they ought to be. If you look at the 5 year cost estimate for repairs, we don't know exactly what "repairs" this vehicle would need but yet it assumes they are there.

The best part is, if you look at the resale value of a 2011 IS350 and a 2011 Volvo S80, the S80 is worth about $5K less than the IS350. That along with it being a more difficult car to sell should be enough to tell you the Volvo is not the cheapest luxury car to own.

Why is the KBB tool worthless? What data do you have to show that the estimates of Prius repairs aren't accurate? Why is the Lexus cost more than it should be? You're just saying that the KBB estimate is inaccurate without any supporting information.

Why is an S80 a more difficult car to sell? What information supports that statement? The resale value cuts both ways. If the Volvo sells for $5k less used, it could be cheaper to own if purchased used. But, much more to the point, TCO includes depreciation. That $5k resale difference has already been accounted for in the TCO calculation and the Volvo came out as less expensive...

While the 350 shows about $5k less depreciation than the S80, it consumes about $4k more in fuel and has $3k more in scheduled maintenance over 5 years. Fuel and scheduled maintenance make the IS350 more expensive to own despite the fact that it holds a better resale value and has fewer unscheduled repairs.

 

[tortillasoup]

Why is the KBB tool worthless? What data do you have to show that the estimates of Prius repairs aren't accurate? Why is the Lexus cost more than it should be? You're just saying that the KBB estimate is inaccurate without any supporting information.

Admittedly anecdotal but I know people who own Prius vehicles, also spoken with service advisors and aside from negligence, the Prius vehicles aren't really subject to a whole lot of repairs, especially in the first five years. The amount of money they have allocated to repairs of these vehicles would be enough for me to ditch the vehicle if I spent that much in the first 5 years. Good vehicles shouldn't need a dime of repairs for at least 7 years. On european cars however, I have always been amused to hear about vehicles being in the shop for repairs.

Why is an S80 a more difficult car to sell? What information supports that statement? The resale value cuts both ways. If the Volvo sells for $5k less used, it could be cheaper to own if purchased used. But, much more to the point, TCO includes depreciation. That $5k resale difference has already been accounted for in the TCO calculation and the Volvo came out as less expensive...

Knowing the S80 is a more difficult car to sell is admittedly anecdotal experience but considering the market for Volvo is quite a bit smaller and their reputation for reliability isn't all that great, suffice to say it's going to be harder to sell. People aren't exactly trolling craigslist for used Volvos. The type of people who buy Volvos are usually yuppies who lack any sort of sophistication about cars and who buy them new. Meanwhile, the market for Toyotas and Lexus vehicles is typically a lot larger both in the new and used markets due to the broad appeal of the brands. To give you an idea of how bad resale values of Volvos are... A 2004 Volvo S60 could be had for $35K when brand new, now, one with 50K miles on it, it's worth less than $4K. Meanwhile, if you had purchased a 2004 Camry new for $20K, it could be purchased today for $8-10K assuming it also had 50K miles on it.

While the 350 shows about $5k less depreciation than the S80, it consumes about $4k more in fuel and has $3k more in scheduled maintenance over 5 years. Fuel and scheduled maintenance make the IS350 more expensive to own despite the fact that it holds a better resale value and has fewer unscheduled repairs.

A 2011 IS350 and S80 both get the same fuel economy though the IS350 uses Premium. If you're looking at 2016 models, then the IS200T gets slightly worse RATED fuel economy compared with the S80 but in all likelihood, Volvo's fuel economy is inflated to a degree as they've never been known for having accurate fuel economy numbers. Having a turbo is a great way to cheat at fuel economy tests and that cuts across most automakers.

Finally, your quote about the Volvo S80 having a TCO of $45K is false. I just used the TCO tool on the KBB website and it says the 2016 Volvo S80 T5 has a TCO of $55K while the IS350 RWD has a TCO of $53K.

 

[JCH13]

As noted in my first post, I pulled TCO data from Edmunds. Data from KBB to suggest something different is interesting, but it doesn't make Edmunds false.

See: http://www.edmunds.com/volvo/s80/2016/st-200737890/cost-to-own/
And: http://www.edmunds.com/lexus/is-350/2016/st-200747205/cost-to-own/

I never disagreed with resale values, I just pointed out that it's only a fraction of the TCO and can be overtaken by other items. Sure, resale values are lower. But money is money... doesn't matter if you pay in depreciation, fuel, repairs, or insurance.

Nearly all of your reasoning is anecdotal and/or uncorroborated generalizations and prejudices. Thus I have a hard time agreeing with your conclusions. My personal experience with Volvos has been much different than yours. My brother, my mom, and my dad all drive Volvos, and we've always had a volvo in the family since 2002 or so. They've always treated us well, the repair and maintenance costs were never trivial, but they're luxury vehicles so that's expected. We generally got better-than-rated fuel economy (teenage lead-footing aside) and never had trouble selling them when we were done. Oh, and we bought all of them used, usually trolling CL to find them.

 

[tortillasoup]

As noted in my first post, I pulled TCO data from Edmunds. Data from KBB to suggest something different is interesting, but it doesn't make Edmunds false.

See: http://www.edmunds.com/volvo/s80/2016/st-200737890/cost-to-own/
And: http://www.edmunds.com/lexus/is-350/2016/st-200747205/cost-to-own/

I never disagreed with resale values, I just pointed out that it's only a fraction of the TCO and can be overtaken by other items. Sure, resale values are lower. But money is money... doesn't matter if you pay in depreciation, fuel, repairs, or insurance.

Nearly all of your reasoning is anecdotal and/or uncorroborated generalizations and prejudices. Thus I have a hard time agreeing with your conclusions. My personal experience with Volvos has been much different than yours. My brother, my mom, and my dad all drive Volvos, and we've always had a volvo in the family since 2002 or so. They've always treated us well, the repair and maintenance costs were never trivial, but they're luxury vehicles so that's expected. We generally got better-than-rated fuel economy (teenage lead-footing aside) and never had trouble selling them when we were done. Oh, and we bought all of them used, usually trolling CL to find them.

Yeah, well have you ever owned a Lexus? Owning a 2004 LS430 from brand new, covering similar miles to a new 2004 Volvo S60, if both vehicles were sold today, the S60 in the end was a more expensive car to own. $35k S60 vs. $55K LS430! Try to wrap your head around that!

 

[JCH13]

I have not owned a Lexus Yet.

I see more claims with no data or sources behind them... Oh well.

 

[tortillasoup]

http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/which-car-brands-make-the-best-vehicles/
Lexus/Toyota
Predicted Reliability: Best

Volvo
Predicted Reliability: Average


Near the bottom is Landrover, Cadillac, and Chrysler Brands. I mean yeah, if I had to choose between a Volvo and a Landrover for reliability, I think I'd choose a Volvo based upon experience (such that it is) but even so, the experience I've had with numerous euro vehicles has been poor and data that can easily be obtained agrees with my experience.

 

[JCH13]

I said it before and I'll say it again: reliability != TCO. As I pointed out earlier: it appears that Volvo's poorer reliability and resale compared to Lexus is more than made up for in lower fuel and maintenance costs.

My original point was that Volvo and Acura were two of the cheapest to own luxury brands. I never said that Lexus was not also one of the cheapest to own luxury brands.

To put things in perspective on 5 year TCO:

Acura TL: $36k
Volvo S80: $44k
Lexus IS350: $45k
Mercedes C300: $50k
BMW 528i: $55k
Audi A6: $65k

Feel free to nit pick trim levels and comparable vehicle sizes, features, and performance, I was not overly careful in picking them. My point is simply that Acura and Volvo are inexpensive in the scheme of luxury cars.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I said it before and I'll say it again: reliability != TCO. As I pointed out earlier: it appears that Volvo's poorer reliability and resale compared to Lexus is more than made up for in lower fuel and maintenance costs.

My original point was that Volvo and Acura were two of the cheapest to own luxury brands. I never said that Lexus was not also one of the cheapest to own luxury brands.

To put things in perspective on 5 year TCO:

Acura TL: $36k
Volvo S80: $44k
Lexus IS350: $45k
Mercedes C300: $50k
BMW 528i: $55k
Audi A6: $65k

Feel free to nit pick trim levels and comparable vehicle sizes, features, and performance, I was not overly careful in picking them. My point is simply that Acura and Volvo are inexpensive in the scheme of luxury cars.

Out of that list the only cars I would consider are Lexus, Mercedes or BMW.

Acura cars look like ass, Volvo and Audi are unreliable.

 

[tortillasoup]

I said it before and I'll say it again: reliability != TCO. As I pointed out earlier: it appears that Volvo's poorer reliability and resale compared to Lexus is more than made up for in lower fuel and maintenance costs.

The fuel economy and maintenance cost "savings" of a Volvo over a Lexus is nearly non existent. The fuel economy of a 2011 IS350 and an S80 are identical yet the S80 has a worse resale value and higher repair costs. Maintenance costs can't be less on the S80 because repair costs are higher. Typically a vehicle with low maintenance costs also has low repair costs. Some maintenance costs are fixed so two different vehicles would have similar maintenance costs. As for a 2016 S80 vs an IS200T, the fuel economy "improvement" is only 3mpg while again, the maintenance costs should be similar while the depreciation and repair costs should be higher for the Volvo.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The fuel economy and maintenance cost "savings" of a Volvo over a Lexus is nearly non existent. The fuel economy of a 2011 IS350 and an S80 are identical yet the S80 has a worse resale value and higher repair costs. Maintenance costs can't be less on the S80 because repair costs are higher. Typically a vehicle with low maintenance costs also has low repair costs. Some maintenance costs are fixed so two different vehicles would have similar maintenance costs. As for a 2016 S80 vs an IS200T, the fuel economy "improvement" is only 3mpg while again, the maintenance costs should be similar while the depreciation and repair costs should be higher for the Volvo.

Volvo provides free maintenance for the first 5 years/60,000 miles which even includes wiper refills, the only thing not covered are tires.

 

[tortillasoup]

Volvo provides free maintenance for the first 5 years/60,000 miles which even includes wiper refills, the only thing not covered are tires.

"At Volvo, we’re committed to a premium ownership experience for all our customers. That’s why all 2016 model year Volvos, sold new and registered in the U.S. by an authorized Volvo retailer, will include Complimentary Factory Scheduled Maintenance.

Complimentary Factory Scheduled Maintenance covers the first three services (10,000 miles, 20,000 miles, and 30,000 miles) at no charge.*

Regularly scheduled maintenance performed by your authorized Volvo dealer will help keep your Volvo trouble free.

*3 years or up to 36,000 miles."
http://www.volvocars.com/us/own/maintenance/scheduled-maintenance

No 60K

Also at 30K miles, they're basically "checking" a lot of stuff, not fixing anything. So pretty much you're getting 3 years of free oil changes at best. I suppose if your car has leaks they will fix that but it shouldn't be leaking in the first place.

 

[MixMasterTang]

"At Volvo, we’re committed to a premium ownership experience for all our customers. That’s why all 2016 model year Volvos, sold new and registered in the U.S. by an authorized Volvo retailer, will include Complimentary Factory Scheduled Maintenance.

Complimentary Factory Scheduled Maintenance covers the first three services (10,000 miles, 20,000 miles, and 30,000 miles) at no charge.*

Regularly scheduled maintenance performed by your authorized Volvo dealer will help keep your Volvo trouble free.

*3 years or up to 36,000 miles."
http://www.volvocars.com/us/own/maintenance/scheduled-maintenance

No 60K

I think he is confusing that with the optional "PrePaid maintenance plans" http://assets.volvocars.com/us/~/me...tenance/volvo-fsm-information-v2.jpg?la=en-us

 

[JCH13]

Out of that list the only cars I would consider are Lexus, Mercedes or BMW.

Acura cars look like ass, Volvo and Audi are unreliable.

Thank you for your constructive input...

The fuel economy and maintenance cost "savings" of a Volvo over a Lexus is nearly non existent. The fuel economy of a 2011 IS350 and an S80 are identical yet the S80 has a worse resale value and higher repair costs. Maintenance costs can't be less on the S80 because repair costs are higher. Typically a vehicle with low maintenance costs also has low repair costs. Some maintenance costs are fixed so two different vehicles would have similar maintenance costs. As for a 2016 S80 vs an IS200T, the fuel economy "improvement" is only 3mpg while again, the maintenance costs should be similar while the depreciation and repair costs should be higher for the Volvo.

More assumptions and assertions without any backup.

The cars that I cited were 2016 MY from Edmunds, not 2011, as I've noted before. 2011 MY cars are clearly a different situation. For 2016 MY cars the S80 gets 29MPG combined and the IS350 (RWD) gets 22MPG or (AWD) 21MPG combined. See: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2016_Volvo_S80.shtml and https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymake/Lexus2016.shtml

I don't know why you keep trying to correlate the S80, a full-size sedan, to an IS200T, a mid-size sedan. Stop making faulty comparisons.

Maintenance cost != repair cost. Maintenance involves preemptive replacement or adjustment of components before failure, repairs only occur after a fault is identified. They are wholly different cost categories. It is entirely possible for two different cars to have dramatically different maintenance costs. Subtle engine differences, such as bucket-and-shim (requires regular adjustment) vs HLA (virtually maintenance-free) valve lifters, can make a dramatic difference in maintenance costs. I don't know why you continually deny that two cars can have two different maintenance costs.

The Lexus IS350 PM schedule is here, P48: http://www.lexus.com/pdf/service/MY16-Lexus-IS300-and-IS350-Warranty-and-Services-Guide.pdf and is so thorough that it specifies replacing the remote batteries every 18 months, tightening chassis hardware every 5k miles, and a road test every 5k miles. The Volvo PM schedule is found here, P14: http://esd.volvocars.com/local/us/2016-Volvo-Warranty-manual-v3.PDF and is somewhat less rigorous. Note that the Volvo PM schedule's primary frequency is 10k miles, whereas the Lexus PM schedule is every 5k miles/6 months. In conclusion: having more-thorough maintenance appointments literally twice as often would make the Lexus' maintenance costs higher than the Volvo's.

As for the relationship between maintenance and repair costs... wouldn't it make more sense that a car with a rigorous maintenance schedule would have low repair costs? With more failure points being inspected and/or adjusted regularly one would logically conclude that fewer failures would occur.

Look, if you want to keep discussing this I'm going to politely ask that you use numbers or values cited somewhere using valid comparisons. I'm getting quite bored of correcting you over and over again.

Volvo provides free maintenance for the first 5 years/60,000 miles which even includes wiper refills, the only thing not covered are tires.

This is interesting because maintenance costs were still included in the Edmunds 5 year TCO calculation. If true, this would make the Volvo remarkably cheaper than the IS350 instead of nearly the same.