Buy or Lease Vehicle?

[Plant Woman]

We are looking to buy another vehicle. Problem is we would either buy a year to two year old car, or lease a vehicle for a few years until more hybrid type vehicles become available.

We've looked into leasing and think this might be the way to go for the short term. We buy our vehicles and keep them for many years. However with the changing technologies and the push towards getting off the oil, I don't want to be going into dept for something that might be an albatross in a few years time.

Anyone lease their vehicles? With what we are planning to do would leasing be a good strategy and letting it go back at the end of the lease?

[Dingfod]

In my experience, if you want the latest technology and plan to trade cars in three or four years, leasing might well be a good choice for you. However, if you even have an inkling that you might want to keep the car, buy that two or three year old car instead, let someone else eat the biggest part of the depreciation.

[Pinecone]

My mom leased her last two cars and her number one problem was with racking up too many miles. Towards the end of the leases she always had to watch it as to where she could go. She hates that and is buying this year. Kind of like having a cell phone with 700 minutes for someone who likes to gab for 1000+

[LadyShea]

As Dingfod said, leasing is only a good deal if you plan on driving the car short term, no more than 3 years or so.

[Dingfod]

And don't plan on driving a lot.

[cappuccino]

And don't plan on driving long distances with a hybrid, otherwise you lose any possible savings.

[ShottleBop]

And don't plan on driving long distances with a hybrid, otherwise you lose any possible savings.

Because of the mileage limitations imposed under a lease?

[ShottleBop]

Another thing about leasing: my cousin, who leases a car, was in an accident. The other driver was at fault, and paid for the repairs--some $17,000. His leasing company has told him that the fact that the car was in an accident, even though not his fault, would reduce the value of the car at the end of the lease, and he would be required to pay for the reduction in value.

[cappuccino]

No because of the nature of hybrids. An electric motor married to a smaller gas engine. If you're driving a hybrid in a city, the normal stop-go nature of city driving allows the electric motor to take over part of the job and be recharged by braking or the gas engine.

If you're driving the car over long distances, you run out of juice for running the electric motor and it's gas engine all the way on a smaller tank so you may end up paying more for the gas.

In my opinion, it's better to buy well maintained used car to avoid the depreciation cost, if you plan on keeping the car for any significant period of time, which's what I did. Automobile technology advances won't be coming that fast enough to justify worrying about being stuck with a gas engine car. Gas engines will be very likely to still be around for at least 10 years more.

[Dingfod]

Another thing about leasing: my cousin, who leases a car, was in an accident. The other driver was at fault, and paid for the repairs--some $17,000. His leasing company has told him that the fact that the car was in an accident, even though not his fault, would reduce the value of the car at the end of the lease, and he would be required to pay for the reduction in value.The value at the end of the lease is normally established in the lease agreement, less damages that would need to be repaired of course. I've never heard of a car being reduced in value because of an accident that had been expertly repaired, nor any lease being changed because of it. If what you say is so, it would be another claim on the insurance, I would think.

[SharonDee]

When I was thinking about leasing instead of buying back in the early 90's, my insurance agent talked me out of it. I wish I could remember his reasoning. Maybe it made for higher premiums, I dunno.

Another thing about leasing: my cousin, who leases a car, was in an accident. The other driver was at fault, and paid for the repairs--some $17,000. His leasing company has told him that the fact that the car was in an accident, even though not his fault, would reduce the value of the car at the end of the lease, and he would be required to pay for the reduction in value.Maybe it was something like that ... :girlthink:

[Plant Woman]

Thanks for this info, as you can't find that kind in the leasing agreements. It's been over ten years since we had a car payment. We paid cash for my truck. I am not looking forward to it as I like owning my vehicle outright.

We aren't into the latest cars, we drive our cars until they almost die and then get a one or two year old. Like Dingfod says, let someone else pay for the depreciation. We love our Camry but it is old ('92) and would like to buy a newer model, but the debt part is what is putting me off.

If technology isn't going to change that much, perhaps we should just go ahead and buy one.

[California Tanker]

The next 'wave' of technology which is coming to the US will be the Euro-Diesels, which should start showing in the next few months. They're getting a lot better at meeting the US environmental laws, for example the Audi R8 Diesel (Yes, really!) just shown in Detroit is actually California-Legal, and a whole bunch of cars will become legal when the US changes the composition of its diesel fuel later this year. Watch Prius sales take a serious hit with VW Golf sales shooting up.

As to the original question, I'm a 'buy' person. You get a lot more flexibility over where you drive, how much you drive, and how long you drive it. In three years, your situation could change to the point that you no longer can afford to lease a car, but if you had bought and paid off one, you could continue driving it without making continual payments until your situation has stabilised enough. I like backup plans.

NTM

[godfry n. glad]

I tend to buy two year olds, and I suspect I'd be a lease aftermarket buyer, if I'd look into it. The last car I bought was two year old with 30,000 miles on it. It is now ten years old and has 75,000 miles on it.

I think Dingfod has some superlative points.

[Dingfod]

Tom and Ray Magliozzi, "Click and Clack, the Tappet Brothers" of NPR's "Car Talk" fame claim buying a car that is 2-3 years old and driving it for 10 years is the best use of a person's car-buying money. Just keep repairing it and repairing it, it's still cheaper than buying another one.

[Plant Woman]

I love that show!

[godfry n. glad]

Yeah, me, too! Great advice, great humor.

Drive now, talk later.

[godfry n. glad]

Also...Word on the street is that the hybrids are not very 'green' at all. Not inexpensive, either, if you have electrical problems.

The specialty batteries are bad news at this time.

[ShottleBop]

No because of the nature of hybrids. An electric motor married to a smaller gas engine. If you're driving a hybrid in a city, the normal stop-go nature of city driving allows the electric motor to take over part of the job and be recharged by braking or the gas engine.

If you're driving the car over long distances, you run out of juice for running the electric motor and it's gas engine all the way on a smaller tank so you may end up paying more for the gas.

I've driven my Prius on 500-mile trips. Even with Mrs. ShottleBop's lead foot (80 mph), we averaged around 40 mpg. The only time we came close to draining the battery was coming back over the Grapevine north of LA, when we were doing 70 mph uphill.

[ShottleBop]

Another thing about leasing: my cousin, who leases a car, was in an accident. The other driver was at fault, and paid for the repairs--some $17,000. His leasing company has told him that the fact that the car was in an accident, even though not his fault, would reduce the value of the car at the end of the lease, and he would be required to pay for the reduction in value.The value at the end of the lease is normally established in the lease agreement, less damages that would need to be repaired of course. I've never heard of a car being reduced in value because of an accident that had been expertly repaired, nor any lease being changed because of it. If what you say is so, it would be another claim on the insurance, I would think.

My cousin is trying to assert that claim against the other party's insurer. (I think that the terms of his lease may require him to pay any difference between a target value at the end of the lease (based on anticipated mileage and normal wear and tear) and the actual value of the car. He wasn't entirely sure.)

[Plant Woman]

Thanks everyone for your comments, it helps to have more opinions.