Accord versus Taurus Economics
I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord.
The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation and the Accord low depreciation. Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an economic point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to eventually account for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with average mileage? I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, tighter, better made car, and some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make an business case for the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the extra money. : ) Fred |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Don't do it, I had a Taurus once and I had every kind of problems, that I
decided to sell it a few months later. And of course, it put me upside down. I am glad I got rid of that P.O.S. Never again, I can tell you that. "Fred Smith" <fred@freddy.com> wrote in message news:410fdf31.0@news.syr.edu... : I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. : The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper : for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation : and the Accord low depreciation. : : Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an : economic : point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to : eventually account : for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with : average mileage? : : I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, : tighter, better made car, and : some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make : an business case for : the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the : extra money. : ) : : Fred : : : |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Don't do it, I had a Taurus once and I had every kind of problems, that I
decided to sell it a few months later. And of course, it put me upside down. I am glad I got rid of that P.O.S. Never again, I can tell you that. "Fred Smith" <fred@freddy.com> wrote in message news:410fdf31.0@news.syr.edu... : I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. : The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper : for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation : and the Accord low depreciation. : : Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an : economic : point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to : eventually account : for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with : average mileage? : : I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, : tighter, better made car, and : some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make : an business case for : the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the : extra money. : ) : : Fred : : : |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> > but I'm wondering if I can make an business case for the Honda Accord. I > would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the extra money. : ) With the Accord, you won't have to buy a new car after 5 years. That alone should save you enough money to justify it's price. If given regular basic maintenance, the Accord should last you 10-15 years or more. Eric |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> > but I'm wondering if I can make an business case for the Honda Accord. I > would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the extra money. : ) With the Accord, you won't have to buy a new car after 5 years. That alone should save you enough money to justify it's price. If given regular basic maintenance, the Accord should last you 10-15 years or more. Eric |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Remember something else, this is a Honda group. I am sure you'll get
different answers at a Ford group. "Fred Smith" <fred@freddy.com> wrote in message news:410fdf31.0@news.syr.edu... : I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. : The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper : for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation : and the Accord low depreciation. : : Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an : economic : point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to : eventually account : for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with : average mileage? : : I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, : tighter, better made car, and : some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make : an business case for : the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the : extra money. : ) : : Fred : : : |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Remember something else, this is a Honda group. I am sure you'll get
different answers at a Ford group. "Fred Smith" <fred@freddy.com> wrote in message news:410fdf31.0@news.syr.edu... : I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. : The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper : for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation : and the Accord low depreciation. : : Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an : economic : point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to : eventually account : for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with : average mileage? : : I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, : tighter, better made car, and : some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make : an business case for : the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the : extra money. : ) : : Fred : : : |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation > and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an > economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, > tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make > an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the > extra money. : ) > > Fred > ====================== The RESALE VALUE graph for an Accord eventually levels out after a few years, so you'll always get a fair buck back out of it. The graph for a Taurus continues to drop and reaches close to ZERO. At least that's what the Auto Trader prices seem to show. :-) 'Curly' |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation > and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an > economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, > tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make > an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the > extra money. : ) > > Fred > ====================== The RESALE VALUE graph for an Accord eventually levels out after a few years, so you'll always get a fair buck back out of it. The graph for a Taurus continues to drop and reaches close to ZERO. At least that's what the Auto Trader prices seem to show. :-) 'Curly' |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of > depreciation and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly > from an economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a > nicer, tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I > can make an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to > spend the extra money. : ) > > Fred The Accord naturally is your car of choice, however dealing with a wife you may find yourself behind the wheel of a Taurus and completely redecorated home. Mike |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of > depreciation and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly > from an economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a > nicer, tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I > can make an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to > spend the extra money. : ) > > Fred The Accord naturally is your car of choice, however dealing with a wife you may find yourself behind the wheel of a Taurus and completely redecorated home. Mike |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of > depreciation and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly > from an economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a > nicer, tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I > can make an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to > spend the extra money. : ) > > Fred Besides which you can get a taupe Taurus and it blends so well with the new roof and trim paint on the house. Mike |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
Fred Smith wrote:
> I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of > depreciation and the Accord low depreciation. > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly > from an economic > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > eventually account > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > average mileage? > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a > nicer, tighter, better made car, and > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I > can make an business case for > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to > spend the extra money. : ) > > Fred Besides which you can get a taupe Taurus and it blends so well with the new roof and trim paint on the house. Mike |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
That's a pretty accurate statement.....I fetched $220 at the junkyard for my
89 Taurus Wagon a few years back that had 185,000 miles and was pretty well shot. They gave me more than a sedan, because they needed wagons. If it has still been in decent running condition, it would have been worth $1,000 tops, even though it was in good physical shape. Older comparable Hondas still fetch $2500. "motsco_ _" <"motsco_ _"@interbaun.com> wrote in message news:410FED42.6080608@interbaun.com... > Fred Smith wrote: > > I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation > > and the Accord low depreciation. > > > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an > > economic > > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > > eventually account > > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > > average mileage? > > > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, > > tighter, better made car, and > > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make > > an business case for > > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the > > extra money. : ) > > > > Fred > > > > > ====================== > > The RESALE VALUE graph for an Accord eventually levels out after a few > years, so you'll always get a fair buck back out of it. The graph for a > Taurus continues to drop and reaches close to ZERO. At least that's what > the Auto Trader prices seem to show. :-) > > 'Curly' > |
Re: Accord versus Taurus Economics
That's a pretty accurate statement.....I fetched $220 at the junkyard for my
89 Taurus Wagon a few years back that had 185,000 miles and was pretty well shot. They gave me more than a sedan, because they needed wagons. If it has still been in decent running condition, it would have been worth $1,000 tops, even though it was in good physical shape. Older comparable Hondas still fetch $2500. "motsco_ _" <"motsco_ _"@interbaun.com> wrote in message news:410FED42.6080608@interbaun.com... > Fred Smith wrote: > > I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord. > > The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper > > for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation > > and the Accord low depreciation. > > > > Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an > > economic > > point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to > > eventually account > > for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with > > average mileage? > > > > I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer, > > tighter, better made car, and > > some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make > > an business case for > > the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the > > extra money. : ) > > > > Fred > > > > > ====================== > > The RESALE VALUE graph for an Accord eventually levels out after a few > years, so you'll always get a fair buck back out of it. The graph for a > Taurus continues to drop and reaches close to ZERO. At least that's what > the Auto Trader prices seem to show. :-) > > 'Curly' > |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands