Year vs Mileage...which to choose?

Hello, Just signed-up to the forum. I've been looking to pickup something fun as new daily driver..........3 pedals, RWD type of thing and keep finding good information here so figured I'd join.

Narrowed it down to the Cadillac ATS manual / rwd with the 2.0T...seems like a bargain and lots of mods for 2.0T available. I went from a BMW e30, e36 to e46  before family obligations took over my vehicle choices and the ATS seems to be the most similar late-model vehicle to my old e46 coupe. 

While shopping for ATS came across a 2013 Cadillac XTS with only 9k miles. That's right 9k miles, the car looks brand new. Stereotypical Cadillac owner, older guy bought it new, vacationed a lot and barely drove it. Price is good and considering getting it for my wife. We do lots of road trips, back seats have lots of room for the kiddos, fully loaded and a very comfortable car, but I could get a newer 2017+ with 40k miles for slightly more, or even wait and get something completely different. 

Generally speaking what's the prevailing wisdom in this? Assuming everything is the same - an 8 Year old vehicle with 9k miles or a newer 4 year old car with 40k miles?

Thanks.

Are there any differences between the different years? Major changes?

All else equal I tend to go for low mileage unless it's too low. 9k in 8 years is low but not "parked for years" kinda low. That sounds like grandma driving to church kinda low which I'm all about.

I'd tend to go for the older lower mileage car  too.

In reply to Blinker_Oil :

Went shopping specifically for rwd and 3 pedals. 

So, with that in mind your question is which fwd and auto trans car should you buy?  Both are low miles.  I would look at things like tires condition.  That can be a nearly $1k expense.  The 8 year old 9k tires are not worn out but they have likely aged out and should be replaced.  Read the code dates on the tires.  I would guess that the 40k tires are past their half-life point so that car will need tires soon too.  

Reports on the 2013 XTS generally call it the Cadillac of Chevy Impalas (built on the same assembly line and same chassis.)

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15114868/2013-cadillac-xts-fwd-premium-test-review/ 

https://driving.ca/cadillac/xts/reviews/road-test/road-test-2013-cadillac-xts-6

Neither. 

Condition.

For me, it depends on where in the country you live and where it was stored/where you will store it. Cars not garaged where I live typically get beat down by the sun long before any mechanical issues arise. Obviously it also depends on the car. Newer is usually better, but not always the case. 

John Welsh said:

In reply to Blinker_Oil :

Went shopping specifically for rwd and 3 pedals. 

So, with that in mind your question is which fwd and auto trans car should you buy? 

I know right? Still after a manual rwd for myself, I mentioned in the OP this vehicle would be specifically for my wife. 

Tires are good call, something to look at for sure - thanks. Checking out the car tomorrow.

Thanks for the responses all - something to think about when I go see the car tomorrow.

In reply to buzzboy :

Good answer - thanks. Looking into it and I believe it's mainly cosmetic differences and an upgraded Infotainment system between the model years. From what I've been reading the Cadillac CUE Infotainment in the 2013 is craptastic and much better is later models. 

I'm thinking the same re: mileage vs year. As long as being driven, albeit very little, should okay for the most part. 

It depends on the deal and the car. Maintenance records and a good previous owner can trump low miles on a lot of cars. Most of the problems that I have had with cars aren't from the factory. It's usually POS syndrome. Previous Owner Stuff!!! 

Aftermarket ignition junk.

Deferred maintenance.

Cheap replacement parts. 

Loose fasteners and poorly executed modifications, typically Jinky cold air setups and leaky exhaust. 

Of course, sun damage, rust, flood damage, etc  can be location specific. 
 

My first concern is the previous owner and documented history on the car.  Based on your description, I'd go for the 9k car.

If it's a DD, infotainment got much better after 2010 or so.  If it's important, make sure the bluetooth, speaker, etc. are good

All things deteriorate with time.  A higher mile car has probably had the things which deteriorate replaced already.  A low mile car will likely be due for them soon.   Often you will pay a premium for a low mile car which tends to have a terrible ROI.

That being said I fully agree with Z31.  Condition.  On my last car I looked at a range of years and mileages, ended up right in the middle of the pack because the one I found was cared for.   Hell I just helped my dad buy a 200,000 mile truck that runs, drives and looks like has about 1/4 of that on it.  It was cared for.  A vehicle like that hasn't had deferred maintenance just waiting to rear its head on you.   

z31maniac said:

Neither. 

Condition.

QFT!

This was what I was going to post.

Donebrokeit said:

z31maniac said:

Neither. 

Condition.

QFT!

 

This was what I was going to post.

Agreed.

Low miles can mean that its been such a pile of crap that they can never drive it and high miles can mean that it's been so reliable they've driven it everywhere.

How long am I going to own the car? How much is the car? Year typically will impact the value more than mileage, but only to a point - probably for about 5-8 years from new. For those situations, I'll typically look for an older vehicle with less miles. 

There isn't much difference in a 1994 and a 1997 Miata (other than OBD2); but there is a lot of difference in a 1993 and a 1994 Miata. As time goes on, that difference becomes less important to a point that it does not matter. Same with the mileage. 

I'll buy the best value within my parameters - for cars that are at the bottom of the depreciation curve, that is often the top and bottom of the market. A good example will ostensibly appreciate.  A not great example, well it can't lose value if it doesn't have much value to begin with.

I'm buying a '94 Saturn with 23K miles off DeMuro's auction site as a long term driver for my daughter.  Picking it up in California and driving it back to Wisconsin as an excuse for a road trip.  It's the extreme version of the years vs miles tradeoff, at least in years.  Will be interesting to see how this works out.

z31maniac said:

Neither. 

Condition.

Maintenance records count for a lot.  Which one was better maintained?

Always mileage for me

[sarcasm] which worked out SO well for me on my last purchase [/sarcasm]

(search the forum for "Branger" and you'll get the idea)

You're buying nicer than I tend to, so maybe you'll be able to be pickier, and also find something with records, which I've rarely gotten. for rule of thumb I've heard it's years, per my recently retired mechanic friend Chuck and somewhat per ConsumerReports, too. I don't have a link handy but they did a bit once about how reliability drops off a cliff at ten years. Granted, law of averages means that's right where 130,000 miles hits, too, so maybe a bit of chicken vs. egg there. 
 

Chuck's explanation was that soft things wear out with time.