Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:
- quote -

The first item on your list is the only viable one, and only for
vehicles that are unusual. Honda Civics, even 10-15 year old ones, are
quite common. (Almost 40% of the cars in service in the USA are over 10
years old.) It is generally easier to find a mechanic familiar with an
older car, after all most of them learn their trade on older vehicles!
As for the smog laws, older cars get grandfathered in so the laws don't
apply to them anyway.

- quote -

In other words, the suggestions on this group have been all over the
map. :-)

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Augustine <evandro[at]mailinator.com> wrote:
- quote -

And no matter the source, 15,9375,000 BTUs of energy is 15,9375,000 BTUs
of energy. Personally, I expect that a car's construction uses
considerably more energy than that, but I don't have access to the
source data to see what they might have missed.

BTW, according to
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/...html#anchor_72 a car's
construction uses over 1,000 gallons of oil, not gas.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

"Mark Bole" <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote
- quote -

When a car is over around 150k miles, one is looking at
periodic "lump" repair costs. Only four areas come to mind
as possibly economically justifying giving up an older car:
needs new suspension, new transmission, new engine, or new
steering system. If these four items appear to be holding up
fine, then insofar as "getting the most bang for your buck"
is concerned, the car is likely still worth continuing to
drive. What I think the frugal person should await is when
one of these four systems is unbearable (in the case of an
old suspension, lousy ride) or flat-out broken (tranny,
engine, steering). Then they should ask the question this
gentleman is asking. Other old car costs (new oil pan
gasket; various seals in and about the engine) are not that
great.

Anyone saying they want to replacing his/her Honda because
it needs a new timing belt is not telling the whole story.
More likely they want a snazzier* car, or they really want
air bags. Other safety features (like ABS) are highly
questionable.

*Not to begrudge anyone wanting this. I have increased what
I am willing to spend for a used car because the really old
ones are usually buckets as far as the suspension is
concerned.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Douglas Johnson wrote:

- quote -

I was just repeating something I'd heard in a business setting years
earlier. Even if the math is a more complicated than I implied at
first, I still think it *sounds* like a really solid and easy rule! ;-)

- quote -

Well, what does then? The older the car, the harder parts are to get,
and the less likely you are to find a mechanic intimately familiar with
the model and year. Some cars are so old (yet less than twenty years)
that even when operating to manufacturer specs, they don't pass modern
smog laws in some states.

I'm still claiming there must be *some* point when repair costs
accelerate for an older car. Since older cars (excluding collectibles)
are cheaper, then there would be a strong inverse correlation between
the value of the car and annual repair costs.

- quote -

To tie this back to financial planning and the OP, I got three things
out of his message: older car (14 years), high mileage (180K), and
peeling paint. What we don't know, although some hints were given, is
the role this car plays in sustaining his (family's) earning capacity,
and what the condition of non-essential systems (air conditioning,
sound, safety/security, interior coverings and finishes) are. If he
lives in the snow belt, there's sure to be some rust by now.

With those conditions, I'm still advising that after ten years, let's
say fifteen max, it makes sense to buy a newer used car, say in the
five-year old range, and plan to then keep it for another ten years or
so. Others have suggested keeping it for another five years, never
selling it, and at least one other suggestion to trade in a for a newER
(not brand new) vehicle.

-Mark Bole

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:


- quote -

Just factor a rental into the repair estimates. But as I said, it has been very
reliable. It has had unexpected repairs only once in 13 years. Everything else
could be scheduled.

- quote -

You had originally suggested 2 years.

- quote -

Notice that, in your example, the value of the car only shows up as reducing the
net cost of buying the new one. It really has no effect on the fix or replace
question.

A couple of other points. One is that $5,000 Explorer is only going to be 3 or
4 years newer than my $1,500 Explorer. You're going be back on the high
maintenance curve before you've broken even.

Another is that you only do essential maintenance (including essential
preventative maintenance) on cars of this age. Once you have been presented
with a $750 repair estimate, the value of the car declines by $750 until you fix
it. The alternative is to foist it off on some unsuspecting buyer.

-- Doug

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Jul 6, 6:30*am, Pete <s...[at]nowhere.com> wrote:
- quote -

Which means absolutely nothing. The energy used to build it might
have come from solar or wind plants and it would still be equivalent
to 1000gals. of gas.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Mark Bole wrote:
I'm talking about
- quote -


Chip

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Douglas Johnson wrote:
- quote -

Who said anything about a "new" replacement? Not me.

How many miles do you put on it? Do you rely on it for your livelihood?
Can you afford to leave it in the shop at any old unexpected time, and
be without a vehicle for a day or two?

If I am spending $750/year cash for repairs to a $1,500 car, and I
replace it with a $5,000 car and reduce my repair bills by two-thirds
for the next seven years, then I am even or ahead.

(Incidentally, I don't think your example or my sample numbers above are
anywhere close to reality for the vast majority of drivers, but I don't
have any studies to back it up. There will always be the extreme
example of the miracle car that still runs like new twenty years later.)

Let's put it in analytic terms -- if repair cost and depreciation are
strictly straight-line functions of time, then it really doesn't make
any difference how long we keep the car. But everyone seems to agree
that the rate of depreciation is high up front and then slows, and I
would argue that repair cost is the converse -- more growth on the back
end than the front end. Therefore there must be a point of diminishing
returns where the ever-decreasing benefit of holding on to the car
longer finally becomes less than the ever-increasing cost.

If you agree, where do you think the point is? I think it's a lot
closer to ten years than fifteen.

-Mark Bole

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:

- quote -

Could you show me the arithmetic on this? I still don't see how the resale
value of the car relates to the fix or replace decision.

I drive a 1995 Ford Explorer worth maybe $1500. It is very dependable and has
been averaging about $300 a year in repairs. A new replacement would be about
$26,000. Why should a $750 repair bill make me trade it?

-- Doug

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Douglas Johnson wrote:
- quote -

True enough, at least for the high-cost status cars. I'm talking about
the other extreme, the automobile equivalent of dirty jeans with holes
and a threadbare t-shirt with something mildly obscene on it.

His 14-year old car has peeling paint, some major overdue engine
maintenance, we don't know about the interior condition or whether the
windshield is cracked but can guess.

Now, he said he only drives 4K miles/year and has another family car, so
maybe this is just the beater for weekend errands, in which case I would
recommend keeping it. Otherwise, I still recommend the "replace when
repairs are 50% of value" rule, it's easy to follow and pretty much
guarantees cash-flow payback in two years.

Speaking of clothes, I wonder how the financial advice would fall
regarding the economics of buying new clothes regularly vs. wearing used
ones well beyond when the edges start to get a tiny bit frayed. For
example, are there financial planning lessons to be learned from "What
Not To Wear" (cable TV show)? Do they clearly demonstrate a pay-off
from the $5K or so spent on clothes in each episode?

-Mark Bole

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Ron Peterson <ron[at]shell.core.com> wrote:

- quote -

Sorry, I should have snipped a little more. I was suggesting the resale value
of the car is irrelevant as to whether you should repair it or not. That
decision should be based on the cost of repairing vs. the net cost of buying
another car. Yes, likelihood of further repairs, reliability, and safety play
into the decision as well. But those are often used as rationalizations for
wanting a new toy.

But since you bring it up, I tend to drop collision on a car when I can afford
to write it off. Don't forget. If the car is totaled, the insurance company
will only pay the blue book (retail, usually), less the deductible. For an
older car, that might be only a few hundred dollars.

-- Doug

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Ron Peterson <ron[at]shell.core.com> wrote:
- quote -

And if your car is never totaled (which is *far* more likely,) then that
insurance has been an albatross on your finances for years.

The OP has made it clear that he would not be financially devastated if
this car disappeared tomorrow, so insurance (beyond what is legally
required,) is a waste of money for it.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Jul 6, 9:36*am, Douglas Johnson <p...[at]classtech.com> wrote:
- quote -

If your car is totaled, the insurance will only pay approximately the
resale value. Collision insurance is reduced for older cars, so it
makes sense to keep it.

--
Ron

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

"Bhoot Nath" <deja_bhoot2000[at]yahoo.com> wrote
Re replacing a 1996 Civic, 180k miles, original and sole
owner:
- quote -

Hi, original and only owner of a 91 Civic here, 204k miles.
Runs like a top, but except for alignments, I personally
maintain it with TLC. I recommend posting your query to
rec.autos.makers.honda and alt.autos.honda. I read and post
at these groups regularly. The regulars are very helpful and
have great experience. For now: The $1500 estimate above is
quite a bit on the high side high. Was this a Honda
dealership estimate? Have the shop that did this estimate
break it down for you by parts and labor. Then get an
estimate from a non-dealer import repair shop for the same
work.

- quote -

I have been shopping for an older Honda for a friend.
Everyone selling and with any smarts uses www.kbb.com. It is
your best online resource for pricing used cars.
www.edmunds.com prices cars much lower, for some reason.
Craigs List and newspaper ad prices are consistent with
KBB.Com

You know this car well and have a maintenance history on it.
What I am finding with used cars is that, unless one buys
from a dealership (paying more!), it is usual for used cars
for sale to have multiple owners, flawed titles, and no
maintenance history to turn over. E.g. odometer tampering,
accidents, filthy inside and out, etc. Gosh knows how they
have been maintained. If the choice is between getting a
lower mileage, newer used car and keeping this one, from
what I know of Hondas (read: religious belief in their
reliability) I think you are far better off keeping this
one.

A few other things you want to consider before making this
decision: Does the car handle well? Specifically, does the
suspension seem sound? If driven on salty roads etc. in
winter, what people generally see is that the suspension
needs rebuilding, especially replacing bushings and ball
joints. Now this could add up. If not driven on salty roads
and it drives well, I would not be concerned about this.

Economics wise, unless you simply like driving a newer
better looking car, I would rule out looking for a used car,
do the maintenance on this one, and figure it will last you
5-10 more years pretty easily.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

In article
<bc849604-835f-4710-9df3-0d80736ebc52[at]z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> ,
Bhoot Nath <deja_bhoot2000[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

I am on my 8th Ford Ranger. I have always traded every 2-1/2 years
as the vehicle hits 75,000 miles. That has been expensive, but I
wanted to keep a nice newer truck to drive.

On my last trade in, the Ranger #7 was in near perfect condition,
but I felt I gave it away in the trade. That left a bad feeling,
so when Ranger #8 was due for trade in, I started doing some math.
I came up with, even in a worst case, scenario, I could never
outspend on maintenance what a new Ranger would cost.

Ranger #8 now has 230,000. It just passed the mark where it did
the work of 3 trucks, and now is in the area of the 4th vehicle
that I would have needed if I had kept to the plan of trading in
at 75K.

While I haven't run the numbers recently, last time I updated my
spreadsheet model, I was ahead by something like $20,000 over
where I would be if I had traded. Not only that, but by doing
all the maintenance, and replacing some key chassis bushings
(little rubber bumpers), the Ranger still looks, drives, and
handles essentially like a new vehicle.

I wouldn't hesitate to drop $3,000 into an older car. But
I think that there is some criteria that you have to consider.
The car has to be basically sound, it should have modern safety
equipment (airbags), and both the engine and transmission need
to be sound.

As far as the timing belt and water pump go, don't skip it.
In this car, the timing belt drives the water pump. The water
pump will run about 100K. If it seizes up, it will ruin the
timing belt. If the timing belt breaks, the engine will quit.
When it quits, the valves will be in a open configuration, and
then the pistons will come up to top dead center, and one by
one, bend each valve, and destroy you engine. This is called
an interference style engine, and a water pump or timing belt
issue is fatal to the engine.

BTW, don't let anyone scare you with stories about getting
stranded or stuck on a bridge. That can happen to any car.
In fact, and older car might be less likely to do this since
it has a proven track record.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III * * * * * 612-720-2854 * * * * * *john[at]johnweeks.com
Newave Communications * * * * * * * * * * * * http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:


- quote -

Let me suggest that the resale value of the car is relevant only if you are
going to resell it. If you are going to keep driving it, then the issue is the
cost of repairs vs. the net cost of buying another car.

- quote -

Reliability and safety are real issues, but are hard to quantify. That makes it
easy to justify an unnecessary trade-in.

- quote -

Or lucky enough to have neighbors and co-workers that don't judge people by
their cars. "Those that matter don't mind, those that mind don't matter."

-- Doug

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

"Bhoot Nath" <deja_bhoot2000[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bc849604-835f-4710-9df3-0d80736ebc52[at]z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
- quote -


I find your numbers are probably too optimistic.

Using Edmunds
http://www.edmunds.com/tmv/used/honda/index.html

I did a little test run. Used car pricing varies depending on many factors,
including age, condition and location. I don't know your location, so I
used my zip code [Brooklyn, NY]. I don't know what model you own, color,
etc. So, I picked the highest line 4 door from the 96 model year. I used
175K as the mileage. Given you description of the body's condition, I chose
"average" -- that is a generous description, given your peeling paint and
dings, a dealer or other buyer would see your car's condition as
significantly below average.

I chose "gray" as the color, with A/C, 4 speed automatic and an AM/FM
cassette. The values suggested by Edmunds are significantly below what you
presently think the value of the car is:

-- trade in value -- $639
-- private party sale -- $1094
-- dealer retail -- $1887

Remember, my numbers are all guesswork -- imaginary car, imaginary
location. Keep in mind that you see the car as valuable because of
emotional factors [it always started, never gives trouble, it got us home in
that snowstorm, etc.] -- a competent buyer will consider it sans emotion.

I'd suggest that you do some further research -- use Edmunds, do a google
for Kelley Blue Book, and for NADA. You will get differing numbers
[markets are art, not science]. But I don't think you will get numbers as
high as what you currently project -- any 12+ year old car with peeling
paint and 175K mileage is likely to be difficult for a dealer to resell [and
make a requisite profit from] -- and not all that easy to sell to a private
party for 3.5K cash.

If my surmises are in the ballpark, what I'd consider doing is the
following:

I'd take that $3000 expense money you are projecting and put it towards a
newer vehicle.

Go to Consumer Reports -- read their car buying issue [in libraries, or for
a small fee, you can buy a year's full access to their website -- I
subscribe to both their paper edition and their website, it's quite
worthwhile]. I think you will find their evaluative philosophy and
criteria in line with yours. That will help you get an idea of what is out
there, what is reliable in terms of used cars and new cars, what fills your
needs, what to avoid, what is worth paying for, what realistic cost
projections are, etc.....

I'd consider a new car, or a low-mileage used car no more than 3-4 years
old. If buying a used car, unless I could buy such a car from an individual
I knew, and it was a car whose history I trusted --- I'd purchase it from a
reliable new car dealer. Yes, a new car dealer. The best combination of
used car + new car dealer would be a new car dealer selling the same brand
of used car, or a used car from/manufactured by that dealer's corporate
parent manufacturer [e.g., a Mercury from a Ford dealer, a Honda from an
Acura dealer, etc.].

Yes, buying such a used car would cost more than from a private party or
third party dealer. But......... here's why I'd spend that extra money:
As far as I know, in the real world, a dealer wants to market used cars that
will not give him headaches, or sully his reputation. If he takes back a
car from a lease, or gets it in some other transaction, he will tend to keep
the very best for himself, and let the doubtful and clunker vehicles go to
auction. If he needs used cars for inventory, he shops for inventory with
other dealers he trusts and/or thru his corporate supply chain. In all
cases, he is not looking of for headache vehicles. He does not want a shiny
vehicle that lived thru Katrina, or was hit and reassembled by artisans,
etc. So, in the case of a *reputable* dealer, what is sitting on his used
car lot is likely to be prescreened in terms of quality.

[the above theory goes out the window if you shop with a lousy dealer]......

As for the old car, you can either sell it, or, if you do not want the
aggravation, I like the suggestion that you donate it.

HTH

albert





- quote -

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Jul 5, 5:15*pm, Bhoot Nath <deja_bhoot2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
- quote -

Estimate the cost per year (over its useful life) of a replacement
car, and compare that to the cost per year of keeping your present car
(over its useful life). If you can realize the difference (over the
estimated useful life of your present car) when you sell, then the two
are equal. (I think this is right!:-)

Assuming a new car will be more expensive, and just pulling an example
out of the air:
New - $20,000 + $10,000 repairs over 15 years = $30,000 / 15 = $2,000
per year;
Old - $12,000 repairs over 8 years = $12,000 / 8 = $1,500 per year.

If you can sell for $4,000, then the alternatives are equal (the
$4,000 compensates you for the $500 higher cost per year of the new
car, over the 8 years, after which you would have to buy a new car
anyway). You can adjust for interest on the foregone $25,000, possible
higher insurance, etc.. You also want to include the availability of
replacement parts on older model cars, and how reliable your mechanic
is to give you that information.

The rest is personal preference.

P.S. Did you use car wax on your present car?

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:15:08 -0500, Bhoot Nath wrote:

- quote -

Another reason I heard recently for hanging on to an old car, or buying a
*used* one, is that it takes the equivalent of 1,000 gallons of gas/petrol
to make a new car.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Bhoot Nath <deja_bhoot2000[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

What you are saying above is that there is absolutely no reason to get
rid of the car. As such, I'm not sure why you are even asking the
question.

- quote -

If they have any idea what they are doing, even a cheep paint job should
last 4+ years. That's $200 a year.

- quote -

So this $1500 investment should last 90K miles, at 4K miles/year, that's
$67 per year.

- quote -

All of which should last at least 40K miles or $70/year.

You are griping because the car cost $337 per year in maintenance?

- quote -

Let's outline two options.

1) You invest the $3K into this car and it will be worth maybe $1600 in
5 years. Total cost $4.9K

2) You invest $10K into a very good used car which will be worth $4400
in five years. Total cost $5.6K. Or maybe you end up buying a car that
has hidden problems and it cost you even more...

I say go with the devil you know, and think about what that little Honda
would look like if you dumped the full $10K into it! It could end up on
the cover of magazines!

- quote -

The timing belt and water pump could probably last another 10 years at
the rate you drive the car, but if the timing belt goes out, the car is
done for.

- quote -

Well hell. If you can afford it and it won't impact your savings, then
get a new car. Instead of throwing away the old one, give it to a worthy
cause and take a tax deduction while feeling good about giving.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.