First off, sorry for the super long post, just maybe thinking out loud here, releasing some anxiety, any input is appreciated.

Well, DH and I have been looking, searching, watching, talking, driving, comparing, (and reading here of course,) for a few weeks now and are getting closer to making a purchase.

Inresponse to a few earlier posts, we did at least "think" about the possibility of a '98, but after a life-time of driving "older,yet not quitevintage" cars we definitely just want somethingless than 10 years old, and so in order to avoid the'01's (bad reviews, transmission problems, etc.) we upped the budget.

Based on recsfrom here, and CR info, we searched and finally found a beautiful '03 locally andmade a low-ball offer last Thursday, they countered and it's acceptable, but not enough to make us immediately jump becuase of a few flags. Really the only reasonthis '03 iseven in our price rangeis because it has high miles(112K) and was in a moderately severeaccident in it's first year of life (spun around on the interstate and smashedthe rear panel into the concrete barrier). Anyway, other than that this car isone owner, bought brand new here in town,and taken back by the same dealer as a recent trade.All dealerschedulled maintenance, high miles are allegedly highway. The timing beltwas done at 105k, tires have some life, the interior is in excellent. Oh yeah, it's theTurbo, and I "love" the wood trim. The Volvo dealer has offered us $10,400. We think there is still room to negotiate.

OK, but then we pause, hubby says he doesn't really want a car with that many miles on it. He has found aonewith only80k miles!But it's an'02. He says if we average 12k a year, that's 2 1/2 additional years of drive-time. This other car also has the rear jump-seat which is something we actually need and would be buying and adding later anyway. According to carfax, the car was originally a lease/corporate fleece vehicle for the first 3 or 4 years of life, seems to have been regularly maintained but then it gets sold in '06 and drops off the report, so the last 25k miles on it area mystery, (although I can still see the indentations from the child-safety car seats on the leather in the back seat so I have my guesses.)It has not yet had the timing belt changed, so that's an added cost a year or so down the road, not sure about the tires. But all and all, it looks clean from the pics, but it'sa few hours awayand we would have to go see it in person. The(car max-ish)type dealer is offering it at $10,900 non-negotiable. One good thing is this seller offers a 3-day-money-back-no-questions-asked guarentee, so we can have our localdealership do an inspection, and a 1 month/450 mi drive train warrenty.

So, what do you think? '02 with 80k for $10,900 or '03with 112k for $10,400?

Ironically they are the same color inside and out, sure I like the idea of a turbo and the newer year, but really, I just want someone to pull out their crystal ball and tell me which one is going to last us longer and be a better car with less "trouble". I know the '03's are good and the '01's are not so good, but is the '02 good enough?


TIA! Rosie

 

Come on.. anybody? I'm freakin' out aboutpayingalmost $1000 more for an out-of-town car that'sa year older, and my husband is wanting to call and buy this '02today!

 

It seems you've been prudent and done the necessary homework, so good for you, you're armed with info and that's more than half the battle. As far as which'll last longer, if there was someone who could do that, they'd be a gazillionaire by now. You've done all the right things and asked all the right questions. No one can tell you definitively which is the car for you. Only you know it. After sifting through all the specs and info, go with the one your intuition tells you is right. Good luck.

 

Thanks for talking me down. I think I'm afraid of commitment, lol. I think I like the '03 better cause it's "newer" and the turbo, and the interior is just like, wow! And DH is being all "practical" and talking about lower miles, and the 3rd row seat.