James Morse
1997 XLT 4.0L 4x4 1999 Mazda B3000 2wd
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2021
- Messages
- 1,891
- City
- Roanoke VA
- Vehicle Year
- 1997 and 1999
- Engine
- 4.0 V6
- Transmission
- Automatic
- Tire Size
- 31x10.5-15 K02's on the Ranger, 235/75R15 on Mazda
- My credo
- The perfect is the enemy of the good.
No not financing.
You are correct it would be a huge down payment but then I'd have payment every month, plus, I'd have to carry collision.
I can budget for expected repairs/maintenance and still have it a lot less than a car payment on newer.
And in some ways I like the old school stuff better than new. Seems to have more heart, that's just me. Obviously if you offered me a 2023 real cheap, I'd take it, but that's not happening.
The thing is, I'm not saying the truck looks brand new, but, not that far from it. So what would a newer truck have that it doesn't? I'm hard pressed to answer that question. Better ride, I guess.
I drive maybe 5k miles/yr right now.
I see lot of '06-09 which is what I was looking at that are beat to h*ll, look bad, drive bad... and more money... for what? Maybe a perception they are more reliable, but seems to me if everything is up to snuff on a 97 it should just keep working.
I still think on my 99 I can get, maybe, 4-5 grand for it, seeing as it drives great and has zero issues. If that were true, I'd be out of pocket maybe 5 grand for the '97, which I think is not a lot of money for a serious upgrade which by that I mean basically 4x4, 4.0L, and power everything, compared to 4x2, 3.0L, and no power anything. Inside pf 97 is clean, no tears or burns, hard to imagine really for its age. There were two owners, and looks like they both were pretty careful of it.
It's not so much the money (talking old vs new) as it is that I just object in general principle to spending tons on a vehicle if I can get one cheaper that does everything I want and looks cosmetically good and is easy to work on.
All that said, you certainly do have a point.
You are correct it would be a huge down payment but then I'd have payment every month, plus, I'd have to carry collision.
I can budget for expected repairs/maintenance and still have it a lot less than a car payment on newer.
And in some ways I like the old school stuff better than new. Seems to have more heart, that's just me. Obviously if you offered me a 2023 real cheap, I'd take it, but that's not happening.
The thing is, I'm not saying the truck looks brand new, but, not that far from it. So what would a newer truck have that it doesn't? I'm hard pressed to answer that question. Better ride, I guess.
I drive maybe 5k miles/yr right now.
I see lot of '06-09 which is what I was looking at that are beat to h*ll, look bad, drive bad... and more money... for what? Maybe a perception they are more reliable, but seems to me if everything is up to snuff on a 97 it should just keep working.
I still think on my 99 I can get, maybe, 4-5 grand for it, seeing as it drives great and has zero issues. If that were true, I'd be out of pocket maybe 5 grand for the '97, which I think is not a lot of money for a serious upgrade which by that I mean basically 4x4, 4.0L, and power everything, compared to 4x2, 3.0L, and no power anything. Inside pf 97 is clean, no tears or burns, hard to imagine really for its age. There were two owners, and looks like they both were pretty careful of it.
It's not so much the money (talking old vs new) as it is that I just object in general principle to spending tons on a vehicle if I can get one cheaper that does everything I want and looks cosmetically good and is easy to work on.
All that said, you certainly do have a point.