Buying 2nd hand-surely low milage is better than newer year?

dinneenp

Hi,
Looking at getting a 2nd hand car.
Surely lower milage is a lot more important that the year of the car (ignoring the 2008 2nd 1/2 or newer lower tax)? As long as it's the same version/trim etc.
What I mean is a that a 2009 with 50,000 miles would be better than a 2010 with 70,000 miles.

I suppose though people often look for a newer reg so the 2010 might be more expensive.
And the older one would have more chance of electrics etc. going wrong as it's older?

cheers,
Pa.

Intensive Care Bear

I don't think either is better, the main things i would look for is condition, spec and price.

Mycroft H

Condition, condition, condition and then service history.

Anan1

dinneenp wrote: »

What I mean is a that a 2009 with 50,000 miles would be better than a 2010 with 70,000 miles.

That depends on the miles - all miles are not equal.

Yakuza

Anan1 wrote: »

That depends on the miles - all miles are not equal.

+1
I'd take 70000 motorway miles over 50000 back road miles!

djimi

Service history trumps both. Id prefer to own a 2 year old car with 80000 miles on it than a 4 year old car with 40000 miles on it if the 2 year old car has been looked after and serviced properly and there is no documented history with the 4 year old car.

subway

as above OP, but you can of course use most irish peoples reg plate snobbery to get yourelf a bargain