My original point was not comparing low mileage nice examples to high mileage ugly ones...there the rationale is obvious. My point was, there are plenty of really nice, garage kept, near mint higher mileage examples which go for a fraction of what low mileage cars go for. When you think about it, it makes no sense to spend 2-3X as much for a car that has 50K miles fewer than another example in equal condition when either car will last another 100-200K miles anyway, especially when those extra 50K miles will not come any cheaper than the later ones because of the age of the vehicle. I've concluded that it is not a case that the high mileage cars are "cheap" or a bargain, its that low mileage cars are overpriced and people drive up the price beyond what is logically justified for them.

If it makes you feel good to have a low mileage car, that's great and is enough to justify the premium I suupose. But just like buying a new car, realize you're paying a premium with respect to the cost of depreciation per mile which is disproportionate to the expected life of the car.

The insurance issue is another good one. When I bought my '98 I inquired with my State Farm agent about how they determine the value of the vehicle if it was stolen or totalled. At first they told me it was the blue book value. I asked further about which blue book value: retail sale, private party sale or trade-in? I told them that the difference for my car was about 50% between trade-in and retail sale. They didn't know what I meant and handed me off to the claims department who explained that they don't really rely on the books at all, each car is inspected and local markets are surveyed to determine the "replacement value"....yeah, right!

__________________
Marty D.

2013 C300 4Matic
1984 BMW 733i
2013 Lincoln MKz