The term "Low Milage"

[Dan Szwarc]

MMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmm.

[66Lincoupe]

Low mileage is not relative to a car's age. It is low compared to the service life of a car.

If a car has 150,000 miles, but is 50 years old, that may be only 3,000 miles a year, but it is NOT low mileage.

and as is usually the case those 150,000 miles were racked up in the first 15 - 20 years; then the car sat which is almost as bad as beating the hell out of it.

[TonyC]

In many cases, it's worse. These cars are meant to be driven, not to collect squirrel nests.

[Barry Wolk]

I was very lucky. My '77 was 25 years old when I bought it with under 13,000 miles. It belonged to a Ford exec that bought the car after a two year lease with 10,000 miles on it. He took it to his place in northern Michigan where he only used it once a week, to go out to dinner. The weren't all that social people so no one had ever sat in the back seat. Over the next 23 years it had 23 oil changes and lube jobs and gained just under 3,000 miles, but it was used regularly.

The best part of the story is that the couple would winterize their summer home and turn off the heat during the winter, but left the garage heated to 50° all winter long for the Lincoln. It even smelled like a new car inside after 25 years.

[LINC400]

I went to look at a Diamond Jubilee with 17,000 miles on it. I was expecting it to be in excellent condition with those miles and from the pics (and price). Well, it had 17,000 miles, not 117,000, but it was still in lousy shape. All the special DJE trim was cracked, broken, or missing. The velour was dirty and stained and peeling off the doors and pillars. And it ran like crap. It appears the car was beat the hell out of for 17,000 miles and then sat for 25 years.

My Givenchy with 52,000 miles was in better shape. And my '79 Cartier with 128,000 miles was in better shape than a lot of the cars I looked at with half that mileage or less. Yet everybody just wants low mileage cars.

[Dan Szwarc]

Condition is very important. My 77 has 98,000 miles and is like new inside. Except for some rust on the outside, it's very nice.

[larrys-62-53A]

I have a part time job as an old car appraiser for insurance purposes. I had to appraise a 1966 Olds 98? 2 door hardtop with 4,000 miles on it. The lady who owned it said people keep trying to buy it from her and wanted to know its true value. Did you ever see the movie "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?" That's what her house looked like, an abandoned mansion. Overgrown lawn, paint peeling, situated in a wealthy part of Toronto. Place looked deserted. The car had 4,000 miles on it all right. It was so filthy inside and out you could barely tell what colour it was. The engine was a big blob of grease and leaking fluids. The upholstery stank of mildew and cat pee. The underside had more rot than the Titanic. The lady was shriveled up with arthritis and could barely move and had to be pushing 95 years old. I did the appraisal, but would not tell here how much it was worth. "I need to research it," I kept saying as she did not want to pay me unless she agreed with the value. I finally got paid and got the hell out of there. What was it worth? 500 bucks.

[1973 Mark IV Fanatic]

I have never worried about the number of miles on my vehicles. My '73 Mark IV has accrued only 32,000 miles in its 39 years, but the car was used regularly enough through the years that everything still works as it should. I drive this car once or twice a week, weather permitting, an average of 60 miles per week total. Am I afraid to add miles to the car? Hell, no. Our old Lincolns and Continentals were made to be driven and enjoyed, and that's exactly what I do. It's not the number of miles a car has on it; it's the kind of miles. I would not pass up an old car, or any car for that matter, just because it had what some might consider to be "high miles." If they were gently driven, regularly maintained, highway miles, there's no problem there, as far as I'm concerned. I would take a pass on a low mileage car if I had reason to believe that the car was not regularly serviced and/or driven hard through the years. When my Mark IV has 132,000 miles on it, I'll still have every bit as much confidence in it as I do now. Maintenance, not miles, is key.

[Castrosua]

Im the same way, i dont care too much about mileage. The only thing mileage might give an indication on is the wear inside the car. Since age and storing would show rust or the lack of it, and how its maintained and driven will lead to its mecahnical condition.

I saw a news clip about some guy in the midwest with a 80s Town Car, with over a million documents miles, and the car, while not nearly show room, looked pretty good. And as far as i know the guy is still driving it. That car i would love to buy..that many miles is worth something to me, not as money, but as a testament to how these cars were made.

[dcm5652]

I have always thought that a " low mileage " car should only be applied to cars under 3 years old, older than that and you have a possible car with problems from lack of use, 3 years of seldom use is just enough use to have rust and " gremlins" hidden threw-out the car. But that is not always the case a-lot depends on where and how the car sat, in a climate controlled garage you won't have as many problems as a car left outside or in a damp none heated garage.