Add high miles or buy backup car?

[jts46]

It is a van first and foremost, a commercial vehicle, designed for high mileage and long distances. So use it

 

[Ciki62]

Would probably go with an old A6/5 series/e-class. Can't really beat them for long distance motorway travel. The idea of doing 500miles in 1 day in a VW UP which I sometimes have to do doesn't sound very appealing.

Long distance motorway travel. I choose VW California


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Borris]

About to spend what seems like a ridiculouly large amount of cash on a new Cali.

I do quite a lot of long distance motorway miles for work and I have the option of using the Cali or buying another cheapish car (say around £5k) to do the work miles in.

Question is which will work out the cheapest option?

How much less would a 5 year old 90k mile Cali be worth vs. a 30k mile 5 year old

Would guess an additional car would cost me at least £7-8K in tax, insurance, depreciation, tyres, repairs etc., over 5 years.

So would I lose that much with an extra 60K miles in resale value?

It seems a wicked shame to me to buy a lovely brand new Cali in order for it to spend most of its life as a hack, hammering up and down the motorways for work and in doing so depreciating rapidly. Unless the money is your main concern I would definately buy a suitable second car that you could use for all other regular day to day use. The second car needn't break the bank. There are thousands of cars for sale for less than 5K and just because they are second hand doesn't mean that wouldn't provide cheap, reliable every day transport.
Another point is that if I were looking for a five year old second hand Cali I wouldn't consider one that had 90,000 miles on the clock. Whilst these vans are basically commercial vehicles that are designed to do galactic mileage that is a lot of miles for a five year old leisure vehicle.

 

[Stuart]

It seems a wicked shame to me to buy a lovely brand new Cali in order for it to spend most of its life as a hack, hammering up and down the motorways for work and in doing so depreciating rapidly. Unless the money is your main concern I would definately buy a suitable second car that you could use for all other regular day to day use. .

See I see it the other way around. It seems a wicked shame to me to buy a lovely brand new Cali and then have to walk past it every morning and get in some inferior car. Unless the money (i.e. depreciation) is your main concern I would keep driving the Cali for regular day to day use!

 

[Jez]

My 2007 has 83k miles but is now my daily driver, getting in and doing about 600 miles a week average, but being self employed all the vat on the fuel and a recent gearbox/clutch surprise can be offset against my tax somewhat. The camper van tax here in Ireland is €102 per year the same Caravel is over €2500!!! If you love driving this machine is designed to drive, my leather heated seat after switching on the remote heater make me smile on a cold frosty morning, by all means run a second car but it's smiles per gallon for me!!

 

[WelshGas]

It seems a wicked shame to me to buy a lovely brand new Cali in order for it to spend most of its life as a hack, hammering up and down the motorways for work and in doing so depreciating rapidly. Unless the money is your main concern I would definately buy a suitable second car that you could use for all other regular day to day use. The second car needn't break the bank. There are thousands of cars for sale for less than 5K and just because they are second hand doesn't mean that wouldn't provide cheap, reliable every day transport.
Another point is that if I were looking for a five year old second hand Cali I wouldn't consider one that had 90,000 miles on the clock. Whilst these vans are basically commercial vehicles that are designed to do galactic mialeage that is a lot of miles for a five year old leisure vehicle.

Sorry, but I cannot agree with that supposition.
A vehicle that has done less than 60,000 miles in 5 years is more likely to have problems than not. A 5 yr old vehicle with 25,000 or less has probably only had 1 service, standing idle for 8 out of 12 months and slowly deteriorating and probably rarely doing long distance trips . Some of the vehicles advertised here and on other sites have done even less milage. I've had more problems with low milage vehicles than high milage over the years. Properly looked after and serviced high milage do better. Anyway, personally I didn't buy a California to keep it in " pristine " condition for the next owner I bought it for me to enjoy driving it and camping in it. If I sold it in 5 years time with 100,000 on the clock, for £0 I would consider it well worth it.

 

[Meoncoast]

I am also in the school "use it or loss it" I am happy that our van will be well used when it is time to replace it The advert for sale will not say

• never cooked in
• never slept in
• low millage
• water tanks never used

62k on clock this week and rising everyday

 

[Alan]

Let's not forget though that VW has stated and recommend you avoid using your vehicle for short journeys if possible (I know,that hacked me off when I read it in my manual)

Alan

 

[gregspam]

Sorry, but I cannot agree with that supposition.
A vehicle that has done less than 60,000 miles in 5 years is more likely to have problems than not. A 5 yr old vehicle with 25,000 or less has probably only had 1 service, standing idle for 8 out of 12 months and slowly deteriorating and probably rarely doing long distance trips . Some of the vehicles advertised here and on other sites have done even less milage. I've had more problems with low milage vehicles than high milage over the years. Properly looked after and serviced high milage do better. Anyway, personally I didn't buy a California to keep it in " pristine " condition for the next owner I bought it for me to enjoy driving it and camping in it. If I sold it in 5 years time with 100,000 on the clock, for £0 I would consider it well worth it.

I think as a general rule of thumb, that makes sense, but the generalisation applies less well to a California.

On of the main reasons high average mileage cars are considered less of a problem than low average mileage cars is because the average mileage is indicative of the type of miles driven. The absolute mileage has less of a bearing. So yes, given two vehicles of the same age, one with 60,000 motorway miles and one with 20,000 town driving miles, I'd take the high miler. However I expect a lot of Californias are driven predominantly as leisure vehicles doing a smaller number of long distance trips. Given the choice between two Californias of the same age, one that has done 20,000 long distance leisure miles vs another that has done 60,000 miles from long leisure miles and a lot of long distance commutes, I'd go with the former

Exposing my bias, I'm in the fortunate position of being able to cycle for almost everything I need to do locally during the week, so my Cali has lower than average miles but is used almost exclusively for long weekend miles. I appreciate everyone isn't in the same position, but I'd find it hard to stomach hauling around what is effectively 1+ tonnes of camping equipment on a daily commute for environmental reasons. Though if environmental reasons are a concern and you do need a car for the commute, the impact of having a second car could be worse.

 

[WelshGas]

I think as a general rule of thumb, that makes sense, but the generalisation applies less well to a California.

On of the main reasons high average mileage cars are considered less of a problem than low average mileage cars is because the average mileage is indicative of the type of miles driven. The absolute mileage has less of a bearing. So yes, given two vehicles of the same age, one with 60,000 motorway miles and one with 20,000 town driving miles, I'd take the high miler. However I expect a lot of Californias are driven predominantly as leisure vehicles doing a smaller number of long distance trips. Given the choice between two Californias of the same age, one that has done 20,000 long distance leisure miles vs another that has done 60,000 miles from long leisure miles and a lot of long distance commutes, I'd go with the former

Exposing my bias, I'm in the fortunate position of being able to cycle for almost everything I need to do locally during the week, so my Cali has lower than average miles but is used almost exclusively for long weekend miles. I appreciate everyone isn't in the same position, but I'd find it hard to stomach hauling around what is effectively 1+ tonnes of camping equipment on a daily commute for environmental reasons. Though if environmental reasons are a concern and you do need a car for the commute, the impact of having a second car could be worse.

I appreciate your view but as far as I'm concerned a vehicle that stands idle for 8 months of the year is something I would pass over. And as far as " environmental concerns ", when the mums in their 4x4s stop driving their kids to school then I'll stop using the California. Compared to some of those 4x4s the California is frugal and most of the environmental impact is in the production and reclamation at the end of a vehicles life.

 

[briwy]

I don't think there's much of a problem with short journeys provided the vehicle does a decent run every couple of weeks or so.
Our diesel Yeti is used every working day for short journeys but gets a good run which keeps it ok. Never had a problem in the five years we've owned it.

 

[gregspam]

I appreciate your view

Everyone's can have their view

when the mums in their 4x4s stop driving their kids to school then I'll stop using the California.

The good old race to the bottom, if you can't beat them join them mentality But seriously, we both drive a California and I'm not criticising you or driving one as an everyday car. I just wanted to share my viewpoint with the OP (sorry if it came across as personal to you) that doing serious commuting mileage in a California is not the greenest of decisions. But yes, once you have a vehicle and assuming you are interested in green creds - which I gather you aren't much - buying another could be a worse decision.

Really I suppose my mental unravellings were that if I was in the position of needing to do serious commuting motorway mileage and I only needed one vehicle, I'd find it hard to justify that vehicle being a California, as much as I love using it. Just a personal view tho, right

 

[gregspam]

^ Markup fail!

 

[Amarillo]

And as far as " environmental concerns ", when the mums in their 4x4s stop driving their kids to school then I'll stop using the California.

That is an extraordinary basis for deciding to cease using your van. What have some mum's vehicle of choice to do with your vehicle of choice?

I do not disagree with what I believe the premise of your statement to be: far too many children are taken to school by a parent in an inappropriate vehicle or by inappropriate transport mode. But why would anyone allow that to influence their choice of vehicle for other purposes?

 

[WelshGas]

That is an extraordinary basis for deciding to cease using your van. What have some mum's vehicle of choice to do with your vehicle of choice?

I do not disagree with what I believe the premise of your statement to be: far too many children are taken to school by a parent in an inappropriate vehicle or by inappropriate transport mode. But why would anyone allow that to influence their choice of vehicle for other purposes?

Because I can!
Just as you and the school run Mums can have an alternative view.

 

[Radio-active]

About to spend what seems like a ridiculouly large amount of cash on a new Cali.

I do quite a lot of long distance motorway miles for work and I have the option of using the Cali or buying another cheapish car (say around £5k) to do the work miles in.

Question is which will work out the cheapest option?

How much less would a 5 year old 90k mile Cali be worth vs. a 30k mile 5 year old

Would guess an additional car would cost me at least £7-8K in tax, insurance, depreciation, tyres, repairs etc., over 5 years.

So would I lose that much with an extra 60K miles in resale value?

This probably won't help but hey...

As a new Cali owner, I bought a 5 year old one with 12000 miles, in great condition, service history clearly well looked after and because they are a 'ridiculous amount of money' for a van, for me it had to be all the above if I was going to buy one.

I personally would not have entertained a 5 year old high mileage one, even though they were maybe £3000? cheaper. From what I could see here wasn't an accurate 'Glasses / Parkers' guide price for Calis, privately they appeared to be sold on condition / service history / mileage / average/comparable price for time of year etc. Mileage isn't the 'be all, end all' but with an extra 60k miles you could expect to have more stone chips / wear and tear / trolley dings / minor scratches etc and to most buyers thats a negative with an expensive purchase.

Its a personal choice, own it, use it, some owners aren't concerned about re-sale but with a 'run around' maybe it will feel more 'special' when you do drive the Cali...

 

[WelshGas]

This probably won't help but hey...

As a new Cali owner, I bought a 5 year old one with 12000 miles, in great condition, service history clearly well looked after and because they are a 'ridiculous amount of money' for a van, for me it had to be all the above if I was going to buy one.

I personally would not have entertained a 5 year old high mileage one, even though they were maybe £3000? cheaper. From what I could see here wasn't an accurate 'Glasses / Parkers' guide price for Calis, privately they appeared to be sold on condition / service history / mileage / average/comparable price for time of year etc. Mileage isn't the 'be all, end all' but with an extra 60k miles you could expect to have more stone chips / wear and tear / trolley dings / minor scratches etc and to most buyers thats a negative with an expensive purchase.

Its a personal choice, own it, use it, some owners aren't concerned about re-sale but with a 'run around' maybe it will feel more 'special' when you do drive the Cali...

Hope you enjoy the Cali life.
So I presume the cambelt was changed at 4/5 years?

 

[Meoncoast]

As a new Cali owner, I bought a 5 year old one with 12000

200 miles a month how sad

 

[soulstyledevon]

Interesting thread.
We also have a dilemma about vehicles. Currently running the Cali as our main vehicle and average about 10k a year (don't really use locally apart from getting to & from work 3 days a week, as we tend to walk and cycle lots).
Our other vehicle is more of a toy. 2 seater which means we (3 of us) can't travel together, so it's a weekend blast for me and heads to the train station when my missis goes to work. Usually 3 days A week also.
We have talked about a 3rd vehicle to use as our daily driver and to sit at the station. But can't work out if this is a waste of money. Personally, I'm not fussed about adding mileage to the Cali. But would like to limit the miles on the toy and hence another car to replace that.
However agree with some on here how a vehicle should be used. It's always a shame to see a car sitting around when it could be used. The reason for owning a particular vehicle is surely the pleasure and joy of owning and driving said vehicle. What's the point in keeping it nice for the next owner or because of resale value...?

 

[Alibee]

I would use the Cali, but then my T4 was my daily driver, and the T6 will be too.

I bought the T4 with 252,000km on the clock, had the diesel pump refurbed for £500 and it was quieter & smoother than most T5s I pulled up next to from then on. She sold for more than I bought her for, including the work on the pump, on the day I put her up for sale. There will always be those that don't understand that Calis are built on a commercial platform, and huge mileages are no problem if they're cared for (which most Calis are).

Besides all that, just getting in them makes the day better, and everyone's reaction to them, from other drivers to occasional passengers, more than makes up for the 1p/mile 'lost' on the usage...

 

[Borris]

See I see it the other way around. It seems a wicked shame to me to buy a lovely brand new Cali and then have to walk past it every morning and get in some inferior car. Unless the money (i.e. depreciation) is your main concern I would keep driving the Cali for regular day to day use!

And that's absolutely fine. However I personally prefer to keep mine for the leisure activities that I feel it was mainly designed for. Obviously, being retired means that I am fortunate enough to be able to make regular all year round use of our Cali so it doesn't really sit idle for months on end. I also realise that for many others it may be their only vehicle so their requirements will be entirely different. My point and my answer to the op was really about whether IMO, a Cali is the best tool to use for a long day to day commute? Clearly for some it is and if that's the case then brilliant.
Whilst depreciation isn't a major concern for me, I would much rather end up with a high mileage cali that had got that way by seeing all sorts of wonderful places and having created some fabulous memories than to use it for the majority of its life doing something that a cheap car could do just as well but at a fraction of the overall cost.
Just my opinion.

 

[Borris]

Sorry, but I cannot agree with that supposition.
A vehicle that has done less than 60,000 miles in 5 years is more likely to have problems than not. A 5 yr old vehicle with 25,000 or less has probably only had 1 service, standing idle for 8 out of 12 months and slowly deteriorating and probably rarely doing long distance trips . Some of the vehicles advertised here and on other sites have done even less milage. I've had more problems with low milage vehicles than high milage over the years. Properly looked after and serviced high milage do better. Anyway, personally I didn't buy a California to keep it in " pristine " condition for the next owner I bought it for me to enjoy driving it and camping in it. If I sold it in 5 years time with 100,000 on the clock, for £0 I would consider it well worth it.

I don't disagree with anything that you have said. Any vehicle needs to be used regularly otherwise things will start to go west. However the point that I was trying to put accross to the op was that IMO, an expensive Cali isn't really the best tool to use for long distance commuting given his concerns about the costs involved.
I think that when comparing the depreciation and running costs on his new Cali over the 90,000 mile five year period against the same on a cheap second hand car, l suspect the latter would be the best choice by a country mile.
If you sell your Cali after 5 years with 100,000 on the clock then you will have used it well, hopefully for all sorts of exciting adventures. I for one will applaud you for that. However and again IMO to use a £50-70k Cali for commuting for most of it's life is a wicked shame.

 

[oryx white]

Don't know if this helps but Parker's guide in November suggests that the depreciation on a 2015 Cali for each additional 1,000 miles is around £110.

 

[hirsty]

Just drive it.

I'd be fed up sitting in 'an ordinary car' every day knowing that something newer & better was sat at home idle & depreciating anyway.

Glad to see the majority claiming greater interest in usage rather than preserving resell values - as (I think?) Crispin said "its not a Tin God".

 

[shudycamps]

About to spend what seems like a ridiculouly large amount of cash on a new Cali.

I do quite a lot of long distance motorway miles for work and I have the option of using the Cali or buying another cheapish car (say around £5k) to do the work miles in.

Question is which will work out the cheapest option?

How much less would a 5 year old 90k mile Cali be worth vs. a 30k mile 5 year old

Would guess an additional car would cost me at least £7-8K in tax, insurance, depreciation, tyres, repairs etc., over 5 years.

So would I lose that much with an extra 60K miles in resale value?