"P. Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:44:01 -0500, "P. Fritz"
wrote:


"NOYB" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:27:34 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:14:20 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

But I can assure you that in their latest
entries to the market, the American auto maufacturer's quality and
engineering is on par with the best of them again.

Let's talk again after 100,000 miles.

I'll be out of it before 40,000 miles. ;-)

see - thats what i don't understand. you dont gain anything by
leasing a vehicle for a stated length of time.



I gain a new car every 3-3 1/2 years. If I bought the car, but
financed
it,
I'd barely be even in 3 years. If I paid cash, and traded it, I'd
lose
$25k
in depreciation in that time period.


we ordinarily keep our cars for at least 100k if not more than
that -
i think the grand marquis my wife had before the town car had 140k
on
it when we traded it in.

You're smarter than me. But I've got a soft spot for new cars. Your
way is
of course the smartest way to own a car.

Not necessarily......if you drive exactly the miles that the lease
alllows
you every year, it is better to lease, at the end of the lease, if market
value is higher than the buy option, you simply buy it and sell it, if it
is
lower, you let the auto company take the loss.

i know someobdy in the car business, less than 1% of the lease cars
ever are returned at or under their milage and almost never in prime
condition.

That is the catch ;-)


I'm 28,000 miles under my mileage limit on my current lease. In theory, I
overpayed for the car since I used it so little. But in actuality, the
residual value was set so ridiculously high, that it's still not worth what
I could buy it for at the end of the lease.