Used vs. New Overland Vehicle?

FJR Colorado

Explorer
Deals are out there. A good friend was showing off his "new" Tundra last weekend... A 2000 Gen-1 with 118K miles. Picked it up for $5K. If he wants, he can get another 200K miles with proper maintenance. The thing is gorgeous.

The thing about overlanding, is that you are effectively living out of the vehicle. That means eating out of it, maybe sleeping out of it, carrying around trash (or worse), getting dog fur all over (especially if you have a Husky :)). Not to mention rough roads, tree branch scratches, etc. Generally, all those things are best avoided in a new vehicle.
 

DaveInDenver

Middle Income Semi-Redneck
I've always bought used vehicles primarily due to budget. My thought was similar to other's about a new vehicle and the advantage of being the only huckleberry to ever have turned a wrench on it.

Then I got to thinking with my Tacoma that new might not be all it's cracked up to be. Mine was a CPO and thus had a 1-year warranty that I used for a couple of things. I saw first owners in the dealer with brand new cars and trucks and you of course hear about issues on forums and stuff. I know this is a statistical game and Toyota is as good as any manufacturer in terms of repeatability and reliability. But no brand or model is 100% perfect.

So it seems to me new or used you have to baseline a vehicle and accumulate time to work out the issues. IOW, I would no more immediately put a brand new Tacoma in service on a long trip than a used one new to me. I'd drive it a while, get a few oil changes, do gear oil changes to make sure the drivetrain is fine, make sure any electrical gremlins are found, etc. So the only real advantage is knowing the truck was broken in how you want and I'm not sure that's really the advantage it once was. If you're really worried bring along a borescope and compression tester.

Point being that now with 50k of my own miles and 95k total, lots of trips and busted knuckles I trust my truck as much any I've owned even though it wasn't off the lot to me. Someone else took the depreciation and headache of initial problems is all.
 

FJR Colorado

Explorer
In 2010 I bought a beautiful Sequoia (2001) with just over 100K miles. Kept it for 8x years. I really did nothing more than normal maintenance, tires, brakes once. Oh, fixed the tailgate latch.

Bought it for $11,500 cash. Traded it in 2018 when I bought my Gen-2 Tundra for $6,000 credit. Still ran great.

So, about $57/month for 8x years of a Sequoia Limited...
 

alanymarce

Well-known member
1) We bought a new vehicle for our first "big trip" (a 2010 Nissan X Trail i (T31) - it was flawless, apart from punctures, which are hardly the vehicle's fault. We had zero problems with the vehicle. One exception, once again not the vehicle's fault, was that once we were in countries where the exact model was not yet available (although the previous model was) when we had the suspension alignment checked (every 5000 Km) they used the wrong specs and we ended up with misalignment and tyre wear. 50,000 Km and no problems.

2) For our second "big trip" we bought a 1997 Series 80 Land Cruiser - one of the last made, and in good shape, however it was a 20 year old vehicle. In general it was very reliable and went everywhere we wanted, however during the trip we had:
- a blown radiator (which had been predicted by one of the mechanics at a service stop a couple of months earlier);
- the A/C fan motor wore out, and we had to order a replacement from Dubai (there none in stock anywhere in Africa, according to Toyota);
- the front differential blew up in Uganda, so we ended up with a 2WD LC for a week or so;
- and, when the differential was renewed the shop put in non-OEM axle bearings and one of them seized on the way to Kenya (the hard way - around the north of Mount Elgon), resulting a couple of days to fix.
So - an older vehicle, which was excellent and did the job, however we did have a number of failures. 45,000 Km - 3 substantial repairs and one minor repair.

3) For our third "big trip" we used our existing vehicle at home (2016 Montero), which we had bought new to replace the Nissan. WE had driven it nearly 17,000 Km before doing some modifications/upgrades and then headed out on the trip. We had zero problems with the vehicle in 45,000 Km.

So, at least for us, if you can afford a new vehicle, and pick the right one, it's a better bet than an older one.
 

DaveInDenver

Middle Income Semi-Redneck
I think your experience @alanymarce just goes to show vehicle wear follows a Bell curve. A 20 year old 80 series isn't worn out but neither should one expect to have zero issues. Many other cars at 20 years are ready for the recycler.



figure-2-siemens.png
 

alanymarce

Well-known member
It's true that a new vehicle may have problems early in its life. A friend went through two brand new Range Rovers before getting one which worked for more than a few weeks (the dealer replaced the first two). This says something about Range Rovers, obviously, and to be fair two other friends have had no problems with theirs. I wouldn't consider a Range Rover for overlanding, mainly because of the complexity and difficulty of repair/maintenance anywhere outside major cities.

We bought our Nissan new and ran it for a few months before setting off, to make sure there were no problems - which there were not. This vehicle is still running reliably after 120,000 Km (we sold it however know the subsequent history and have been driven in it a few times).

We bought the Montero new and used it for 17,000 Km before the 3rd "big trip", having no problems at all in this time. Initially we had simply planned to use it as our "local" car - still covering a fair number of off-road Km, within Colombia and potentially other parts of South America, however when we did the evaluation of options for the third "big trip", to Australia we concluded that it was the right vehicle and so then did the modifications and headed out. The car is home again and running perfectly (although not for the last three months since we've not been allowed out in the pandemic).

Our Land Cruiser was clearly at the right hand end of the "bath tub curve" however to be fair, the problems were few and we covered a lot of Km in tough conditions, and felt that the decision was the right one. We did look at some newer Land Cruisers, however the more recent ones are less capable than the Series 80, have become very expensive, and the ones available in Africa were not in good shape, so in our estimation would have had more problems. This vehicle, the last we heard, was fine.

An observation: the "bath tub curve" is a good way to look at products in "standard service" conditions (valves, pumps, etc.) however I think that for vehicles the story can be somewhat different. With care and regular maintenance the failure rate after a "critical point" does start to climb, however it can be flattened for a long time with some vehicles. One example is our 1981 FIAT X-1/9, which is still more or less as reliable as it was when I bought it new [space here for people to comment that a FIAT was never reliable, even when new - however this one has been perfectly reliable for the last 39 years - we haven't started to climb the unreliable bit of the bath tub yet]. Another example was my 1947 MG 1-1/4L Y-type, which needed constant care and repair (I used to carry a spare rocker box gasket and starter motor all of the time). This vehicle started up the unreliable bit of the curve after about 20 years.

 

DaveInDenver

Middle Income Semi-Redneck
Yes, indeed, there's quite a bit of variance in the useful life that results from how the vehicle is used (or abused) and the maintenance or modification done. Statistically speaking the manufacturer makes assumptions for purposes of prediction. If you use factory filters, fluids and replacement parts then you should expect typical life. The Land Cruiser is built with the assumption it won't get the same care or live the same life as a Corolla. That most of us use premium fluids and follow severe duty schedules helps offset the rough life we expect of them so it probably balances in the end.
 

kanger

Observer
Holy thread revival. So since my '96 4Runner I went through some changes. Ended up in a '03 Honda CRV, then to a '11 Honda Accord coupe, '12 Acura TL, and now I'm in a '12 Toyota Tundra. I also moved from California to Iowa and now in Alaska.

I'm happy to say I'm back in a rig I can overland. Just got the Tundra a month ago and planning out my build to explore Alaska. I'm definitely going to keep things conservative though. I'm done with the more "hardcore" wheeling for now. I got lucky with the Tundra. 2012 double cab 4x4 with 68K miles for $13K. All dealer maintained. Time to explore!
 

billiebob

Well-known member
Many of you travel solo, so I'd imagine vehicle reliability is very important.
For that reason I never buy new. I'd sooner drive a 40 year old well maintained pickup than trust any of the nanny system computer diagnostics with built in limp mode when a sensor fails which seem to cause most problems today. Keep It Simple Stupid is my philosophy.

Some say but you spend so much to keep an old vehicle running, so true but my YJ I drove for 200K miles. I bought it for $4500. Sold it 15 years later for $3000. And spent $12,000 on everything from oil changes and tires to a new engine. So a grand a year to keep it running and reliable with depreciation. My wife bought a new Legacy 3.6R. Gorgeous car. $33K new and sold it 8 years later for $13K, $20K in depreciation is $2500 a year. Plus tires and oil and service.

In 40 years I've never bought new and never spent $10K on a vehicle.
New for my wife makes perfect sense for security and peace of mind.
New for me would be crazy with how I drive and use/abuse my vehicles.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
189,639
Messages
2,919,229
Members
232,632
Latest member
Timboruski
Top