Honda Car Forum

Well thanks for all the good feedback, I decided to take it to my
mecahnic who deals with Honda's & have everything looked at and get a
price for all the damage that needs to be replaced or fixed. With only
148,000 original miles, I guess this car has the potential to go another
148,000 with the propper upkeep

Annual depreciation and maintenance on a three year
civic is about $1200 a year. A 1993 is almost fully
depreciated. So this would be my repair threshhold
for replacement.

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 14:58:21 -0800, rick++ wrote:

> Annual depreciation and maintenance on a three year
> civic is about $1200 a year. A 1993 is almost fully
> depreciated. So this would be my repair threshhold
> for replacement.

The Blue Book value on it is still about $2,000 for fair condition.

But that shouldn't really matter, since he is not trying to sell it. He
can fix it for reasonable amount, and reasonably expect to have it last a
good long time more, so what does the car's value have to do with
anything? Especially since he already stated that he can't really afford
to get something newer...

"rick++" <rick303@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165964301.650871.130090@j72g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Annual depreciation and maintenance on a three year
> civic is about $1200 a year. A 1993 is almost fully
> depreciated. So this would be my repair threshhold
> for replacement.
>

A mechanic who has (had?) a radio show in Phoenix had an interesting way of
appraising whether a car was worth repair. The method was to determine how
much it would cost to lease a car in the same size class, a purely
functional equivalent. For example, say it would cost $250 per month for an
equivalent car. If you are facing a $2500 repair bill, after ten months the
cost is the same as if you had leased a car for that time. When the
aggregate and expected repair costs are more than you would pay for a
replacement, it's time to replace the car. Of course, a really good crystal
ball helps.
;-)

Mike

Mike

The repairs that I am gonna need should not exceed anymore than
$800.00....I can do the trunk myself. I am gonna get a good deal from a
very reliable mechanic

piperspost@webtv.net wrote in news:17437-457E2B95-930@storefull-
3333.bay.webtv.net:

> I love the car & fought hard to get ownership from my ex-wife. I have
> put lots of new parts into the car already, including an alternator,
> spark plugs, distributor, battery, etc... I love the car, I would just
> like to know what I would be looking at dollar wise to get these parts
> for the car? I am living paycheck to paycheck & I am not sure if it's
> worth it anymore for a 1993 car. Cxan I afford something newer..no I can
> not
>


A timing belt and water pump change (with OEM parts) will run you somewhere
in the region of $400 or so. If you do it yourself, it's around $150 for
the parts.

The oil pan is about $200 for the part alone. Maybe 2 hours labor to change
it. If it just has a stripped drain plug hole, there is a Heli-Coil fix
available that is a lot cheaper than that.

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

So bacically it's worth fixing it for now than starting with another car
payment

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:NNydnWrpcZa00OLYnZ2dnUVZ_t2tnZ2d@sedona.net:

> "rick++" <rick303@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1165964301.650871.130090@j72g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>> Annual depreciation and maintenance on a three year
>> civic is about $1200 a year. A 1993 is almost fully
>> depreciated. So this would be my repair threshhold
>> for replacement.
>>
>
> A mechanic who has (had?) a radio show in Phoenix had an interesting
> way of appraising whether a car was worth repair. The method was to
> determine how much it would cost to lease a car in the same size
> class, a purely functional equivalent. For example, say it would cost
> $250 per month for an equivalent car. If you are facing a $2500 repair
> bill, after ten months the cost is the same as if you had leased a car
> for that time.



That's my approach. Last year, my car cost me $300Cdn ($260US) per month.
That's everything from maintenance to repairs to tires, excluding gas. And
I did a *lot* of elective stuff (the rear bushings were a thousand on their
own). Absent the elective stuff, I would have spent less than half that.
Try carrying a new car for less than $150 per month.

The biggest problem with dumping lots of money into an old car is
insurance. The insurance company doesn't care whether your car is
mechanically brand-new or a worn-out deathtrap, so if you had to claim, you
would have to fight to get anything for all the mechanical work you might
have done. Basically, you will not be covered for money spent on mechanical
condition.

The strange thing is that they WILL pay you a portion of your expenses if
you spend your money on something stupid and useless, like fancy wheels or
a stereo, or a snazzy paint job.

And it is impossible to find an insurance company that will sell you an
"agreed-value" policy (at ANY price) unless you have a classic car.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

piperspost@webtv.net wrote:
> I love the car & fought hard to get ownership from my ex-wife. I have
> put lots of new parts into the car already, including an alternator,
> spark plugs, distributor, battery, etc... I love the car, I would just
> like to know what I would be looking at dollar wise to get these parts
> for the car? I am living paycheck to paycheck & I am not sure if it's
> worth it anymore for a 1993 car. Cxan I afford something newer..no I can
> not

Hmmmmmmm?

Short of cash. You have a car you love, have invested parts in, it's
just about broken in and seemingly your only option is to go out and buy
a USED "pig in a poke" about which you know nothing _OR_ throw some more
money at a known entity.

Uh, what was the question again?<g>

In article <Xns9897ED0B573C8tegger@207.14.116.130>, tegger@tegger.c0m
says...

> The biggest problem with dumping lots of money into an old car is
> insurance. The insurance company doesn't care whether your car is
> mechanically brand-new or a worn-out deathtrap, so if you had to claim, you
> would have to fight to get anything for all the mechanical work you might
> have done. Basically, you will not be covered for money spent on mechanical
> condition.
>
> The strange thing is that they WILL pay you a portion of your expenses if
> you spend your money on something stupid and useless, like fancy wheels or
> a stereo, or a snazzy paint job.

This may be a case of "YMMV" - when my eight-year-old Prelude was
totalled in 1990, a couple of months after I'd spent over $1000 on an
engine rebuild, I successfully argued to my insurance company that they
needed to factor in the cost of that work in determining the amount of
the check they were going to cut. Once I supplied receipts, they agreed
to do so, and IIRC the upward adjustment they finally settled on was a
significant percentage of the amount incurred for the rebuild.

Of course, it's entirely possible that insurance companies have gotten
considerably more hard-ass about this in the intervening years, and
since I haven't had a total loss claim since then, I (thankfully)
haven't had the opportunity to find out.

Dave