Volvo XC90 - XC90: older lower mileage or newer higher mileage? - JohnCC

I'm shopping for a used XC90 and I have up to about £12k to spend. I notice that for this money you tend to see 2003 cars with 70,000 miles up to 2005 cars with nearly 100,000 miles.

All things being equal, which would you prefer? The newer car or the lower mileage car?

I believe some light changes were made for MY2004 too which is another issue, but nothing very significant as far as I know.

Volvo XC90 - XC90: older lower mileage or newer higher mileage? - brignac

Younger car with higher miles for me every time - assuming they are both in the same condition s/history etc

B

Volvo XC90 - XC90: older lower mileage or newer higher mileage? - JohnCC

Is that a personal preference (fair enough if it is!), or is there a mechanical or economic reason for it?

Volvo XC90 - XC90: older lower mileage or newer higher mileage? - brignac

A car that has done 20,000 miles a year is more likely to have been siting on the motorway for long stretches at a time suffering minimal wear. A car that has done 8,000 a year will tend to have been on lots of short runs - school//local shops etc which put much more strain on gearboxes, the engine and other components.

The younger car will suffer fewer age related problems, and will probably have been upgraded in some way - better features. Improvements learned from earlier model failures etc.

I tend to buy cars at 3/4 years old (Toyotas) with at least 70,000 on the clock, FSH, and it has served me very well. Previous owner will have sorted out any minor problems, and assuming it all works, it should carry on doing so.

You still need to check condition history etc. There will be some 5 year, 100,000 dogs out there and some 8 year, 70,000 dream cars out there too, but as a general rule it is better to go younger, and higher mileage IMHO.

Go and see and few cars and see you think.

Good luck

B

Volvo XC90 - XC90: older lower mileage or newer higher mileage? - JohnCC

That makes loads of sense. Thanks!