2010 car: msrp = $115
2009 car msrp = $115

both cars have zero miles and neither have had the warranty start

2010 = $100k

2009 = offered at $90k but lets say i can get for $85-88k

1. which would u choose?
2. what price on the 2009 would it take for you to choose '09?
__________________

 

I would take the 09, at $88-$90. The first year of depreciation is picked up in part by the dealer.

 

Besides price, are they spec'd out equally and identically? Saving some money is great, but if it's not what you want then I'm not sure it's an overall great deal.

If both are C2S cars, then at 115K, then must be very well optioned. If they are equals, then take the 09 and plow the savings into something else.

 

they are equal

 

Take the 09'......... considering the discount you would receive, once both cars get past 3-4yrs in ownership the gap is very close on worth. (So you save big taking the better priced car).

Now......if it were only a 5K difference I might take the 2010, but for 10K+, the 2009 is the winner. (Just my humble opinion)

Good luck!

 

09 all the way...

 

the 2009 car sold

i just bought the 2010
should get it wednesday or thursday

 

Not surprising that it's sold first. But congrats on the 2010! Post some pics when you can.

 

I woild have taken the 2010. The 09 car wholesale would have still been in the low 70's with msrp of 115. Plus it sat for a year and there's usually a reason. I think you got the better car PLUS there are slight improvents for 2010 .

 

What are the 2010 improvements?

 

At this point it's hypothetical, but it seems like the decision criteria is how long he'll keep the car. If it's a long-termer then the '09 is the way to go. If he swaps cars often, then it might be a closer call. I don't believe there are differences of note between '09 and '10.

 

Guys there's no decision to make. I bought the 2010