Buying cheap knowing you'll have to rebuild?

[altesk]

I'm considering buying a nine year old car for sale that has very high mileage. It runs fine and everything looks pretty good cosmetically. However, I assume that I'll need to rebuild or replace the engine and transmission before too long.

Suppose I buy this car cheap, and later replace those drivetrain components when they break. I then have a car that is sort of "good as new" mechanically.

Are there any problems with this car buying strategy? Does it make economic sense?

In case you are curious about the car's details:

1999 Honda Civic
230,000 miles on the odometer (the owner claims this resulted partly from highway driving during a long commute)
Automatic transmission
AM/FM/CD
New Tires (80K warranty), New Battery, New Radiator, New Belts, New Air Conditioner compressor Unit, new fluids.
Original owner is selling it.
Alternator, water pump, CV joints and boots have never needed replacing.
Timing belt was replaced only once, at 175,000 miles (seller claims this is not far from the factory recommended interval for timing belt replacement).

Current asking price is $4050. The seller claims to have received offers of about $3500, but is holding out for a little more.

['97ventureowner]

I used to do that in the late '80s/early '90s, buy cars cheap (usually preferred w/ engine & tranny) and then used my own engine/ tranny combo that I installed myself. There are positives to doing that as well as negatives. One of the big negatives on something that is older/higher mileage is that most of your parts have a 'definite' lifespan. Front end components, electrical components,body parts (in certain areas of the country), and other interior/mechanical parts may wear out at any given moment and need replacing. To me it's a gamble as to whether or not the vehicle you purchase will need many of these parts replaced within a few years.If they have not been replaced when you buy the vehicle then you should look at it as "all these parts are 9 years old and have 230,000 miles on them." Then ask yourself," Am I willing, and do I have enough money to repair/replace anything and everything that may go wrong in the coming months?" That can help you make a decision as to whether or not you want to undertake something like that or use that info as a bargaining tool to hopefully get a lower purchase price for that vehicle.

[alphalanos]

Price is high for that mileage. The timing belt should be replaced about every 60-90k depending on usage. It needs alt, cv, and water pump asap. 230k is way too long for that stuff. I think you could find better. I got my 96 with ~110k on it for 4500, but its in really good shape.


-just FYI ive spent about $2,000 on maintenence. But the only thing that broke was the radiator shroud cracked. most other things ive replaced by choice.

[sickcallawayc12]

I don't think its a bad idea but I wouldn't do this unless I owned more than one car because it is a gamble especially if you need to really rely on the car. I also agree that is way too long of an interval. Only things I can think of with that long an interval is a tranny, engine, or certain gaskets.

[JoshParsons84]

Sounds like that seller is a Jew. No offense.