tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12275730.post6043135888313749459..comments2023-06-15T09:28:38.897-05:00Comments on My Mundane Life: Which one?Katannahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04565779997509656273noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12275730.post-78724344132855623622008-06-20T11:06:00.000-05:002008-06-20T11:06:00.000-05:00HAHA!! yeah, that might be a clue...I think that a...HAHA!! yeah, that might be a clue...<BR/><BR/>I think that a year newer and $2000 cheaper are a negative point when combined. Here's why: When you trade in, the dealer says that the "normal" amount to drive your car is 12,000 mi/yr. If you try to buy one, they say that it's 15,000 mi/yr. Either way, the 2003 drove almost 20,000 mi/yr (avg, so probably even more in one or two of those years, if more than one owner) which is REALLY hard on any vehicle, even a Jeep. Secondly, it's pushing 100,000 miles which is the universal point where almost all cars (except deisels) start to have bigger problems. Because of the very high mi/yr, that 100,000 mile point is going to be even more significant.<BR/><BR/>I'd go with the 2002, if those are your only two options.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13423434474491928449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12275730.post-54944226709452829902008-06-20T09:06:00.000-05:002008-06-20T09:06:00.000-05:00I think you'd better beware if the guy up and move...I think you'd better beware if the guy up and moves to Florida tomorrow.Sarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01048936523086212165noreply@blogger.com