2005 still worth it?

[Brickhil12]

Hi guys, looking for some help please!

I've been offered this car privately for £6500

IS 250 SE-L Auto

Date first registered - 16th December 2005

Petrol

2499 cc

2 Axle rigid body

Compact Saloon

It's only driven 12,500 miles and has a full dealership service history. It's a private sale and has been driven carefully. The inside has leather white seats.

I'm wondering whether buying a 2005 model is still a reasonable investment. I'm aware that Lexus are reliable cars and really I'm after an upgrade on my 2008 ford fiesta.

Is it madness to buy a car that is 3 years older than my current car? It is higher spec but I'm worried I would be making a mistake.

Any feedback would be very much appreciated.

 

[bobmc]

IMO, that price is too high. I get that the mileage is low and it's almost a 2006 reg, but still seems expensive to me.

I take it you know the car's owner and it's history. Does it have SATNAV and Mark Levinson Audio? These affect the market value.

Is it madness? Personally no. I bought my Lexus IS earlier this year. For the price I paid, I could have bought a far newer reg car from Ford, Renault, Skoda, etc, or a similar age car from BMW, Merc or Audi. My choice was Lexus, because I liked the look and how it felt to drive it, along with their reputation for reliability and the brand kudos.

It will cost a bit more to run than your fiesta, tyres, tax, fuel etc.   

[gdh300]

Hi Ron, I saw your post on the HJ forum and was about to suggest you come over here and have a nose about, but I see you've beaten me to it!

I'm sure you'll get good advice here from those that know the IS250. It will be chalk-and-cheese compared to your Fiesta, you should get behind the wheel before you even start to worry about the numbers; you might not even like it...

[is200 Newbie]

Have you asked what the reason is for it having such a low mileage for the year of the car - breaking it down, that's just over 1000 per year.!!

You need to consider that the mileage is not that important due to the age of the car - the cost is a bit excessive to be honest. It is still an old car however you look at it.. If rust was an issue with these cars (luckily its not) then the mileage would be irrelevant. It has obviously not been used regularly so I would take a very close look at hoses / fluids / moving parts as being sat for any length of time is not good for any car.

You have said it has got a full service history ... what has it had done and at what mileage. I would have expected the dealer would have referenced the age of the car and not the mileage when considering the service work required?