<VV> Re: low mileage

[airvair]

Consider this point. If you'd say that 2,000 miles a year is low milage,
what if you had a Model T? The car'd be almost a hundred years old, and
if it had "only" 2,000 miles put on it for every year, that would mean
it would have nearly 200,000 miles! THAT is "low milage" ??? By who's
standard, Methuselah's? And in that 200,000 miles, how many times has it
been reworked? With a Model T, it would have to have been reworked
several times, as no original T could withstand that much milage. It
simply wasn't designed for it, not to mention that the longevity
technology wasn't there, either.

No, my point is that the term "low milage" becomes meaningless as the
years and decades accumulate. Not to knock Ken's car in any way (as I
happen to have a '67 with 33,000 miles on it myself), but after a while
the "low milage" idea really becomes a moot point, and particularly if
the car's been reworked.

BTW I also happen to know the history of this particular '69, and it's
pretty extensive. So if you are thinking "low milage" and "original" in
the same thought, forget it.

-Mark

Craig Nicol wrote:
> 
> Mark said:
> I wonder about the "low milage" thing myself. On eBay I see that phrase
> used all the time on Fieros (vintage '84-8) that have as much as 46,000
> miles on them. Sure, for a car that is expected to last at least 150,000
> miles or more, that's "nicely broken in" status. But LOW MILAGE?
> 
> My thought is that at a certain point, age makes milage become
> irrelevant. Only something under 10,000 miles could be termed low
> milage, and even then, that something might have to be considerably
> UNDER 10,000 miles to qualify.
> 
> Craig opines:
> I agree in their description of 46K as low mileage.  The worst case Fiero in
> your example only got 4600/year compared to the average of 8-15k per year;
> that's certainly lower than average.  AFIR, the '69 on ebay has 33k.  That
> means it has only traveled 846 miles per year.  Jeez, what will it take to
> let the guy tout this virtue?  IMHO, this is near the minimum a car could be
> driven without getting really stale.  I think anyone on this list who had a
> car with 33k (or 46k) would list that as a virtue; I would.
> JMHO
> Craig