Hello, everyone. First post here.
I'm considering buying a used 1st gen FX35. I've read just about every piece of information about reliability that I could dig up by Googling and even talked to a friend of mine who owns a 370Z to see what kind of issues he has or has not had with the platform. I think I'm to the point where I'm overall comfortable with the idea of purchasing a used 1st gen FX.
The question I have is this:
If the miles and condition were similar, how much more would you be willing to pay for a 2007 FX35 versus a 2004?
Anything out there to support the idea that the 2007 is more reliable than the 2004 other than the fact that the 2007 is obviously 3 years newer?
I know they're both 1st gens so only so much can really be updated from one year to the next, but sometimes there are quirks in one model year that may not be as bad in a different model year from the same generation.
Or is the difference so small that it would be wiser to attempt to save a few thousand bucks by going with the 2004, particularly since the mileage on the 2004 is only slightly higher than the 2007?
I test drove a 2004 with 88k on it the other day and it drove strong. Car was very "tight" not only for a 10 year old car but for basically any car. Hard to put this into words, but it felt "tighter" than even my daily-driven 2009 Mazda6s GT, which I feel is in very good shape and is an excellent car. It definitely felt tighter than a 2008 Hyundai Veracruz I test drove a couple days later, which has received great reviews as a Lexus-lite SUV (I'm shopping for my wife, btw).
Mechanically, the 2004 FX35 seemed to be in great condition. Had some mild brake squeel when applying brakes lightly at high speed. Maybe a little more road noise than I expected although it was modest enough (and without vibration) to think that maybe it was just characteristic of a performance-oriented suspension on 20" wheels. Even though I'm fairly confident that the car has no wheel bearing issues at this time, based on information I've uncovered in my search, I'm making sure to get a mechanic to inspect - among the standard inspection- the rear axle, subframe bushings, and wheel bearings on any FX35 that I'm seriously contemplating making an offer on.
I haven't started negotiating yet, but the posted asking price is $14.5k on this 2004.
I just noticed a 2007 in town with 75k miles marked at $20k. The only difference I can see other than exterior color (2004 is orange, 2007 is beryllium; brick interior on both) is the interior seems to have a little less wear (not that the 2004 was bad outside of what seems to be the inevitable seat tear on the side of the driver's seat cushion) and it has nav.
As far as the cosmetic or options differences, I'm no compelled to spend a bunch more for the 2007 for such reasons. OEM nav has never been worth it to me to pay what manufacturers want for it although having built-in bluetooth would be a plus versus having to figure out an aftermarket solution on 2004. I do think I like the beryllium paint better than the orange but it is not a critical difference for me.
Basically, I'm focused on getting into the least amount of debt possible so I can pay this thing off ASAP and absolve my family of car payments for awhile...but there may be compelling reasons to consider dropping some more coin on the 2007 versus the 2004. I realize both cars are used and used is a bit of a crapshoot no matter how careful you are. Both cars are 80k+ miles and 6 to 10 years old. Relatively major maintenance/repair comes with the territory on most any make or model when you're talking about driving them well beyond 100k.
Having said that, I probably would rather spend a little more now if it likely means major repairs come later rather than sooner. I'm just not sure that simply being three years newer does much to guarantee that...which is why I'm turning to you guys for input.
I would appreciate whatever thoughts or opinions you would like to share. Thanks!
I'm considering buying a used 1st gen FX35. I've read just about every piece of information about reliability that I could dig up by Googling and even talked to a friend of mine who owns a 370Z to see what kind of issues he has or has not had with the platform. I think I'm to the point where I'm overall comfortable with the idea of purchasing a used 1st gen FX.
The question I have is this:
If the miles and condition were similar, how much more would you be willing to pay for a 2007 FX35 versus a 2004?
Anything out there to support the idea that the 2007 is more reliable than the 2004 other than the fact that the 2007 is obviously 3 years newer?
I know they're both 1st gens so only so much can really be updated from one year to the next, but sometimes there are quirks in one model year that may not be as bad in a different model year from the same generation.
Or is the difference so small that it would be wiser to attempt to save a few thousand bucks by going with the 2004, particularly since the mileage on the 2004 is only slightly higher than the 2007?
I test drove a 2004 with 88k on it the other day and it drove strong. Car was very "tight" not only for a 10 year old car but for basically any car. Hard to put this into words, but it felt "tighter" than even my daily-driven 2009 Mazda6s GT, which I feel is in very good shape and is an excellent car. It definitely felt tighter than a 2008 Hyundai Veracruz I test drove a couple days later, which has received great reviews as a Lexus-lite SUV (I'm shopping for my wife, btw).
Mechanically, the 2004 FX35 seemed to be in great condition. Had some mild brake squeel when applying brakes lightly at high speed. Maybe a little more road noise than I expected although it was modest enough (and without vibration) to think that maybe it was just characteristic of a performance-oriented suspension on 20" wheels. Even though I'm fairly confident that the car has no wheel bearing issues at this time, based on information I've uncovered in my search, I'm making sure to get a mechanic to inspect - among the standard inspection- the rear axle, subframe bushings, and wheel bearings on any FX35 that I'm seriously contemplating making an offer on.
I haven't started negotiating yet, but the posted asking price is $14.5k on this 2004.
I just noticed a 2007 in town with 75k miles marked at $20k. The only difference I can see other than exterior color (2004 is orange, 2007 is beryllium; brick interior on both) is the interior seems to have a little less wear (not that the 2004 was bad outside of what seems to be the inevitable seat tear on the side of the driver's seat cushion) and it has nav.
As far as the cosmetic or options differences, I'm no compelled to spend a bunch more for the 2007 for such reasons. OEM nav has never been worth it to me to pay what manufacturers want for it although having built-in bluetooth would be a plus versus having to figure out an aftermarket solution on 2004. I do think I like the beryllium paint better than the orange but it is not a critical difference for me.
Basically, I'm focused on getting into the least amount of debt possible so I can pay this thing off ASAP and absolve my family of car payments for awhile...but there may be compelling reasons to consider dropping some more coin on the 2007 versus the 2004. I realize both cars are used and used is a bit of a crapshoot no matter how careful you are. Both cars are 80k+ miles and 6 to 10 years old. Relatively major maintenance/repair comes with the territory on most any make or model when you're talking about driving them well beyond 100k.
Having said that, I probably would rather spend a little more now if it likely means major repairs come later rather than sooner. I'm just not sure that simply being three years newer does much to guarantee that...which is why I'm turning to you guys for input.
I would appreciate whatever thoughts or opinions you would like to share. Thanks!
