help before i buy this particular Civic FD

[Aussy]

I'm eyeing for this 2010 Civic FD AT. My concern is its mileage of 100,000kms. Being 7 years old and having this mileage, will the automatic transmission still last for many more years or will I be shouldering its costly repair very soon if I get the car?

By the way, its asking price is P450K (negotiable). So far, the car is in very good condition. Any input will be appreciated. Thanks!

100k is ALOT for an Auto only 7yrs old
If it was a Manuel no problem.
Personally I would walk away.
Plenty of other nice second hand cars to buy.
Never be pressured to buy.



Sent from my SM-J510GN using Tsikot Forums mobile app

[Egan101]

If the owner of the car lives in the south metro area (Paranaque or Las Pinas or Muntinlupa), it is expected that the car will have reached 100k KM on its 7th year. I live in Paranaque and our cars average around 15k km per year. Around half of that distance is mostly spent on SLEX/Skyway.

However, 450k is on the high side for the asking price. Maybe you can something similar for around 380k to 400k.

[makelovenotwar]

OT: Wow. I wonder how cheap(in terms of percentage) my car will be after 7 years. It's only 2.5 years old but has 100k kms already. But still no issues/repairs done aside from busted brake ligghts.

BTT:
I agree that you should consider the usual route of the seller.

[vinj]

It's not mileage but how the car was used and maintained. A relatively high mileage car used on the expressway experiences less stress than a car that runs nothing but short, low mileage, bumper to bumper city miles.

If the ATF was replaced as required on the owner's manual (or even more often), then that's fine.

100km in 7 years is 15,000kms per year approximately which is pretty average, especially in the day and age where people live outside the Metro Manila area or take the expressways to travel around more often than before.

[dr. d]

put it this way.
which is the most likely better buy: a high mileage car in good condition, or a similar-model, good condition car with much less mileage on the odometer, at the same price?

[GTi]

Look for the newest Jazz or City that will fit your budget. Though with the traffic that we have in the metro, you may appreciate the automatic more.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[bulilitliit]

Chooses are 2nd hand Honda City 1.3s 2009 or 2nd Hand Honda Civic 1.8s 2007, same 80k+ mileage. Which is better po bilhin? Salamat po uli.

[GTi]

Chooses are 2nd hand Honda City 1.3s 2009 or 2nd Hand Honda Civic 1.8s 2007, same 80k+ mileage. Which is better po bilhin? Salamat po uli.

Test drive both before you decide.

While the Civic is definitely of a higher class, fuel consumption will also be higher. It is very well built though, and feels almost like an Accord.

The City is definitely the more pocket-friendly "commuter car". 1.3 engine, while not blisteringly fast, offers decent performance.

80+tkms mileage is reasonable. Our 2007 Santa Fe has 79tkms and 2010 Carnival 70tkms.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Egan101]

Chooses are 2nd hand Honda City 1.3s 2009 or 2nd Hand Honda Civic 1.8s 2007, same 80k+ mileage. Which is better po bilhin? Salamat po uli.

As GTi stated, test drive both and ask for a maintenance history. Both cars are reliable but no reliable car will be safe from trouble if the previous owner has no car for proper maintenance.

Unless the Civic FD has major issues, I'd go with it over the City 1.3S 2009. Heck, I'd even go with a much older Civic ES (2001-2005) or Accord 6th gen (1998-2002) over a City/Jazz AT (2009-2013) with the 1.3L engine.

Honda's 1.3L engine mated with the AT tranny of the City/Jazz offers a poorer fuel consumption against the higher model with the 1.5L engine. Not to mention, it is slow and feels burdened when pushed hard.

[ardnas]

As GTi stated, test drive both and ask for a maintenance history. Both cars are reliable but no reliable car will be safe from trouble if the previous owner has no car for proper maintenance.

Unless the Civic FD has major issues, I'd go with it over the City 1.3S 2009. Heck, I'd even go with a much older Civic ES (2001-2005) or Accord 6th gen (1998-2002) over a City/Jazz AT (2009-2013) with the 1.3L engine.

Honda's 1.3L engine mated with the AT tranny of the City/Jazz offers a poorer fuel consumption against the higher model with the 1.5L engine. Not to mention, it is slow and feels burdened when pushed hard.

I agree with you 100%.

I've owned and used a City 1.3 2009 and City 1.5 2009 and the difference is very noticeable in terms of power and fuel consumption. Bitin yung power ng 1.3. I also owned a Civic ES 2001 way back. Performance and ride is ok naman. Now I'm using a Civic FD 2007 1.8S and I think I'll stick with this for a while because of the more aggressive and powerful engine, space and looks. However, might sell this and get the new Civic next year if budget will permit

[StockEngine]

napaka baba naman ng mga odo. tampered? meron ba sila 2nd vehicle? rfs?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tsikot Forums mobile app