Low Mileage 2007 Altis 1.6E vs High Mileage 2008 Altis 1.6G

[adulaamin]

I am looking at two used cars, a 2007 Altis 1.6E with 51k mileage and minor scratches and a 2008 Altis 1.6G with 98k mileage fresh in and out. I can probably get them at the same price.

I need a primary car that won't give me any worries for the next 2 or 3 years.

Any opinions on which one should I get? Thanks.

[L1quid]

51k for a 10yr old car seems to be too low unless its a garage queen. If it's real have a look first to see if it indeed feels like a low mileage car.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[adulaamin]

51k for a 10yr old car seems to be too low unless its a garage queen. If it's real have a look first to see if it indeed feels like a low mileage car.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Thanks. Anything in particular I should be looking for?

[GTi]

Are these two the same generation? I think 2008 was the last year for the ZZ and the first year for the ZR Altis.

51tkms is very low for a 2007 vehicle. Does the condition of the car correlate with the indicated mileage? I have a friend who used to have a 2004 Altis that was Ondoy'd. The car was revived, and he continued using it for a number of years. When it was flooded though, the odometer was reset to zero in the process. He estimates that the car has already ran in excess of 100tkms by then.

98tkms for a 2008 model, while not low mileage, is not particularly high either. It just means he travels around 10tkms per year on average, which is about right for the typical daily driver.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[adulaamin]

I'm also looking at a 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer GLS with 95k mileage. It's considerably less expensive than the two Altises. Do I have anything to worry about Mitsubishi's CVT? I've read testimonies about how Mitsubishi's CVTs are solid, but theirs are less than 95k Kilometers driven.

[adulaamin]

Are these two the same generation? I think 2008 was the last year for the ZZ and the first year for the ZR Altis.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Not the same generation. The 2008 one is the ZR

[GTi]

Cedia Lancer's have been known for heavy fuel consumption, though everything else seems to be fine. Personally, I'd still go for the Altis.

Newer gen pala ang 2008, dun nalang ako. Perhaps you can look for other units with lesser mileage? But if you are sure that there is nothing wrong with the car, I'd say 98tkms is still within acceptable limits, and you'd be quite positive that it really wasn't tampered. Just bring your trusted mechanic with you to inspect the car. Listen for any odd sounds during the test drive. Lift the car in a gas station to check the suspension. We just got a 2010 Carnival about two weeks ago. There was no sound from the suspension whatsoever. Didn't notice anything when we lifted the car either. But when I went to have alignment and wheel balancing done, we found out that the front shocks were leaking. Shocks replacement plus alignment, camber adjustment and balancing set me back 12k.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[dr. d]

I'm also looking at a 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer GLS with 95k mileage. It's considerably less expensive than the two Altises. Do I have anything to worry about Mitsubishi's CVT? I've read testimonies about how Mitsubishi's CVTs are solid, but theirs are less than 95k Kilometers driven.

i used to have a 2003 cedia with cvt. i believe the 2005 has the same innards. i drive a 2003 altis now.

matakaw nga sa gas ang lancer cvt, something like 5.5-6.0 km/li.
at 100K on the odo, my cvt seemed ok.
but what the cedia had, that the altis then, did not have, were lotsa passenger space, easier egress and ingress. and a tad lighter steering wheel.

[GTi]

By the looks of it, if you're considering the Cedia, might as well include the 2003-2007 Camry 2.0 or 2.4 to your list too. Similar FC, makes good power, huge space, timeless looks, boat like ride...

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[adulaamin]

Thanks everyone