# Used car advice - Miles or Years **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Tags:** used, sienna, toyota\ **Created:** [April 22, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851 "2010-04-22T21:20:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jjl22ljj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9f8e36/32.png) [@jjl22ljj](https://community.cartalk.com/u/jjl22ljj)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/1 "2010-04-22T21:20:06Z")
I’m considering purchasing a AWD Sienna minivan and am evaluating two choices and wanted to get folks advice on which to pursue. Car1 is a 2005 with 45K miles. Car2 is a 2007 with 88K miles. Otherwise they are basically the same and priced the same. So … which would be the better choice fewer years (car2) or fewer miles (car1)? Thanks for the help Jeff ---
**Author:** ![Jeffmw05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@Jeffmw05](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Jeffmw05)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 10:03pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/2 "2010-04-22T22:03:34Z")
Low miles indicate that it may have been driven on short trips and thus the engine wasn’t warmed up properly at times. I would seriously bargain hard on the 05. Also keep in mind low miles doesn’t mean squat if the maintenance hasn’t been done. I wouldn’t consider either of them unless there is at least a reasonably complete maintenance history to look at. So to answer your question, it just depends on maintenance history and the price. The point is low miles alone isn’t necessarily a significant advantage. Be sure to have a professional evaluate the one you decide on, before you buy it. Hope that helps. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://community.cartalk.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 10:11pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/3 "2010-04-22T22:11:00Z")
I generally say younger is better in a situation like this. I’m usually somewhat suspicious of a car with unusually few miles (7.5k per year for the '05)-- usually this means either lots of short trips or long periods of disuse, neither of which are particularly good for a car. This is especially true since people rarely actually follow the time-dependent maintenance schedule on low mileage vehicles. On the other hand, though, if you do drive a lot of miles and usually wear out a car from miles rather than age (or plan on putting on a lot of miles and then selling) having the 40k fewer miles might be worthwhile. On the other other hand, having a few extra model years may or may not be better for the usual minivan transmission issues-- this might be worth researching a little on model-specific forums to see if there’s any big differences in transmission failure rates between the years. ---
**Author:** ![waterboy](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/waterboy/32/764_2.png) [@waterboy](https://community.cartalk.com/u/waterboy)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/4 "2010-04-22T22:28:56Z")
My choice would be significantly impacted by maintenance especially oil changes performed. ---
**Author:** ![dagosa](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/dagosa/32/9837_2.png) [@dagosa](https://community.cartalk.com/u/dagosa)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 10:34pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/5 "2010-04-22T22:34:55Z")
I’m with Greasy…I like those introspective, convoluted replies. Makes sense to me. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Whitey](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/whitey/32/24680_2.png) [@Whitey](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Whitey)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2010, 11:53pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/6 "2010-04-22T23:53:18Z")
> So … which would be the better choice fewer years (car2) or fewer miles (car1)? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![dagosa](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/dagosa/32/9837_2.png) [@dagosa](https://community.cartalk.com/u/dagosa)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 3:25am UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/7 "2010-04-23T03:25:03Z")
Or how about the car with “less” age on it or “less” mileage. ---
**Author:** ![perry1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8491ac/32.png) [@perry1](https://community.cartalk.com/u/perry1)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2010, 9:17pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/8 "2010-05-18T21:17:37Z")
I asked a friend who owns several insurance companies and buys his cars directly from the auction. He says always buy the newer car if miles are not a huge difference. Newer cars usually have better safety features also. ---
**Author:** ![edb1961](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/edb1961/32/122_2.png) [@edb1961](https://community.cartalk.com/u/edb1961)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2010, 10:07pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/used-car-advice-miles-or-years/47851/9 "2010-05-18T22:07:38Z")
If you buy a AWD Sienna, beware of the run flat tires. The tires only last 18-20k miles and are very expensive. My wife has an 06 Sienna LE with FWD, it has a spare and 16" tires which are reasonably priced. The timing belt replacement on a Sienna is 7 years/90k miles whichever comes first. The 3.3 V6 (2004 - 2006) is an interference motor. I believe the 2007 is a 3.5 V6, I’m assuming the replacement interval is the same which means the 07 is due for a timing belt in 2k miles. Ed B.