I worked for a Ford/Chrysler dealership for 15+ years. During that time we sold thousands of rental cars purchased from the factory auctions. These cars typically were a year old with 15k miles or less. We didn't have any more or less service problems with those cars than anything else, including new cars. These cars aren't for everyone, but they're a cheap alternative to buy a year old car with a warranty over new. Scott

 

Depends on the car I'm sure. I bought way back in 97 a Ford Taursus that was an ex rental. It has 12k miles in it and was about 9 months old. It was also about $10k less than a new one, I paid about $12k for it which at that point I thought was pretty good. I only owned it 10 months before it was stolen, I replaced it with the first of many Ford Explorers that I have owned, and one of my favorites. It was a 1998 XLT loaded with the 5.0 V8 and AWD. I loved that thing, but the whole Firestone tire mess made me sell it. The newer Explorers are nicer vehicles, but I never loved them the way I loved my first one.

I imagine if I drove it today... Well, you know what they say, never meet your heroes... . Some times memories are better left that way...

 

Why not just replace the tires?

 

And now my anecdote that supports rentals cars can be just fine:

My first Mustang was a 99 v6 'vert I bought in 2004. It started life as a rental, and then it had been purchased and owned by someone else for 3 more years.

I also bought a brand new 2002 Toyota Matrix as a family vehicle.

Guess which one was sold in 2009 when it started having transmission problems? It was the "reliable" Toyota.

The only things the Mustang needed beyond brakes/oil/etc. during the 5 years I had it was the handbrake wire disconnected, a new top (which had lasted for 9 years in sun, sleet, and snow), and new 35th anniversary badges after some teens in a parking lot ripped them off (may they be consigned to the hellfire for all eternity).

 

I did the week I bought it, I could tell the Firestones were crap before the recall, I put michelin M/S tires on it and that really improved the ride.

That being said, I was never convinced it was all Firestones fault, those same tires were on other vehicles without a problem.

The rear suspension in the Exporer from that era sucked, and when combined with the updated front suspension, it caused a problem that I don't think was fixable. The 90-94 Explorers with the same tires didn't have a problem, but they had a completely different front end.

The recall, I believe, was done to avoid having to recall all the Explorers outright which probably would have bankrupted Ford.

My next Explorer was a 2002, it was much improved over the prior model in most ways and was much more stable, but it was boring with a V6.

 

I am on my 7th Mustang; 1997, 2000, 2004 (both my wife & I), 2012 (again my wife & I) and this time a new 2015 GT Premium. I ordered it the way I desired; nt off the lot, but exactly as I wanted. And wow, it is even better than the "in folks" rave about. It is light years better and improved over my 2012 GT Premium. My only complaint is gas mileage suffers significantly with the 435+ horsepower, but who buys a high performance car for mileage?
It is time for the "old Mustang" to go away quietly, to be held in reverence, and for us to embrace the new, bold, and I think, gorgeous.

 

Totally agree about letting the "old mustang" go away quietly. No issue with putting the S197 to rest and moving forward with new design. All I was hoping for from Ford was a raw, modern muscle looking Mustang. Current 2015 model, epic fail in my eyes!

Its all sports car and lost the muscle car look and a rear end that only a mother could love.

 

Kona ! What is it about the rear end you dislike so much ? As I'd really like to know because I personally feel the rear is the best feature on the 2015..

What I like most about the rear, is Ford brought back the full fastback profile from the 65-68 models, but rather than attempt to re-copy them, they were able to do so in a contemporary/modern design for the 21st century..

IMO the rear profile definitely reminds me of the 1st generation 65-68 fastback models every time I look at them

 

Everything from slope, to the actual taillights, just the whole rear end is really horrible but just my opinion. No matter how many times I look at the car, I can't convince my mind it is sweet looking. Lol

 

So do you feel the slope has too much of an angle or not enough ? As I'm just trying to get a better understanding as to where your coming from

 

Not so much the slope as the ugly taillights and shape of the rear.

 

I understand your feeling. I never fell in love with he 11-14 front or rear clips. The 13/14 got closer in the rear, but the 10-12's were bulbous and fat looking to me, even with the fake slimming Ford tried with the lower black valence. That doesn't mean it was horrible, but rather to my eye it didn't mesh well at all. That's one reason I never traded my '09 GT for one.

 

I sure do love the LED taillights on the 13-14's and can't understand why Ford wouldn't use similar taillights for the 2015. I do love the rear ends of the 10-14's. Its the J Lo booty of Mustangs. Ha ha ha

 

Can you provide some details about the shape you don't like, as in which areas, sections and so forth

 

Absolutely sir. Take a look at the rear glass down to the trunk area. Ugly! Take a look at the taillights itself. Notice how there not pleasing to the eye and ugly. Take a look below the taillights at the bottom portion of the rear, just ugly. More specifically, take a look at the entire rear end, trunk area, rear glass, all ugly.

 

Maybe he doesn't care for the rear slope because I'm in agreement with the rear as well! I do really like the rest of it though.
I DO want the GT350R!!! :-)

 

The sloping rear worked so good for those old school muscle mustangs and went with the rest of the rear.

 

Perhaps I'm not seeing what you don't like, or I'm just seeing it differently I will admit they could've done a better job with the slope from the rear glass down into the trunk area.. In other words, they cut off the angle of the trailing edge too soon rather than create a more gradual slope completely all the way back into the decklid..

Guess what I'm trying to say, is give it more of a 67-70 slope/trailing edge look..

 

I'm trying to love it. I want to love it. Its just that the muscle look is gone! Very sad!

 

When compared with the 67-70 fastback style.. That's exactly what I was hoping for with the 2015, as the 67-70 was my favorite body style in the fastback.. Unfortunately we'll more than likely never see anything like it again although the previous 05-14 Mustangs came pretty close at least in the styling dept anyhow..