On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 13:23:53 +0100, Bill wrote:

In message , Richard
writes
"Bill" wrote in message ...

In message ,
Capitol writes
Realistically, rule of thumb, a car loses 30% of its price on sale,
then a further 10% of it's price per 10K miles per annum. At 100K
miles, or 10 years, it is essentially worthless. If you pay more than
this, that's your loss.

Well, I'm still in the market for a 10yo diesel automatic Disco.

Yes, essentially worthless, and I have the appropriate cash waiting.

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-sear...us=1500&postco
de=so151aa&onesearchad=Used&onesearchad=Nearly%20N ew&onesearchad=New&mak
e=LAND%20ROVER&model=DISCOVERY%203&year-from=2007&year-to=2007&fuel-type
=Diesel&transmission=Automatic

£7k for a 10 y o car doesn't spell worthless to me.

If the govt can get the price under £1k, I promise I'll never drive or
park in Central London again.

Interesting that the Kings College London guide to air pollution only
says "In recent years the average level of nitrogen dioxide within
London has not fallen as quickly as predicted.".

I can't see why urea injection couldn't be made cost effective and,
having been ordered to wash the car this weekend, I am more convinced
than ever before that tyres and brakes are the source of 10 times the
particulates produced by engines. Just look at the wheels and mudguards.

You've got mudguards? 90% of cars seem to lack this very important feature and spray muddy water everywhere.

--
I was explaining to my wife last night that when you die you get reincarnated but must come back as a different creature. She said I would like to come back as a cow. I said you're obviously not listening.