Printable View
I'm new to this lease vs finance vs buy car game.
Looking to pick up a new 17 Q50 3.0T. Originally I was planning on buying it outright, but then others suggested lease vs finance.
Which route is better? Is $600/month lease too expensive? I like to keep my cars long term so better to finance then? But then others are telling me to lease it and buy it out at end? Residual?
Is there a Lease Vs Finance For Dummies Guide?
Here's my take on it:Quote:
Originally posted by dj_rice
I'm new to this lease vs finance vs buy car game.
Looking to pick up a new 17 Q50 3.0T. Originally I was planning on buying it outright, but then others suggested lease vs finance.
Which route is better? Is $600/month lease too expensive? I like to keep my cars long term so better to finance then? But then others are telling me to lease it and buy it out at end? Residual?
Is there a Lease Vs Finance For Dummies Guide?
Lease positives, as best as I understand it:
- Don't need to take care of the car beyond mandatory maintenance
- "Pride of ownership" effort such as detailing, waxing, 3M, etc. is totally optional and does not affect the buyback. Take it though the touch car washes and use the brush on it at coin washes without worrying about swirls.
- Rock chips and door dings are considered normal wear and tear within reason, go ahead and squeeze into any parking spot you want
- You don't have to take care of it in the winter (block heaters, cold starts, driving easy, etc.)
- Severe damage like hail, collisions, etc. do not affect your buy-back agreement (this is actually amazing peace of mind) even though it would completely destroy the resale value if you owned it
- Drive it however you want, as hard as you want (without massively damaging anything of course)
- Guaranteed to always have warranty
- You only pay GST on the payment, not the entire sale price
- Option to buy out at the end if you think you can get significantly more on the used market than your residual
- Always have a new car to look forward to every 4 years or whatever your term
- The above is why I would never and have never bought a vehicle that was a lease-return
Lease Negatives:
- You ALWAYS have a car payment as you are simply paying the vehicle depretiation based on a predetermined residual value after X years (but if you get a new car every 4-5 years, you always have a payment if you finance too)
- You don't own anything at the end
- The residuals are almost always artificially low to force a higher lease payment (based on everything I've been looking at so far anyway).
- Limited KM (but you would pick something that worked for you I'd assume)
- Can be harder to get out of
Finance Positives:
- You own it when you're done
- Pride of ownership applies
- Cheaper in the long run if you keep your cars for a super long time like 5+ years
- No KM limit, but directly affects resale
- ???
Finance Negatives
- Severe damage like hail or collisions decimate their resale value
- Every little bit of damage and wear & tear is your problem
- Far more time, effort, and money required to keep it's resale value as high as possible
- Limited warranty period
- Monthly payment is almost always higher unless you get a ridiculous term like 84 months 0%
As for the payment, it's all just math. Lease is car cost minus predetermined residual divided into payments over the lease term and they may or may not have interest. Financing is just the sale price divided by the payment months and may have interest. With leasing, you can get some surprisingly nice cars for the same payment as a worse car just because it holds it's value better and the residual is strong. It's all just a game, but it's easy to back into the numbers.
If all you care about is payment, it's just a simple calculation comparison. Financed amount divided by months + interest OR Purchase price less residual divided by months + interest.
That's my take on it, unless I have misunderstood something along the way haha (anyone please feel free to correct me). Leasing appears to be the dream - the more I think about it the more I think it is by far the best option with some pretty significant safeguards built in.
Fine print on lease deals almost always includes a hefty down payment, so be wary of those. A good piece of advice seems to be that if you have to put much money down on a lease, it means you can't afford it. Also if you pay by-weekly it reduces the payment significantly but some dealers (like Mercedes) won't let you do that.
Looking at your Q50 3.0T, just picked an entry model:
48 mo Lease: $601/mo, 16,000 KM allowance, give it back after 4 years
48 mo Finance: $1094/mo
84 mo Finance: $689/mo
Your gamble is if you think you can sell it for a lot more than the predetermined lease residual when you're done. If you keep the car for a super long time like 10 years, you're best off buying it outright at the very start and avoiding all interest.
Leasing that looks pretty good to me if you're worried about monthly payment. As for how good of a deal it is though it doesn't seem like anything special.
Have you checked with the Cadillac dealers?
I was able to get a 16 ATS performance for the same price you listed the Honda for. Considering this is my work paid for car I am more than happy.
Mitsu, only you would start a thread which was meant for helping yourself but will probably end up being the reference for Lease vs Financing going forward.
I have the same car as 88CSX, with the 8 Speed. I know he has had some issues with his. Mine has been pretty good, at least I can't tell that its bad?
I won't lie, I had the same reservations that you did leasing a "base" TLX. Especially without things like Nav, Leather Seats (this one bugged me allot but the "leatherette" is just fine), the nice stereo, I'll be honest, now, I don't really care. I did look getting into the tech but it was way more (~120 a month), which wasn't worth it.
Mitsu, did you try calling GSL for the ATS deal? It might be available, you just might have to get to the right guy.
Yup base awd is already loaded enough for my liking. I also thought I wanted Nav and the upgrade stereo but this more then enough. Leatherette seats you never know they aren't real leather.
And I haven't really had any major issue with transmission it's just not very good. It's laggy and it bumps up gears in stop and go traffic. Pretty sure it's the exact same ZF tranny that's in the jeep Cherokee. Apparently the 2017's have been improved.
My gas mileage has averaged 9.5L/100kms over last 6 months. I'd guess it was 8.5 in the summer months. That's mostly city driving in slow rush hour traffic. I use premium fuel only.
If you can wait till next fall I'm sure Acura will be giving away these tlx's again, considering the face lift model will be here by then. Me and Neil and my brother and his friend all bought in 2015 near the end of September. Exact same deal.
This isn't the first lease vs finance thread. There's one from a couple years back that rage2 did a big write up in, with lots of good marth in it. Definitely worth the read if anyone can find it.Quote:
Originally posted by dj_rice
I'm new to this lease vs finance vs buy car
Is there a Lease Vs Finance For Dummies Guide?
Marth has got to be my very favorite beyondism ever.
10/10 use.
Two of them PM'd me, I will have to see what they are offering. From Cadillac though I would only be interested in a ridiculous deal, simply because the cars don't do a lot for me, so the value would have to be on the price side not so much the ownership excitement side. I would be much more picky about price in that situation.Quote:
Originally posted by Kavy
Have you checked with the Cadillac dealers?
I was able to get a 16 ATS performance for the same price you listed the Honda for. Considering this is my work paid for car I am more than happy.
Haha whatever helps people! I have a feeling I will end up doing something different than planned, I often do, but maybe I will end up pulling a Mar in the end :rofl:Quote:
Originally posted by Neil4Speed
Mitsu, only you would start a thread which was meant for helping yourself but will probably end up being the reference for Lease vs Financing going forward.
I have the same car as 88CSX, with the 8 Speed. I know he has had some issues with his. Mine has been pretty good, at least I can't tell that its bad?
I won't lie, I had the same reservations that you did leasing a "base" TLX. Especially without things like Nav, Leather Seats (this one bugged me allot but the "leatherette" is just fine), the nice stereo, I'll be honest, now, I don't really care. I did look getting into the tech but it was way more (~120 a month), which wasn't worth it.
Mitsu, did you try calling GSL for the ATS deal? It might be available, you just might have to get to the right guy.
By 8 Speed does that mean you have the DCT? Or was the previous automatic 8 speed instead of 9 speed? I will have to drive one and see what I think of that transmission. I can say right now though that if it's too eager to get into gears 7-9 to save fuel economy when I'm doing 50km/h I probably won't like it. Having to floor the car and shift down 6 gears just to go from say 50-80km/h ruins the driving experience for me.
I did call GSL and ask about the ATS'. The reply I got was that due to all of the ridiculous deals in years past, the ATS residual is now so bad that they are no longer economic to lease. Knowing that they were $299/mo, I could not bring myself to pay much more than that out of principle alone for an ATS. It would bother me too much, especially since some of my friends are driving those $299 ATS' as a constant reminder :rofl: If I was driving the same thing for $400/mo, it would constantly make me angry haha. That being said if it's STILL the best deal at the end of the day, it has to be considered.
I am actually not picky at all about options in general, but my problem is that the few options I really do want are often split up into different, expensive packages. I want android car play (could settle for just bluetooth if the deal was good enough), a decent stereo, and blind spot monitoring. Beyond that I don't really care. I also much prefer google nav to vehicle nav so I wouldn't want that regardless. I am on my phone a lot in the car, changing music, navigation, etc. at stop lights so it would be really nice to have that integrated.
Yeah I am definitely cool with the fake leather - Mercedes uses it too. I like it a lot and I imagine it's even more durable. I'm actually a fan of cloth interiors, because they look the same 10 years later and don't get hot/cold with weather, but for a lease it doesn't matter because you don't have to care for or worry about the leather. I think the TLX is the only car I have looked at that has a separate subwoofer in the base stereo so I suspect I'd be fine with it. Other cars with just a couple lower door speakers just don't cut it as I listen to music 100% of the time I am in the car.Quote:
Originally posted by 88CRX
Yup base awd is already loaded enough for my liking. I also thought I wanted Nav and the upgrade stereo but this more then enough. Leatherette seats you never know they aren't real leather.
And I haven't really had any major issue with transmission it's just not very good. It's laggy and it bumps up gears in stop and go traffic. Pretty sure it's the exact same ZF tranny that's in the jeep Cherokee. Apparently the 2017's have been improved.
My gas mileage has averaged 9.5L/100kms over last 6 months. I'd guess it was 8.5 in the summer months. That's mostly city driving in slow rush hour traffic. I use premium fuel only.
If you can wait till next fall I'm sure Acura will be giving away these tlx's again, considering the face lift model will be here by then. Me and Neil and my brother and his friend all bought in 2015 near the end of September. Exact same deal.
Transmission worries me a bit but I will be test driving the new 9spd to see. If it's like the Cherokee's I can't bring myself to own something that bad, it would bother me too much despite an otherwise excellent car.
Why didn't you consider my Tiguan suggestion. :(
Sorry I thought I replied to everyone but I missed that!Quote:
Originally posted by R154
Why didn't you consider my Tiguan suggestion. :(
The problem with the Tiguan is it uses the old 2.0T with low torque. All the other cars get the 258lb/ft from that motor and the Tiguan is stuck at 207. Also reviews all seem to dislike that VW 6AT, and DSG isn't available. Payment calculator shows $412 before taxes and fees so you're looking at over $430 assuming fright & PDI are in there. If I end up going to VW I will look at it though, maybe it surprises me. It can't hurt.
Have any of you driven a new Chevy Cruze? What did you think about it? Probably not my first choice but it's pretty cheap to lease.
Actually, yes. A family member has a 1.4t
The engine is peppy. She gets ridiculous mileage. Quiet, comfortable. Infotainment system isn't bad. Seems to have decent fit and finish. A bit plasticy though.
No awd.
Fair enough on the tiguan. I test drove one and borrowed a coworkers for a day or so. I was shopping approximately the same segment for a work vehicle. Ended with the tiguan. Your criticism of the car are mostly accurate. The model we ended on came to a hair under 400 a month. Trend line with convenience package.
Thanks.
Yeah I don't know why VW paired the lower power motor with the Tiguan when it's heavier, and has to push AWD along with the less efficient 6AT (compared to DSG). It never seemed to get refreshed with the 258lb/ft version of the motor. If I were to end up with an SUV though, I would want a smaller one like that.
The Cruze looks pretty good, is available in a hatch back, and loaded to the nuts over $30K can be leased for $338/mo zero down. 0-60 is 7.6 seconds though which is almost a full second behind the new Civic and might feel slow, but it has good low torque which is what will matter for 90% of driving situations.
You need to drive these cars instead of just reading what the internet says.
I have driven the Golf and the Mazda3 GT.
The Golf has a great engine and trans combo with quick shifts but I found the suspension to be more geared towards comfort (a bit floaty) but overall the car was great. Very nice car for the price.
The Mazda3 GT is definitely the sportier car with a lively engine and sporty feel. It also has a premium interior for the price. it would definitely be more fun to drive then a B250 IMO.
With your budget, you are either going to have to wait until a deal comes up on a premium brand or just go with a cheaper brand. If it was me, I would go with the mazda.
I've driven almost all of these cars, just some of them not as recently as I'd like so I need a refresher. We have a GTI in the family as well, but it's not the new model. As I said earlier I am driving everything next week because the roads will be better :) . Would have gone this week but I wouldn't have got much out of the test drive, especially on the all seasons I'm sure all these cars have.
I won't entertain a Mazda because I will not buy another car with a N/A 4cyl. I have driven the current gen Mazda 3 and I was not a fan. A GT with the options I want leases out at $430/mo and is the only car here without a V6 or a Turbo. IMHO that is too much money for the least amount of car. On top of that I have heard nothing but bad things about every Mazda dealer in the city, and even with a lease I will have to deal with them at some point. All the closest competition has turbos for the same price (Civic, Golf/GTI) which lowers the Mazda's value proposition considerably for me.
The B250 is quite a bit faster than a Mazda3 GT (basically the same performance as a GTI around 6sec 0-60), and has the added fun of a DCT, but I have little doubt the Mazda would handle better. Also at our altitude the Mazda is losing an additional 15% of it's power or so, something the turbo cars are not affected by, bringing power down into the 150hp range.
Funny, my gf who drives the B250 90% of the time was just talking about how fun it was to drive in the snow. She did the SASC course before and is pretty comfortable figuring out the limits of the car, and with Hakka8's the limits are pretty up there this winter.
Anyways, from another thread, description of the B250 4Matic for those that haven't driven one before:
I will add that in the summers, even with all seasons, there's way too much traction to have any meaningful fun in it (at least for my driving style). It needs another 200-300hp to have it lose traction. That's pretty much a problem for me and every AWD car out there, including the 911 Turbo I owned years ago.Quote:
Originally posted by rage2
It's like a poorer handling more comfortable and roomier GTI. Dead even in a straight line. You do look like you're driving a mini-minivan tho.
It's also a bit of a drift machine in the winter with traction off. Pretty fun.
YMMV.
Okay that is all fine and dandy.. But how do you get one for 400 per month? I configured a base (without 4matic) and it is close to 500 per month. (24k per year, 0 down).Quote:
Originally posted by rage2
Funny, my gf who drives the B250 90% of the time was just talking about how fun it was to drive in the snow.
You don't. Mitsu's first post says that with current incentives it's $450/month. Ours (4matic with every option from 2015) with incentives, discounts, loyalty rate worked out to $500/month even.Quote:
Originally posted by mzdspd
Okay that is all fine and dandy.. But how do you get one for 400 per month? I configured a base (without 4matic) and it is close to 500 per month. (24k per year, 0 down).
I will mention that one trick that we do is that we go on a 39 month lease because we plan on replacing the vehicle every ~3 years anyways. MB has a no penalty early lease return (max 6 months, was 12 months) where if you lease/buy another MB vehicle, just drop the car off and lease ends early. So a 39 month lease rate (same interest rate) is effectively a 33 month lease, lowering your TCO even more. Back when it was 12 months, it was awesome. New car every 2 years at the much better 3 year rate/residuals, which explains why I was swapping some of my cars so often. There's other bullshit you can do to lower TCO, stretching service intervals slightly over so that you do one or 2 less services out of pocket when you return the lease. Typically, my lease returns will need the more expensive service a couple of months or a couple thousands of kms after my return. :rofl:
Only works if you're a MB fanboy.
The 9spd is the same ZF 9sp in the Jeep Cherokee. Not sure if it's programmed better in TLX tho.Quote:
Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Damn for $365/mo I'd be all over that (or a bit more for the tech). Do you remember what month they had that in?
Also is the current 9spd the same one everyone is complaining about? One thing I can't stand is a transmission with too many gears and shitty programming - had a couple rentals with them now (Jeep Cherokee) and it ruined the entire vehicle.
EDIT: nope, lots of bitching on harsh shifts
http://www.tlxforums.com/forum/compl...ission-24.html
The $365 deal was fall 2015. I don't think it has been repeated since.
http://forums.redflagdeals.com/2015-...r-hot-1818457/
The current B250 incentive is a $3570 discount and 0.9% leasing.
Freight & PDI is ~$2300 which is pretty high, and not included in any of the pricing you see online until you hit the checkbox on the lease page. Dealer money grab admin fee is $895 which is insane, but I would not expect to pay that (would likely be a deal-breaker in fact).
Prepaid maintenance is $18/mo and apparently gives you a 30% discount compared to lump-summing it.
I am not sure how much negotiating room there is on the B250's sale price but the sales rep from DT Mercedes seems to think they are extremely motivated in the month of February, and are hosting sales events to preempt the car show.
I need some Car Cost Canada reports I think to help me with my calculations.
The B250 gives you a lot of car for the money, but it's also one of the most expensive things I'm looking at in terms of a monthly payment.
Well that's too bad - it was quite possibly the worst transmission I have ever experienced in the Cherokee. Harsh shifts wouldn't bother me as much as horrid programming though. I cannot stand it when it's in 8th or 9th gear at all times unless it's floored.Quote:
Originally posted by Xtrema
The 9spd is the same ZF 9sp in the Jeep Cherokee. Not sure if it's programmed better in TLX tho.
EDIT: nope, lots of bitching on harsh shifts
http://www.tlxforums.com/forum/compl...ission-24.html
The $365 deal was fall 2015. I don't think it has been repeated since.
http://forums.redflagdeals.com/2015-...r-hot-1818457/
Here’s the 2 scenarios that play out every day with the transmission that annoy me.Quote:
Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Transmission worries me a bit but I will be test driving the new 9spd to see. If it's like the Cherokee's I can't bring myself to own something that bad, it would bother me too much despite an otherwise excellent car.
- As you accelerate (from a stop light or in stop and go rush hour traffic) if you can’t keep constant or increased throttle pressure (ie: you let up on the peddle) the shifts from first to second or second to third aren’t that smooth and you feel the car ‘bump’ as it shifts (like a less then ideal shift in a manual transmission car). If you’re giving it shit and pinning it or keep the acceleration constant all the shifts are silky smooth. I can replicate this issue almost all the time and its slightly worse in colder weather then the warmer months. Some people have had this issue improved or fixed by software updates at the dealership, my latest update had no effect on the issue.
-If your cruising along in slow moving rush hour traffic at say 30-50km/h and want to switch lanes into a fast moving lane (say 70-80 km/hour) you signal, change lanes, mash the gas peddle and then wait… and wait… and wait… and then it finally powers up after shifting down a couple gears and you get going. I should actually time it but it must be 2 full second (which feels like forever when a faster moving car is approaching you from behind) before you start accelerating.
I only drive in sport mode. Eco mode is terrible for power delivery and steering feedback. Normal is slightly improved but still lame. And sport plus mode is useless, never in the right gear, aggressive downshifts, crazy high RPM’s… its completely useless. Paddle shifters also suck and are supper laggy.
If/when you test drive one make sure you try and replicate these issues, I believe they’ve been improved in 2016’s and 2017’s but not 100% sure.