Newer cargo van or older camperized van?

[Milk Hauler]

So it is sounding like for older "gear heads", old iron, or at least pre 2000 works fine. For less mechanically capable, it's an event bet which way to go. I don't go for style, but certain things like a full ladder frame and robust brakes and axles I prefer. Never did like the unbody half tons... Even though I currently drive one... And a G20 is not a true 3/4 ton...

Yeah. My Dad always taught me that if ur not willing get greasy or have a greedy mechanic hose you, stay with newer vehicles under warranty. A few car makers now offer free maintenance as part of the sticker price. I hate debt more than sweaty shirts and greasy hands, so Ill keep fixing mibe till I cant find parts anymore.

YT has a wealth of info for any repairs. If u can do brakes, u can trouble shoot electronics. Just follow a flow chart. Its not nuclear physics. [emoji41]

 

[Milk Hauler]

Lookup EricThe Car Guy on YT. As a former shop owner he gives up alot insider secrets and tips. I've saved hundreds watching and learn.

 

[SternWake]

I'd fear a van with 125K miles on it. It seems the average full size van transmission lasts 130K miles with average maintenance. Work vans are also generally driven hard by employees who neither care about the van or fuel economy.

Then again camper vans with raised roofs and build in amenities carry so much more weight and have so much more wind resistance that they too are hard on the drivetrain.

Previous owner stank is also a factor, if you've got a sensitive sniffer.

 

[SoulRaven]

I'd fear a van with 125K miles on it.  It seems the average full size  van transmission lasts 130K miles with average maintenance.  Work vans are also generally driven hard by employees who neither care about the van or fuel economy.

That might be true on the newer stuff, but I've seen a lot of 60's-80's vans with 400k+ on them with the original engines & transmissions.

 

[Canine]

I almost pulled the trigger on a 94 e150 low top last week, $2200. It was very clean, almost original owner family, had 177K on it, but had the original tranny as well as all other original mechanicals. Only things they'd ever replaced were tires, brakes, battery and some fluids. Even shocks were original. Now that tells me I'd have a whole lot of maintenance to do. I don't want to be Goodyear Tire and Auto company's best customer...

I'm glad for that owner that he got great service out of it but I won't be the sucker who buys it.
If it had a rebuilt tranny maybe. Service life is about out on the rest, except for the 5.8 engine. I have no issue with 177K but not when it's almost all original!

 

[akrvbob]

I disagree, my experience has been any 1996 and later vehicle that was well maintained will give you 200,000 miles of basically trouble free service. I'd be delighted to buy one with 125,000 miles.
Bob

 

[highdesertranger]

Bob at 200k a vehicle should only be getting broken in. after all that's only 11 or 12 round trips to Alaska. when I went to AK I put on 18,500 miles on my old chevy in three and a half months. highdesertranger

 

[akrvbob]

At 10,000 miles a year it's 20 years and my guess is most of us drive less than that per year on average. We may have a few big mileage years, but usually we slow down to much less.

The first 2 years may be 25,000 miles but the next 5 may not add up to that.
Bob

 

[One Awesome Inch]

The problem with older campervans is that though the mileage might be low, they will cost you more as you get nickled and dimed to death with older parts failing. Along with that if an older vehicle has low miles it means its been sitting for extended periods. Gas and oil can act as a corrosive if it sits in a vehicle for 6 months + without use. Also, the rubber (seals etc) is going to breakdown over time so the older the vehicle the more likely to have problems in that way.

I went with a cago van with 213xxx kilometres and built it out myself. I figure I spent 300hrs on it and I still need to do the solar. However, it is VERY well insulated and overall quite comfortable. Best of all it has all the features/components and nothing I don't and because I built it myself I have a good idea how to fix it if needed.

Best of luck.

 

[Canine]

Just my opinion,but I'd take a newer high mileage vehicle over an old low mileage one any day.All else being equal,of course.

 

[Canine]

Boy we are a diverse group. Some new member posted about how he sees reverse elitism on this forum. Heck, we don't even agree about which van would be better, a 1972 Dodge 318 powered tradesman with the 3 speed Torqueflight and 400K or a 2010 GMC 3500 with a 6.0 and a 6 speed tranny!

I like the fact that there is old iron as well as the newer technology present here. Allows for lots of sound mechanical knowledge to be passed back and forth. Some unsound too!

I'm driving what I'm driving out of sheer necessity, vs all the scientific or engineering comparisons. Yes it's TBI fuel injection and pre OBD2, and it doesn't have a very electronic tranny. There's pluses to all of that but it is still going on 22 years old and is aging. If I found the keys for a 2010 I'd take it just to move up in age and tech. But since that isn't likely and the budget rules, it's sub $3000 vans for me. That limits me to an 80's or 90's with close to 200K, no matter what I'd like. With vehicles it's kind of a crap shoot anyway. You try to weed out the obvious and then hope it lasts...

Every groan and rattle I hear going down the road reminds me that age takes its toll (and that's just my body, I'm sure it doesn't help the van either)!

Anyway, in Colorado now, maybe I'll find someone who is in love with a near classic 94 Chev mid top and wants to get rid of his 2012 e250, no "soul" plain white van, straight across...


Thanks for giving the OP (and me) good thoughts on wether or not he should go newer or older, it's been entertaining reading!

 

[Milk Hauler]

I will never spend more than $3000 for any vehicle. I let other people take the financial beating in depreciation and maintenance. If you find and older vehicle with a box of service records, than that's the way to go. As long as the replacement parts were oem or better, then mechanically you have a newer vehicle. Most of the auto mfgs still support thier older models. Now cosmetics? Ur S.O.L!

Newer vehicles run longer between services, but are less serviceable than older cars. Cars and trucks now a days are considered "throw away." Why pay $30+K for a vehicle and junk it when the transmission failed? Any reputable shop can build a "better than new" transmission for a fraction of then cost of a replacement vehicle. Given the tools I can fix anything on my older vehicles. Electronic gremlins are a challenge, but there are only so many variables.

 

[Canine]

Great thought above. Case in point: a family member just bought a 1998 Honda CRV with 160K from the original retired owner. Every maintenance record was logged and receipt kept. The guy didn't go overboard but when the Honda service schedule said it was time for an "A", "B" or "C" level service, he did it. Now yes there were a few door dings and the original windshield was pretty sand pitted but the relative spent a total of $1,200 on a reacement windshield, 2 new reman headlight lenses, 4 tires and got a great little 4 banger AWD for $3,100 total cost.

Relative #2 just bought a brand new 2015 F150 FX4 pickup with the new 2.7 Eco boost engine and paid $32,400 out the door. Both will tell you they got a deal and both really like the vehicles. One is 10X the other and yes they are apples vs oranges yet both are transportation. So who was "smarter"? Hard to say. I know that several Ford employees were glad that relative #2 kept them working and the local mechanic will be glad that relative #1 bought used, since the local mechanic likely won't see the pickup till its out of warranty. Each "side" is happy.