You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1991 toyota celica gt 135000 miles on it or 1999 cougar v6 with 100,000 miles. which is
- Thread starter Vito
- Start date
Impossible to say.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.
Impossible to say.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.
kelly_f_1999
New member
type into search box
how to check used car
follow a check list and look for problem signs
type into search box
1991 toyota celica problems
1999 cougar problems
wil find whats been said about any car
knowing how to check a used car
never look at mileage but check shape you can find a low mileage car thats been drove at drag strip on weekends and be junk check shape look for problem signs
how to check used car
follow a check list and look for problem signs
type into search box
1991 toyota celica problems
1999 cougar problems
wil find whats been said about any car
knowing how to check a used car
never look at mileage but check shape you can find a low mileage car thats been drove at drag strip on weekends and be junk check shape look for problem signs
Impossible to say.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.
That's like saying "Who is healthier, a 40 year old, or a 45 year old?"
Without checking out the physical condition of both, down to every detail, there is no way to compare.
The 45 year old might be running marathons. The 40 year old might be near death.
Same with car miles. 135000 sounds like a lot, but how were the 100,000 miles of the Cougar gained? Was it maintained the whole time? Driven gently? Etc?
Nevermind that 135k miles on a 1991 car works out to 7500 miles a year. National average is around 12,000, so that's actually a LOW mileage car.
And without knowing the complete history of both cars, driving patterns of the owners, maintenance records, etc....there is absolutely no way to accurately compare the two.
As far as more reliable.....that's on YOU. The car doesn't maintain itself, repair itself, etc. So, either one will be reliable, as long as you take proper care of it.