Residual values of trucks

mich800 wrote:

JALLEN4 wrote:
Most all leasing companies use the figures supplied by ALG in their ALG Leasing Guide. These figures are used by multi-billion dollar leasing institutions to lease in excess of a hundred-billion dollars of vehicles yearly. With the money involved, these prognosticators are far advanced from ESPN talking heads.

I think it reasonable to assume the numbers used are far more reliable and accurate than anecdotal experiences related on a public Forum.

That is funny. I was thinking maybe they were using the leasing arms residual values. But it is the other way around. I only leased two vehicles in my lifetime but in both cases the residual ended up being very close to the market value at lease turn in. If this is the case I would be comfortable using their figures. Thank you for the update.

By far, the majority of leasing in the U.S. is through the captive finance arms of the manufacturer...Chrysler Credit, Ford Motor Credit, Mercedes Credit, etc. These lenders, for the most part, base their residuals on ALG Guides. In some isolated cases they will use slightly higher residuals on certain models using manufacturer subsidies for competitive purposes.

I only know that when it came time to replace my totaled 2005 Ford F-250 with the (gasp!) 6.0 diesel, I had a devil of a time trying to find a replacement at a good price. It took me three months and a search across seven states until I found my 2008 Ford F-250. Even with an engine that has its share of problems, the 6.0 trucks were still fetching $20,000 retail. That would have made it worth half the purchase price new last October. I'm happy with my Fords, thank you. The only reason I don't have a Ford car is that they don't sell diesel cars in the U.S. So all of the other cars in my family fleet are Volkswagen Jetta TDIs.

No issues. Last year I upgraded the camper to a travel trailer. (We had a small fifth wheel before) and the 1500, while up to the task, performed below my standards. So I accidentally test drove a new 2500 with the 6.4 and there was no going back. When he offered so much for my trade I couldn't resist. It worked out to .18 a mile depreciation. I generally don't keep vehicles long. I don't like repairs or maintenance. So I trade often. I do oil changes and tire rotation. Brakes if needed.

jrp26789 wrote:
I just traded my 3 yr old ram in. I got 4000 less than I paid new.

I'm curious. Why only three years? Problems with it?

I generally keep mine longer.
'01 Ford F150 - 12 years, 240,000 miles (Reason: Wanted Ecoboost for towing)
'94 Chevy C1500 - 7 years, 172,000 miles (Reason: Too many transmissions)
'88 Chevy C1500 - 6 years, 150,000 miles (Reason: Wanted extended cab)

JALLEN4 wrote:
Most all leasing companies use the figures supplied by ALG in their ALG Leasing Guide. These figures are used by multi-billion dollar leasing institutions to lease in excess of a hundred-billion dollars of vehicles yearly. With the money involved, these prognosticators are far advanced from ESPN talking heads.

I think it reasonable to assume the numbers used are far more reliable and accurate than anecdotal experiences related on a public Forum.

That is funny. I was thinking maybe they were using the leasing arms residual values. But it is the other way around. I only leased two vehicles in my lifetime but in both cases the residual ended up being very close to the market value at lease turn in. If this is the case I would be comfortable using their figures. Thank you for the update.

blofgren wrote:
For 1/2 tons this may be true. But I can tell you that in this neck of the woods Ram with the Cummins diesel has the best resale value in the HD class. They are a very desirable truck that do not last long when listed.

Cummins and Duramax seem to be tops by far where I live, with the Cummins probably a bit higher. I have no idea on the lighter duty trucks or gas models.

JALLEN4 wrote:
Most all leasing companies use the figures supplied by ALG in their ALG Leasing Guide. These figures are used by multi-billion dollar leasing institutions to lease in excess of a hundred-billion dollars of vehicles yearly. With the money involved, these prognosticators are far advanced from ESPN talking heads.

I think it reasonable to assume the numbers used are far more reliable and accurate than anecdotal experiences related on a public Forum.

Exactly and thanks for helping me understand little of what ALG does,I posted manly about the differences between the trucks not any actual dollar amounts

Most all leasing companies use the figures supplied by ALG in their ALG Leasing Guide. These figures are used by multi-billion dollar leasing institutions to lease in excess of a hundred-billion dollars of vehicles yearly. With the money involved, these prognosticators are far advanced from ESPN talking heads.

I think it reasonable to assume the numbers used are far more reliable and accurate than anecdotal experiences related on a public Forum.

spud1957 wrote:
I'm sure nobody will pay MSRP for your truck new. I suspect these percentages are based on MSRPs.

I tried to figure this out also. Is the base on MSRP or actual average selling price.

The Nissan trucks are notoriously unreliable. (Not just my opinion - CR agrees.) I'd take a Toyota or Ford any day over one of those.