why replace, why not just rebuild and reuse. the roi on rebuild and reuse is much quicker than replacement with a new vehicle.
Well, I guess if that was true, Schneider and JB wouldn't be buying new trucks. They certainly have the resources to do rebuilds. Seems like something is missing from the equation. Perhaps overall rebuild costs exceed the cost of new somewhere in the chain. Perhaps with downtime, suspension, body, frame, air systems, metal fatigue, rubber parts and all the other parts that are going to wear.
I don't know. I suppose on a singular basis you could it. Don't know what the longevity would be. Then you might run into the the problem of some carriers not wanting that age of vehicle reguardless of condition.
I keep thinking of my 57 chevy I used to have and what it cost to rehab. While it was a head turner, it lacked fuel performance technology and compared to the newer vehicle chassis technology is was a beast to drive. It certainly lacked creature comforts and gadgets found in new vehicles.
Me personally, I go for new. The depreciation and warranty is worth it. Don't know if you can depreciate a rebuilt vehicle. Don't know the tax code on that. For me, the tax savings in depreciation puts me in a new one pretty close to the cost of rebuild. Donate the old vehicle after depreciation and get further tax benefits. In the end, I end up with new and warranty with very little out of pocket when it's all completed the cycle. So now ROI is greater than on a rebuild. Thank you mister tax man.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using EO Forums mobile app