Unless I am missing something it doesn’t really serve any purpose. It seams it just leads new comers astray thinking it is a good metric for judging a deal. Why do we have it?
False sense of security, akin to the 1% rule. I kind of agree it should be discarded.
At least, perhaps a disclaimer indicating it’s for entertainment purposes only, and should not be used as gospel.
Anything based off MSRP is almost meaningless, because MSRP is basically just a meaningless number conjured out of thin air (“market research”) by the OEM.
Everyone would balk at paying $1,000 per month for a car but call it 0.X% of MSRP or Y LH score and suddenly a lot of people will think it’s a good deal
As a newbie, the first pitfall I encountered was the LH Score (because it’s on the calculator).
Next pitfall I fell into is the 1% rule. Because it’s in a front-page article.
New posters who cite one or both get corrected, and sometimes not too politely.
I agree. It just creates a false sense of good vs bad deal, just like the useless 1% rule.
I’d love to see this removed,bas well as the 1% article
I disagree. I think people who do this frequently get caught up in the details.
I think the LH score is a good rule of thumb whether something is a good vs bad deal. No its not perfect, manufacturers inflate MSRP but its better than nothing, which is effectively the alternative.
Effectively, you’re taking away all internal deal measuring sticks.
I still think that the best possible metric would be something based of the cost per mile to drive weighted by MSRP somehow. I’m just not mathematical enough to conjure up an effective and easy to understand formula that would properly display that information to people.
Newbie here - Isn’t it useful when comparing apples to apples, a X5 4.0 fully loaded with a LH score of 11 would be a better deal than a non-loaded one with a score of 8.5 with same mileage allowance? even if the non loaded one has lower payments. I get it ultimately you have other considerations such as demo, time at dealership etc. For consumers indicators such as time at dealership shouldn’t matter…
Also most unicorn deals have absurdly high LH scores, should mean something…
I agree with Bilalxnj, It’s a terrible tool for comparing leases in general, but a great tool for comparing leases on similar cars. And the more similar the cars, the better the tool.
I actually noticed that the other day. @Michael has since removed.
What is the measurement you are after? If someone finds a good 1 off deal on a Buick at 12 year LH score, that doesn’t mean a 9.8 is necessarily bad, yet people will think it is, because someone touted a 12.
That’s basically the only time it is useful
Not really though. There are some cars where an 8 is an unbelievably good deal and others where a 12 is a horrible deal.
I agree. There are just so many variations and exceptions in every deal, it makes it difficult to have a good rule of thumb.
I’ve said it before, $ per HP is the only true measure of a good lease!
The 1% rule should’ve been discarded a while ago.
The 1% rule will never die, cause it’s on the internet. And if it’s on the internet, it must be true.
I think we just have a difference of opinion. I think metrics are good to have even if they aren’t universal
People come in here and run their deal through the calculator and get a 6.5. It tells them that its a bad deal, and they need to work the numbers. They do some research and realize that others are getting a 9 for that model and work to get close, or realize that incentives have changed. Or they realize, hey, others are getting a 10 on car model X, maybe I should look at that.
I’m sure there may be instances as you describe, but I can’t recall any 12 that was a horrible deal. There may be 8s that are the best they can get for that model, but it is also telling you that the model doesn’t lease as well as others.
Its like any other metric. It isn’t going to tell the full story, but it tells you something.
Do you really need a “Score” to tell you that?