Your point is you’d rather pass on the car; and I’m fine with that, it’s well within your right and most people do. My whole argument is that it’s used when someone isn’t passing on the car. It’s going to be purchased or leased. It’s just a matter of what makes more financial sense.
No idea how you came with my point being passing up on a car. I did not pass on my car but I would never buy it, period. Even with only $50-100/mo difference between purchase and lease. I did buy 2 Foresters, however, because it made more sense than leasing them even at 1%.
Your posts reference looking at one car, and passing on it for another.
My past half dozen cars have all fallen under, or at most 1.1.my definition of the 1% rule (total payments with taxes divided by months in lease)…they’ve all been 36/12 or 36/10. Normal cars that are readily available. No add ons in finance. Tier 1 credit.
Funny…for all those slamming the 1% rule, every time I look at a friends or clients lease, it is always way over 1%!!!
In most matters of money, the key isn’t getting the top 1% pricewise…it’s avoiding the bottom 70%…which I believe can be achieved by sticking with the 1% rule.
Seriously? lol
I gave you two examples when I was targeting only one car at a time. And showed two different outcomes that did not include some arbitrary variable, but included all other pertinent factors.
You keep bringing up your xc90, or your Subarus. You can’t bring up subjective personal choices that you made (eg. Under no circumstance would you purchase an xc90, you could afford to wait a few months on getting a Volvo until you got a payment that was acceptable to you)
@Electric said it. It’s all about being ahead of the curve against a purchase. It’s purely about the math, minimizing loss (due to depreciation), and comparing the lease of one vehicle against the purchase of the exact same vehicle.
1 Like
I also like the divide by the miles over the cost of the lease metric. But I drive a ton of miles so getting 36/12 or 36/15 for only 1-3% penalty in residual is a no brainer
Another factor on the 1% is eligibility for loyalty/competitive. Sometimes you have to first get into a lease program like BMW for those benefits to accrue to get a kicker on the 1% rule.
Hello,
Super basic question that will be solve fast I am sure.
When talking about the 1% rule, it is based on the original MSRP of the car, or the 1% should be based on the “Adjusted selling price” you already negotiated?
Thanks !!!
It’s been discussed extensively before, but short answer it’s off of the MSRP. This rule is bogus though because there are some cars that simply lease terrible above 1%, and other’s that lease phenomenally well under 1%. There’s much more to a lease than matching the first digits of a monthly payment, to the first digit of the MSRP.
1 Like
It’s not really a rule more as it is a guideline.
2 Likes
True…but very few car leases at 1% are terrible deals. It’s the exception, not the rule.
Please get familiar with the search function on this site. This topic has been beaten to death, so I’ve merged it into another topic which beat it to death.
The “1% rule” is stupid and lazy.
1 Like
I dunno. There are cases where it’s golden like most Texas leases.
Coincidence does not equal causality.
4 Likes
How about constantly repeated coincidences?
Like a broken clock?
1 Like
Working clock, more like.
Maybe a working clock set to the wrong time
Yes like moths to the flame. 1% rule 4evr!!!111
2 Likes
Is there a .04% rule? 
3 Likes