I invite you to come drive either of our trucks then. Depending on how a 50k mile or less vehicle was stored/kept, the interior isn't going to be in any better shape. Rubber bushings, gaskets, seals and such still rot & dry out from age just as they do from mileage. As I said, age presents it's own kind of wear.
You're right that some things will look or feel better in the lower mileage vehicle, if it was garage kept and such. I touched on that by saying, "..if the vehicle in question has high mileage but checks out overall, don't hesitate on snatching it up.." My wife's '92 fits that description. Bought it with 200k miles on it. Original driveline, doesn't burn oil, smoke, tick or knock. It leaks oil from the rear main, something I can live with and which will probably happen to a low mileage vehicle which starts to be driven. Throw some heat cycles & extended highway jogs on it and hedge your bets. The paint is shot, there are dents, bruises and other imperfections. But, we took into account what we wanted out of a vehicle that was intended to be a daily driver and sit outside 365 days/year. It's going to be subjected to parking lot dings already, no garage means it'll end up with worn out paint & everything that goes with it. So with that stuff in mind, you betcha we snatched it up for $1,000 rather than pay some ~$3,500 or more for a better looking truck which would still have to be gone through mechanically same as the one we bought.
My '88 Town Car? Bought that with 83k on it, I consider that low. Ended up needing new gaskets from intake up, front sway bar links/bushings, tires were dry rotted, rear air bags dry rotted, heater core went, A/C needed to be recharged and it needed two rear window motors too. Also needed new rubber brake hoses all over The initial purchase price was higher on that car, I paid for the shiny paint and immaculate interior.
We got the wife an '89 before I got mine. That actually inspired me to get my '88.. Anyway, was a FLA car, no rust whatsoever but faded paint, some bruises and a dead AOD trans. Interior was ~90% of what my '88 is, very presentable & perfect for a DD. Got that one for ~$800. We're not sure if it had '88k or 188k on it. Whateves, we had the trans rebuilt, replaced two rear window motors, flushed all fluids and put new tires on it. All of that cost us less than my '88 did to initially get it. It rode just as nice as my '88 did, yet the engine seemed smoother. That's all we had to do that aside from rotors/brakes/calipers/rubber brake hoses and pads up front for the three years she had that car.
Just a few stories of my experience, which have taught me lower mileage doesn't guarantee a better or more trouble free vehicle which costs more. The OP's experience here as well as others I've read over the years echo this. In the end, it depends what you want, what you're going to do with it and what you're willing to pay. I'm of the opinion old + low mileage isn't something one should get suckered into paying more for.
Yeah, it's strange. Too bad your dad sold that '92! But upkeep is what makes or breaks it. So if a vehicle is kept up on, mileage isn't anything to run away from but more of a thing to save a person money. My '88 Town Car still looks as nice as it did when I bought it some forty thousand miles less and seven or eight years ago.
That 92 had a lot of work done, but you’d never have known it. I turned 16 in 93 and I drove that hell out of that thing a lot. There was even an incident where we got it stuck in the mud. I did the back and forth flooring it until I got out. It blue smoked for about 5 minutes after that and quit. A couple years later with around 100k miles the crankshaft broke in half when my dad was driving home from work. I never told him about the blue smoke incident until a few years ago, and he still got really pissed.
