Hi,
I just bought a 95 Honda Accord with supposedly 76,250 miles
Here are the Car Fax mile reports:
GOOD NEWS! No major odometer problems were ever reported by a DMV
under the Truth-In-Mileage Act for this 1995 HONDA ACCORD LX/EX. If
you find that any of the following odometer problems were reported by
a DMV and not included in this report, CARFAX will buy this vehicle
back. You must register to activate this free guarantee!
Not Actual Mileage Title - issued by DMV when the owner discloses
mileage fraud or a broken odometer.
Exceeds Mechanical Limits Title - issued by DMV when the owner
discloses an
Odometer Rollback Check:
CARFAX found no odometer rollbacks for this 1995 HONDA ACCORD LX/EX
(1HGCD5534SA016427). Rollbacks reported in this section originate from
readings collected by a DMV or other verifiable source.

Mileage Consistency Check:
CARFAX found no inconsistent odometer readings in the mileage history
of this 1995 HONDA ACCORD LX/EX (1HGCD5534SA016427).

Date: Mileage:
10/04/1994 6
10/25/1995 10,000
10/09/1996 20,000
11/06/1997 32,000
10/27/1998 37,000
11/01/2004 75,236
Now here is the deal I found a shop that had this car in it I believe
for the Timing at 68,xxx miles in 2002 so that is only 7xxx miles to
the 11/01/2004.
Now my concern is I am looking at the analog odometer and the 075 but
numbers are just a tad off center line up just fine but the 236 is off
some as far as the lining.
How hard is to roll back the miles on the 95 Honda Accord 5 Speed.
The actual title says 75,236 and I know that that was not actually
inspected by the person that actually prepared the title it was the
owner who verbally told him. It does seem the mileage is consistent
but there is still that doubt that it is actuall miles. I do not know
what to look for on this car please any help would be awesome. Also
there is not really any wear on the interior.
Please how can I actually tell that this is actual miles or not.
Thank you

 

thistinks wrote:

> Date: Mileage:
> 10/04/1994 6
> 10/25/1995 10,000
> 10/09/1996 20,000
> 11/06/1997 32,000
> 10/27/1998 37,000
> 11/01/2004 75,236

I found it difficult to understand your post, but I graphed those data
points and they all line up very well. My wife and I drive our '02
every day (it's our only car) and we only put ~ 6800 / year on it.

Really, you're most concerned about the fraud being in the 68k-75k
range? That's not such a big deal *if* it was even rolled back... Does
it look like they put 50,000 miles on it in the last two years?

a

 

thistinks wrote:

> Date: Mileage:
> 10/04/1994 6
> 10/25/1995 10,000
> 10/09/1996 20,000
> 11/06/1997 32,000
> 10/27/1998 37,000
> 11/01/2004 75,236

I found it difficult to understand your post, but I graphed those data
points and they all line up very well. My wife and I drive our '02
every day (it's our only car) and we only put ~ 6800 / year on it.

Really, you're most concerned about the fraud being in the 68k-75k
range? That's not such a big deal *if* it was even rolled back... Does
it look like they put 50,000 miles on it in the last two years?

a

 

I have to agree, some cars sit for a long time. Usually after the car is
paid off and the owner buys a new car. I barely put on 1,500 miles last
year on my 91 Civic. Before that it sat in my driveway for almost a year.
Since gas prices have gone up, I'm driving it more. A full tank is a little
over $20, and I can remember when I was able to get a full tank for under
$10 when I first got it.

"a" <a2@a.ca> wrote in message news:Adcpd.206814$9b.57880@edtnps84...
> thistinks wrote:
>
> > Date: Mileage:
> > 10/04/1994 6
> > 10/25/1995 10,000
> > 10/09/1996 20,000
> > 11/06/1997 32,000
> > 10/27/1998 37,000
> > 11/01/2004 75,236
>
> I found it difficult to understand your post, but I graphed those data
> points and they all line up very well. My wife and I drive our '02
> every day (it's our only car) and we only put ~ 6800 / year on it.
>
> Really, you're most concerned about the fraud being in the 68k-75k
> range? That's not such a big deal *if* it was even rolled back... Does
> it look like they put 50,000 miles on it in the last two years?
>
> a

 

I have to agree, some cars sit for a long time. Usually after the car is
paid off and the owner buys a new car. I barely put on 1,500 miles last
year on my 91 Civic. Before that it sat in my driveway for almost a year.
Since gas prices have gone up, I'm driving it more. A full tank is a little
over $20, and I can remember when I was able to get a full tank for under
$10 when I first got it.

"a" <a2@a.ca> wrote in message news:Adcpd.206814$9b.57880@edtnps84...
> thistinks wrote:
>
> > Date: Mileage:
> > 10/04/1994 6
> > 10/25/1995 10,000
> > 10/09/1996 20,000
> > 11/06/1997 32,000
> > 10/27/1998 37,000
> > 11/01/2004 75,236
>
> I found it difficult to understand your post, but I graphed those data
> points and they all line up very well. My wife and I drive our '02
> every day (it's our only car) and we only put ~ 6800 / year on it.
>
> Really, you're most concerned about the fraud being in the 68k-75k
> range? That's not such a big deal *if* it was even rolled back... Does
> it look like they put 50,000 miles on it in the last two years?
>
> a