يستاهل إصلاح ولا أشتري جديد؟

Consumer sources split into two camps. Trade/dealer sources state a crisp arithmetic rule (50%, or 50/50 with an age condition). The two most credible consumer organisations — Consumer Reports and Which? — refuse a universal threshold and instead weigh age, original cost, depreciated value and the specific fault; CR only ever commits to per-category thresholds (fridge <10 years = repair; sub-$300 microwave: repair at 1-3 years, consider at 4-6). A third position holds that the 50% rule is unusable as written because 'replacement cost' is never defined (original price vs used equivalent vs new machine). A defensible calculator should therefore apply the 50/50 rule with the NEW-machine price as an explicit, stated denominator, show the age term separately, and disclose that CR and Which? would not endorse a single fixed cutoff.

• The 50% rule

  Repair only if the repair quote is less than half the cost of a new comparable unit; at or above 50%, replace. Stated plainly as "you don't want to spend over half of what it would take to replace it" and, by a working appliance dealer, as "if it costs the same as buying a new appliance, you might as well buy a new machine. But if it's half the price then I'd say fix it." No age condition is attached in this form.

  www.slashgear.com
• The 50/50 rule (age AND cost, both conditions)

  "If an appliance is more than 50% through its average lifespan AND the cost of the repair is more than 50% of the cost of a new, comparable model, then you should seriously consider replacing it." Both conditions must be met — a 3-year-old machine with an expensive fault still gets repaired under this framing.

  appliancerepairteodor.com
• Age brackets that bound the 50% rule

  Under 3 years old: repair, don't replace. 3-15 years: the 50% rule applies reliably for mid-range units. Over 15 years: "repair almost always wins; the rule fails in the replacement direction" — i.e. for a very old machine the arithmetic pushes you to replace when repairing the old one is still the cheaper real-world outcome.

  www.voltagehomeservice.com
• Consumer Reports — refrigerator age threshold

  "If your refrigerator is less than 10 years old, it's usually more economical to get it fixed." With caveats: budget top-freezer and side-by-side models approaching 10 years may be worth replacing even at modest repair cost, while a higher-priced French-door model at 9 years is typically still worth repairing. CR reports 62% of fridge repairs succeed on the first attempt, +25% after two or more.

  www.consumerreports.org
• Consumer Reports — microwave age/price threshold

  For a microwave costing $300 or less: "should be repaired if it's 1 to 3 years old and considered for repair if it's 4 to 6 years old" — implying replace beyond 6 years for cheap units. For higher-priced units CR directs you to its interactive tool rather than a rule. 86% of attempted microwave repairs succeeded.

  www.consumerreports.org
• Consumer Reports — explicit refusal of a universal rule (washing machines)

  CR gives NO single hard rule or age threshold for washers. It weighs machine age, original cost, repair estimate and current depreciated value together, and illustrates by example: "If you spent $650 on your washer seven years ago and you're doing seven loads per week (a lot of wear and tear), a new washer purchase makes sense. But if the machine is 3 years old and you spent $1,000 for it, a repair may be the better financial choice." This is a direct disagreement with the flat 50% rule.

  www.consumerreports.org
• Which? — case-by-case, get the quote first

  Which? (UK consumer association) deliberately publishes no percentage or age thresholds. Its guidance is to obtain a professional repair quote before deciding, and it flags specific faults where repair rarely pays: washing machine wobbly drums and PCB failures (labour £70+ plus parts), tumble dryer electrical faults (£100-£200 plus labour), and dishwasher electrical faults on "older or cheaper models".

  www.which.co.uk
• The critique: the 50% rule has no agreed denominator

  A documented objection worth carrying into any calculator. The rule is 'repair cost < 50% x threshold', but the threshold is undefined across sources — it may mean (a) the original purchase price of the broken machine, (b) the current replacement value of an equivalent USED machine, or (c) the cost of a NEW machine. These give very different answers. The author found "no official definition", notes Consumer Reports cites it only "as a rule of thumb", and ultimately rejects the rule in favour of a value-added analysis.

  artoftroubleshooting.com