Research on aging and decision making reveals that older adults often rely on simple strategies when choosing among a set of alternatives, but less work has examined the use of simple strategies that are adaptive, namely classic decision-making heuristics. For example, younger adults rely on the availability of information from memory when judging the relative frequency of plane crashes versus car accidents. Yet, few published studies investigate how reliance on heuristics may differ across adulthood, with the exception of the sunk cost fallacy, where older adults are less susceptible to the bias than younger adults. In the current study, participants aged 20 to 90 years old made judgments that could be answered by relying on five different heuristics: anchoring, availability, recognition, representativeness, and sunk cost bias. We found no evidence of age-related differences in the use of the classic heuristics — younger and older adults employed anchoring, availability, recognition, and representativeness to equal degrees in order to make decisions. However, replicating past work, we found age-related differences in the sunk cost bias — older adults were more likely to avoid this fallacy compared to younger adults. We explain these different patterns by drawing on the distinctive roles stored knowledge and personal experience likely play across heuristics.