• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Yahoo Auto's horrible analysis on switching to fuel efficient car

M

mozirry

Senior member
http://biz.yahoo.com/brn/08050...l?.v=1&.pf=family-home

Yahoo business analysts suck (EDIT, looks like Yahoo actually posted this from some other site, same though, it's a horrible analysis)

Let's see here, they use a comparison of someone who owns a 2001 Expedition XLT with no loan to see what the real savings are if that person switches from the expedition to a fuel efficient vehicle.

The vehicle they chose to "switch"? A 2008 Escape Hybrid, which retails for around $28,000-$30,000.00 and gets 28-32 city/hwy


Obviously, if the Expedition owner can't afford gas, why the hell would they consider purchasing a brand new SUV Hybrid? Obviously the owner of the expedition would be considering trading in their vehicle or possibly purchasing a cheap USED car or inexpensive new alternative to save money on gas.


If you check out my scenario below, you can keep your gas guzzler, and by purchasing a fuel efficient car, IT ALMOST PAYS FOR ITSELF. Just imagine the savings if you dumped the inefficient vehicle entirely (this assumes you do not need the truck/SUV or only need it rarely)


-----------------------Here is where the real savings are by switching to a cheaper vehicle---

Previous Year:

Owned 2002 Chevy Silverado, drive around 1,200 miles per month. @ 14-20 estimated city/hwy @ $2.50 gallon
Gas cost = $214-$150 per month
Insurance cost = $900 per year
County tax/registration= $100 per year

Total = $1,214.00 per month in ownership of 1 vehicles.

------------------

This year

Owned 2002 Chevy Silverado, drive estimated ZERO miles per month, only drive when absolutely necessary.
Gas Cost = $0-$50 per month
Insurance cost = $450 (Dropped due to nature of driving habit per insurance, dropped deductable)
County tax/registaration = $100 per year


Purchased 1996 Saturn SL2 4cyl FREE, drive estimated 1,200 miles per month @ 25 city - 30 hwy
1 time title fee = $25.00
Gas = $120-$100 per month
Insurance cost = $500 (Just medical pmts, liability, NO DEDUCTABLE, car is only worth $500 private party esitmated)
County tax / registration = $50 per year

Total = $1,295.00 spent per year for ownership of 2 vehicles


 
maybe they're looking at (more) fuel efficient vehicles, assuming the person is looking for a new vehicle with similar style/capabilities?

otherwise, a used car is always the best bet
 
What kind of mileage were you getting out the forester, Jumpem? I thought that it got about as good a mileage as you could expect out of a small SUV. (Although its really more of a wagon pretending to be an SUV).

I'm think of buying one of those when we start a family.
 
If you don't need AWD/4WD, then a small SUV doesn't make a whole lot of sense compared to something like a Mazda3 Hatch or Honda Fit. The Fit/Mazda3 will get better fuel economy, offer comparable interior space, better handling/braking, and probably cheaper insurance to boot.
 
Originally posted by: PingSpike
What kind of mileage were you getting out the forester, Jumpem? I thought that it got about as good a mileage as you could expect out of a small SUV. (Although its really more of a wagon pretending to be an SUV).

I'm think of buying one of those when we start a family.
Click to expand...

We had the XT (turbo + premium gas) and averaged 21mpg. The regular engine'd models get around 26mpg.
 
If people are always so damn bent up on saving gas, get an early 90's civic hatchback. Those things get over 40mpg and im sure you could pick one up for cheap.
 
Regardless the comparison doesn't show that the Escape is half the size of the Expedition, with no towing capacity what so ever. YES we get the point, singles and lone couples with no children can use this stuff. But it doesn't work for families with 4 teenagers that have to actually fit in the back of the darn things.
 
Originally posted by: Jumpem
I traded in a Forester XT for a Fit. I am saving $100 on the car payment, and $200 on gas monthly.
Click to expand...



I'm curious ... why did you go for the Fit instead of the Civic? The difference in invoice on the Fit Sport vice the Civic LX is less than $1,000, the Civic is larger, more refined, has a huge trunk, has more power and gets the same gas mileage.
 
Originally posted by: dud
I'm curious ... why did you go for the Fit instead of the Civic? The difference in invoice on the Fit Sport vice the Civic LX is less than $1,000, the Civic is larger, more refined, has a huge trunk, has more power and gets the same gas mileage.
Click to expand...

Well first, we would have looked the Civic EX, which is $3k more. The lower level Civics have steel wheels with hubcaps, and I won't buy a car with steelies. And second the Civic has a trunk. We wanted to keep a car with a hatch.
 
Originally posted by: Jumpem
Originally posted by: dud
I'm curious ... why did you go for the Fit instead of the Civic? The difference in invoice on the Fit Sport vice the Civic LX is less than $1,000, the Civic is larger, more refined, has a huge trunk, has more power and gets the same gas mileage.
Click to expand...

Well first, we would have looked the Civic EX, which is $3k more. The lower level Civics have steel wheels with hubcaps, and I won't buy a car with steelies. And second the Civic has a trunk. We wanted to keep a car with a hatch.
Click to expand...

I don't even think the base Civic (2008) has air conditioning. Seriously =[

I might be wrong though
 
I've recently been going over all the numbers and all the options of switching vehicles, and the simple math does show that switching to a fuel efficient vehicle is not even close to being financially beneficial.

I currently have a '98 Dodge Dakota in very good mechanical condition, averages 17mpg, 87k miles.

To break even on cost within 5 years of ownership, I need to find a car ~27mpg, good mechanical condition, for about $5k. The only vehicles in this range are 10+ years old, or 150+k miles, both of which I would seriously question their mechanical condition. Yes I currently have a 10 year old vehicle, but it's already gone through all the normal repairs associated with the vehicle. I was even checking out the Toyota Prius, and even that vehicle it would take me 12 years to recoup the purchase price from gas $$ saved!


The sad part of it all, fuel efficiency was higher in the 80's than it is in this new millennium. 🙁 U.S. cars, European cars, even Japanese cars (but mostly U.S. cars). I was shocked to see this while looking stuff up recently. That there was a decent range of cheap vehicles in the 80's that averaged in the mid 30's! Not talking average amongst the whole range of vehicles, I'm saying like a late 80's Ford Escort averaged 35mpg, an '08 Ford Focus averages 30mpg.
 
Originally posted by: mozirry
If you check out my scenario below, you can keep your gas guzzler, and by purchasing a fuel efficient car, IT ALMOST PAYS FOR ITSELF. Just imagine the savings if you dumped the inefficient vehicle entirely (this assumes you do not need the truck/SUV or only need it rarely)


Purchased 1996 Saturn SL2 4cyl FREE, drive estimated 1,200 miles per month @ 25 city - 30 hwy
Click to expand...

Of course! Why didn't I think of this before? All I have to do is find a free vehicle and I'm set for life! And when this free vehicle breaks down within a year, no worries, I'll just move on to another free vehicle which is readily available!



Just for fun, I went and checked the classifieds here. Sure enough there is an ad in there for a 1995 Saturn 35mpg! I was looking for the word FREE, but couldn't find it, there was this typo that instead said $2,000. I should call them up tomorrow and check if they really meant "FREE".
 
I think for most families a lot could be done by replacing two living rooms on wheels with a family car and a commuter car. Relive the idea of the family car and realize that you don't need to take 6 people and a weekend's worth of camping gear to work, so a small car will work better 🙂
 
Originally posted by: cubby1223
I've recently been going over all the numbers and all the options of switching vehicles, and the simple math does show that switching to a fuel efficient vehicle is not even close to being financially beneficial.

I currently have a '98 Dodge Dakota in very good mechanical condition, averages 17mpg, 87k miles.

To break even on cost within 5 years of ownership, I need to find a car ~27mpg, good mechanical condition, for about $5k. The only vehicles in this range are 10+ years old, or 150+k miles, both of which I would seriously question their mechanical condition. Yes I currently have a 10 year old vehicle, but it's already gone through all the normal repairs associated with the vehicle. I was even checking out the Toyota Prius, and even that vehicle it would take me 12 years to recoup the purchase price from gas $$ saved!


The sad part of it all, fuel efficiency was higher in the 80's than it is in this new millennium. 🙁 U.S. cars, European cars, even Japanese cars (but mostly U.S. cars). I was shocked to see this while looking stuff up recently. That there was a decent range of cheap vehicles in the 80's that averaged in the mid 30's! Not talking average amongst the whole range of vehicles, I'm saying like a late 80's Ford Escort averaged 35mpg, an '08 Ford Focus averages 30mpg.
Click to expand...

Heh, the late 80s Ford Escort also run a ~100hp motor and drove like poo. But I get what you're saying, there should be better options. Ford is bringing the Fiesta over for '09 or '10, can't remember. '09 I think. That should help.
 
Originally posted by: cubby1223
The sad part of it all, fuel efficiency was higher in the 80's than it is in this new millennium. 🙁 U.S. cars, European cars, even Japanese cars (but mostly U.S. cars). I was shocked to see this while looking stuff up recently. That there was a decent range of cheap vehicles in the 80's that averaged in the mid 30's! Not talking average amongst the whole range of vehicles, I'm saying like a late 80's Ford Escort averaged 35mpg, an '08 Ford Focus averages 30mpg.
Click to expand...

Part of that (not all, I'm not disputing your main point) is probably changing the testing methods for the EPA. I'm not sure how accurate either method is, but I know the new ones use driving that is more aggressive and gets worse mileage out of the same vehicle.
 
toyota dealer is here advertising a 'free' corolla by parking your 15 mpg truck/suv in the garage (to drive on weekends) and leasing the 'rolla for $179 a month. they're not factoring in insurance, obviously.
 
Retarded analysis. Let's compare a car that I own versus buying a new car.... GASP! THE NEW CAR COSTS MORE MONEY! I really thought that the gas savings alone would make it cheaper to buy a new car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top