Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Pain Point?
People started to grumble at $2 per gallon that gas guzzlers were doomed.
Then it was $3.
Now they're talking about $4 gas as the tipping point where people start to dump low mileage vehicles for more efficient choices.
Seems like we have a moving target.
Will we ever reach a Pain Point and see people dumping larger vehicles for more economical rides?
Then it was $3.
Now they're talking about $4 gas as the tipping point where people start to dump low mileage vehicles for more efficient choices.
Seems like we have a moving target.
Will we ever reach a Pain Point and see people dumping larger vehicles for more economical rides?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I think it's been tipped as you say but those that have such vehicles are keeping them for the times that they are needed but picking up additional vehicles for everyday use. Sales of new BOF SUVs are down everywhere from 10-30%.
A lot of these vehicles may disappear as the time comes to renew them.
Just a casual observation
Europeans routinely pay more for gas than Americans do.
They still sell a fair number of big cars, and SUV sales are rising there.
They also sell alot of small cars too, so maybe the tipping point is $5-6.00/gal which has been the traditional European price point.
$2 to $3 is only a 50% jump
$3 to $4 is only 33%
So while each level is $1, the underlying increase in pressure can actually seem to be less to most folks.
I don't know if it could happen today, but if you were a driver back then , you remember the pain on sitting in line on you odd or even number day.
If I was driving as much as you I would probably have a Jetta TDI. For me $5 per gallon gas and 15 MPG is not even a factor in my budget. My water bill is higher than my gas bill each month. We will run out of water before we run out of fossil fuel. I am going to ride in comfort. I don't plan on leaving a fortune to my children. If they get a $1000 when I die it will be more than I ever inherited.
I end up parking the 4x4 and using a 3.8 L car that needs 3.1 gallons. The car was purchased for $1k more than a year's gas use of the truck. That was about $15000 less than the cost of a new Mazda3 would have been with tax and interest. I got 90% of the efficiency difference without the huge outlay. With a car that uses 3.1 gallons instead of one that uses 2.8 gallons a day to go to work, what price change in gas will drive me to PAIN? The savings that 40 mpg offers comes with other discomforts. The savings from an i4 over an efficient V6 is barely more than a dollar a day at $2.75 a gallon gas. With sales tax of $1100 for any new car, that's almost 1100 days just to recoup the sales tax. I know keeping a 4x4 around for weekend errands is costly but I kissed that money bye when I bought it. What I could recoup by selling or trading it is barely over half of what I bought it for. The majority of that loss has already happened.
The pain was answered with the jump from 16 mpg to 29 or 30. That was from V8 to V6. The pain from 30 to 40 is only a 33% reduction in fuel cost. After the 100% from '03 to '07, getting back 33% of that with the convenience of a 40 mpg car doesn't seem so improtant. There in no room in the back seat of any 35 or 40 mpg car.
Back in April, I borrowed my uncle's 2003 Corolla to take a trip up to Carlisle, PA and back. I averaged 37.4 mpg in basically pure highway driving. Now I was raised on big cars and pickup trucks, so I may be a bit biased, but I found that Corolla to be a cramped, uncomfortable, rough-riding, jittery, underpowered little thing. Short of some hybrids and maybe a Diesel Jetta or two, I doubt there are very many vehicles that I'd be able to get 40 mpg out of. So by my reasoning, 40 mpg is a mythical, unreasonable number to start with. And even some of these cars that people are claiming 40 mpg with, that's not automatically a given that I, personally, would be able to attain the same mpg with my type of driving.
FWIW, I just came back from a similar trip in my 2000 Intrepid, and got roughly 30.7 mpg off that tank of gas. That trip ended up being about 281 miles. I paid $2.679 for gas. I figure that the Intrepid cost me about $4.34 more than the Corolla would have on that trip. That $4.34 spent was well worth the improved comfort, ride, handling, performance, quiet, stretch-out room, etc.
I am curious though, to see what the "tipping point" truly is with gas prices. I'm somewhat insulated, as my commute to work is only about 3 1/2 miles, and even with all other driving I probably only do maybe 6,000 miles per year. Back in 2005 when prices started shooting up, I did make it a point to start cutting out unneccesary trips and such. And when the Intrepid finally bites the dust, it'll most likely get replaced by something more fuel efficient. But that's mainly because fuel-efficient cars have gotten better and more comfortable in recent years. I could probably be happy with an Altima 4-cyl, rated at 26/34, or even a Civic with the CVT, rated at 30/40, both of which would give me a savings over my Intrepid's 20/29. But if we were still in an era where small cars were of, say, 1976 Accord or Pinto quality, you wouldn't be prying my hands off the steering wheel of a Caprice or LeMans anytime soon!
I went with a 27 mpg car when I started doing that long drive. Gas was $1.59 back then. That was $5.57 a day for round trip to work. That price is gone forever.
That same car is $9.30 a day for gas this week due to higher gas price. That's $3.73 more a day 3 1/2 years later. About a buck a year of increase in the per day cost.
For a 3 mile trip to work that would be measured in pennies per day.
My uncle used to drive a 1997 Silverado to work. His job was around 45 miles away. That truck would usually get around 18-19 mpg. He got transferred to a job that was around 65 miles away. The Silverado was getting up in miles, so he bought an '03 Corolla as sort of a sacrificial vehicle, to use to rack up miles and run into the ground commuting to work. I forget now how much gas was back in May of '02 when he bought it, but it was a pittance I'm sure, compared to today. He still has the truck, which he uses when he needs it, but does most of his driving in the car.
I've tried driving that car a few times, to save gas, but for the most part, the fuel savings isn't worth the pain and agony it inflicts on my body!
As for my Intrepid, the main reason I don't drive it is that I let one of my roommates borrow it. He works about 20 miles away, and in that commute the Trep would get around 25-26, whereas the truck would only get around 15. And being an old truck, I just wouldn't trust it to hold up with him pushing it that far every day.
Maybe they're trying to make, I mean squeeze, hay while the sun is shining. For them.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I agree with the idea of people adapting to the pain point. Its a hard habit to break, and in most peoples mind, they have no choice but to pay for it and whine about those "evil oil companies"
Bush is now claiming a $168 billion federal budget defecit next year thanks to taxes on fuels rolling in.
Problem: The US uses too much oil.
Solution: Require automakers to make vehicles with better mileage.
So...if your goal is mileage...and we live in a capitalist society...raise gas taxes to put gasoline at $6/gal. Some thoughts:
1. Drives behavior that you only buy a car with bad mileage if you a. need it or b. want it.
2. E85 can be taxed less, if the desire is to push E85 (different discussion on whether that is right)
Haven't we learned what happens when automakers produce vehicles not driven by the consumer?
Congrats on the new house. Personally, I wouldn't move closer to work just to save on gasoline. I'd do it for quality-of-life issues, such as more free time, a house that suits me better, better neighborhood, convenience, etc. But it sounds like you're doing that anyway, and the shorter commute is just one of many benefits.
I moved closer to work about 4 years ago. Commute went down from about 14 miles each way to 3.5. It would usually take me abut 25 mins to get to work, and 30 to get home. Now, in a worst-case scenario, it might take 10 mins to get to work, and 10 to get home. So even though my commute wasn't that bad to begin with, I ended up shaving off 105 miles of driving per week, not to mention picking up nearly three hours more of free time each week because of the shorter commute.
There are always trades to make. Some things that will be lost are having acreage, change of schools, and proximity to long time friends. Gains will be worthy and gas savings is only one piece. 47 miles can be dangerous after long work day making safety near the top of the list. 80 minutes is a lot of time per day. I looked at work as a 6 day week where one day was driving extra miles. Wear and tear on cars caused time, money, and energy spent maintaining. New lawn to mow will be 1/5 the size of my current one.
The new house is bigger, nicer and there is a convenience from being close to many places that are far away today. It took 3 years to decide on this and gas went from $1.60 to $3.15 during that time.
I had a reasonable drive to work for 11 years prior, and I remember it as an easier, less stressful time.
The one thing my wife and I did do was to buy fuel efficient vehicles. We didn't specifically go replace our cars with more fuel efficient ones, but instead did so as our previous cars needed replaced. My wife's daily driver, as well as mine both average 30 mpg for our commutes. What's interesting is that my wife has an '08 Mitsubushi Lancer, and I have an '02 Hyundai Elantra. Both of these cars seem to be as large as the 89 Honda Accord my father-in-law use to own back when we were dating - although I have never looked up interior specs to compare. I am 6'-0", and my wife is 5'-6", and both of these cars are comfortable drivers for us.
A couple of years ago, we decided we wanted an SUV as a 3rd vehicle for traveling, and hauling our dogs, so we bought a 4 cylinder SUV that we put about 5,000 miles a year on. Even with the SUV, we get mid 20's around town, and high 20's on the hwy - and it's an automatic and 4wd.
The auto industry has hit its own pain point now and has to change as well.
Even though gas prices are plummeting at the moment, have you permanently changed habits or not?
Now that it's cheap again, I've noticed that a lot of people seem to be driving faster again. I wonder if people are going to start dumping their small cars and going back to bigger vehicles? If there ends up being a glut of small, economical cars on the market, prices might drop, and it might be a good time to snatch one up, in preparation for the next time prices rise.
1-2 years ago, I had thought about what kind of car I would get, when my 2000 Intrepid finally kicks the bucket. I was thinking of something like a V-6 Charger, possibly an Altima V-6, or maybe a Saturn Aura with the 3.5. And I have to admit, when the Pontiac G8 first came out, I was tempted. But earlier this year, gas was "only" around $3.25 per gallon...once it hit $4, the G8 sort of slipped my mind!
Back in 2007, I tried driving my uncle's '03 Corolla a few times, to see if I could tolerate something that small. I couldn't...at least, not that particular car, but that's not to say that the same would hold true for ALL small cars.
Anyway, next time I need to buy a new car, it would probably be a 4-cyl Aura/Malibu or Altima. It just depends on my financial situation. I don't really drive that much anymore, maybe 5-6,000 miles per year, so while fuel economy is still a concern to me, it's not as big of a concern as it would be to someone who does a lot of driving.
One big area where high fuel prices made me change, though, was in the home. Once home heating oil prices hit $5+ per gallon this summer, I broke down and made the decision to switch to a heat pump. Now that heating oil is down to around $3.00/gallon, it might take a long time to recoup my investment. But, at least I'll have central air conditioning now. And whole-house heat, as the old oil furnace didn't have vents upstairs...just whatever heat rose up through the stairwell. And I also got some electrical upgrades in the process, as it's an old house and some of the old wiring and the circuit breaker weren't adequate. So overall I'm satisfied. Plus, I know fuel prices aren't going to stay low forever!
I'd say I see some "happy days are here again" types that are blasting around, but I think there's a lot less "racing to the next traffic going on.
Hope we avoid euphoria!
Point is, I think the fuel economy choices we have now suck. Everybody goes around saying "Wow! This one makes 30 mpg, that's excellent!". To them I say, no it's not, it's barely above mediocre. And the real sickening thing is all these carmaker ads playing now talking about their highway EPA ratings, which are not only low but also do not represent the mileage people will really get in their regular driving.
So my point is, will the automakers learn their lesson properly this time and focus on fuel frugality from now on when they design new models, or will this be 1980 all over again? Because my choices in truly fuel efficient cars right now from ALL automakers are almost zero. It's 2008, the new century, let's get with it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
In that case your Intrepid should serve your needs for a long time. That's unless you get tired of it, but it's my impression that, like me, you like to keep your cars until the wheels fall off. Well, okay, maybe not that long for your daily driver, but quite long, nevertheless.
Sure, it's nice to have a new car, but in a way it's kind of a luxury to drive something that doesn't owe you anything.
AMEN!
I owned a string of 4 Nissan Sentras, an '81, '87, '91, '96, and now an '07 Versa and the mileage has just evaporated over time. All of them were 5 speed manuals. The '81 got me 48-50mpg combined and 54-55 highway. By the time the '96 came around, I was down to 36-38 mixed and 42-44 highway. My 6 speed Versa being heavier was getting me 32-34 mixed and 35-36 highway until ethanol rolled into town and those numbers have dropped by about 10%.
Is there ANY reason we can't see those kind of numbers out of normal cars anymore?
I can think of a bunch of reasons. Weight, power, size, safety. A Versa weighs about 2700 pounds. Just to put it in perspective, the base weight of a 1968 Dodge Dart hardtop is 2715 pounds. And that's with a 475 lb lump of a slant six engine, and the extra bracing to make up for the lack of a B-pillar!
In 1981 standards, 2700 lb would put you heavier than a Citation or K-car, maybe just below a Ford Fairmont, or about what an '82 Celebrity would start at. And I doubt if any of those were getting 35-36 mpg on the highway except in extreme circumstances.
Your Versa would also be safer than any of them, with airbags, better side impact protection, more controlled crumple zones, etc. As for size, the 102.4" wheelbase puts it above the K-cars (100.3"), and not that far below the Citation (104.9) or Fairmont (105.6). At 66.7", it's around the same width as most of them, and what it lacks in length, it more than makes up in height.
Speaking of height, I wonder if that might take its toll on fuel efficiency at highway speeds. At 60.4" tall, it's starting to blur the line between car and minivan! I'm sure it has a very low drag coefficient, but that height increases total frontal area, so I'm sure that has to be a drag.
How much hp does a 1.8 Versa have? 122? I'm sure it would blow away most cars from 1981. Now if you have something cheap and small enough from 1981, it's going to be loud and buzzy enough that you're going to feel like you're going fast, even if you're not. But your typical 2700 lb car from 1981 isn't going to have anywhere near the performance of a Versa. Maybe a Chevy Citation X-11 with the fuel-injected V-6, but then you're not going to be getting 35-36 mpg on the highway, no matter how gently you drive it.
Just out of curiosity, how are your driving habits on the highway? 35-36 does seem low. I was able to get 37.4 out of my uncle's '03 Corolla when I took it on a trip once. But the Corolla is a bit lighter, and not as tall as a Versa, so that might be enough to make a difference. I also drove it gently, staying around 55-60, maybe rarely getting up to 65-70, but always trying to accelerate as slow as safely possible.
If I had the choice for my commute car of car A that gets to 60 mph in 10 seconds and makes 45 mpg or car B that gets to 60 in 8 seconds and makes 36 mpg, I am going with car A without question.
But that's the problem with all these cars today, and their sucky fuel economy. They are all much heavier and much faster than they need to be. And BTW, the weight problem is tied in to the speed thing, because a car that can go faster needs chassis improvements and wheel and tire upsizing to handle the extra speed.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If I had the choice for my commute car of car A that gets to 60 mph in 10 seconds and makes 45 mpg or car B that gets to 60 in 8 seconds and makes 36 mpg, I am going with car A without question.
Point well taken, but compared to 1981, more power IS a good thing. Good Lord, some of those cars back in 1981 could take 20 seconds, sometimes more, to get from 0-60! More power IS good, up to a point.
And nowadays, more power isn't necessarily going to hurt your fuel economy, at least not like it did in the past. Cars today are more like turbos in that respect, where you get the power when you need it, but at the cost of fuel economy. But when driven more gently, you'll get the economy. Back in the old days, if you had a strong engine, you got bad fuel economy no matter how gently you drove it!
Power and the ability to go fast no doubt do add some weight to a car, but I'm still convinced that a lot of it is also because of increased rollover protection, better side impact protection, improved crumple zones, etc. And then there's insulation, which can add hundreds of pounds to a car. I'm sure modern cars have more of it in them than older ones did, in order to make them quieter.
FWIW, it probably only takes 20-30 hp to move a small car along at a steady 60 mph anyway, so any modern engine is only using a fraction of its available power to do that. Therefore, I don't think making the engines smaller and weaker is going to help very much with fuel economy. Although it will irritate people when they actually NEED that power, such as for merging, passing, etc., or when they load up the car.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
There's no way they shouldn't be able to produce a car now that gets that kind of mileage. Yes, the cars have gotten bigger and heavier but the technology has advanced.
Do I like a car with a lot of zip? Sure, but not all of them have to have that.
I agree 100%. What has happened to our perception of what "good mileage" is? Heck, my 1966 Chrylser Newport with the 383 V8 was getting 19mpg when it had 220,000 miles on it.
Of course the real slug of my various cars was that 69 Volvo 142. If it wrere any slower it would have been going backwards.
1.6 liter was the only size engine available for the 87
That body style was similar to my 81.
Once we got to 1991 there were 3 engine choices, 1.4, 1.6, and 2.0 liter. I had the 1.6 so that explains why I didn't notice much difference. I liked the B13 body style the best of all my Sentras. This photo was just after someone stopped short for a deer in front of my wife:)
See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com
I briefly had a 1967 Chrysler Newport hardtop coupe with a 383-2bbl, but didn't have it long enough to track the mileage. 19 mpg sounds really good for something that size, though. My '67 Catalina convertible, with its 400-4bbl, could get about 17-18 mpg if I kept my foot out of it.
Maybe I should've held onto that Chrysler? I got rid of it back in 1999, around the same time that I got my Intrepid.
Folks couldn't dump their SUV's fast enough, and cars like the Civic, which you could get for around invoice in the spring, suddenly became as scarce as hen's teeth (with an increased transaction price to match). Public transportation and carpooling became more popular.
I was lucky in that I started a new job with my company that allowed me to work from home .. now, instead of commuting 21 miles each way to work every day, I go into the office once every 2 weeks.
Now that prices are hovering around $1.75 / gallon (national average - I paid $146.9 for gas earlier today), will folks go back to their SUV's and pickup trucks? Perhaps, but in much smaller numbers, I should think. I don't think you'll see folks buying a large SUV or full-sized truck unless there is a real need for it (large family, need to tow).
A co-worker of my wife used to drive an '01 (or so) Chevy Tahoe. Over the summer, she and her husband bought a used Toyota Corolla (mid 90's, I think) and put in a reconditioned engine. I think they spent around $1000 to get it up and running. She drove it back and forth to work most of the fall. When I went to my wife's work last week, I noticed that she was back driving the Tahoe. Now, this could be due to the poor weather we've been having in Colorado lately, but it could also be that she is just more comfortable driving the Tahoe.
andre, I second your comments about the cramped interior of the Corolla. Some friends of ours have an '06, and I drove it once. I'm only 5'11", and I found myself uncomfortable behind the wheel. More so than I did in our '03 Focus or my daughter's '06 ION - both of those cars were reasonably comfortable for me to drive.
pf, I owned a '91 Sentra - I think they only came with the 1.6L and 110HP, unless you got the SE-R, which came with the "hot" 2L and 140HP. I don't specifically remember the kind of mileage I used to get with it, but it was the car that took me from CA to CO when I moved there in '93.
But the pain point has changed me I believe. I no longer need at least 150 HP no matter how small the car. I love my Tahoe and use it as a SUV should be used, towing and hauling. I don't love my 4 banger but I like the mileage it gets and plan on keeping it till the wheels fall off. The only thing that will get me into a new small car is if they make one that gets the kind of mileage of an Insight for the price of a Aveo, or maybe I could stretch it to the price of a focus. Other than that I moved to a smaller place and don't have to commute. From most of the people I talk to most people have changed how they drive even if not as many changed what they drive as some had hoped.
(pun intended, given the model of car I drive for my commute, which by the way is not nearly as slow as most cars I drove in the 80s.....that was before I could afford a new car, or even a fast used car)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)