By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
My dad's 09 Accord v6 is heading in for what looks like it's 3rd major engine issue. The low oil pressure light is coming on and the oil level is fine. It has already been torn apart twice for oil consumption and miss fire problems which began around 60k miles.
I read Honda is offering an 8 year unlimited mile warranty on several vehicles with the 3.5 V6 to cover oil consumption and miss fire issues.
Seat belts and shoulder harnesses have been standard in cars since about the 1960's. Today, 2013, we can still read accident/crash reports where the driver and/or passenger(s) were not wearing seat belts. We can still hear about people saying they do not want to wear seat belts either because they are uncomfortable OR that in event of a crash they want to get out of their car quickly and not be burned up in a fire. Would guess that none of these type of people are ardent NASCAR or F1 fans. They know better.
and definitely expect a number of people to start running on the alternate highways instead of the interstates.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
That's in todays Detroit News as well.
My brother has a newish F-150 and he avoided the EcoBoost; thought it was too new.
I'm not sure, but I don't think your description above is how this would be implemented.
Much easier to have the vehicle report its statistics to a central source, on a periodic basis, or if you want to go old-school, simply develop a system that relies on some averaging algorithm and place cameras everywhere (technology that already exists and is in use today to monitor speeding, red light running, etc.).
I know we don't always see eye-to-eye on car stuff, but we agree on that!
I'm a conservative guy, but I just don't worry about that kind of stuff. I figure I don't do anything bad enough to worry about.
In any state that has inspections, that information is already captured. In states without inspections, they could implement them and kill 2 birds with one stone - collect the mileage and get dangerous vehicles off the road.
The fuel tax should be an adequate method to pay for roads and highways. Somehow, a method is needed to tax electric or hybrid cars so they pay their fair share of road use.
Conservative guys should be advocating how to cut back on government, and government intrusion into our lives. Government putting mileage tracking devices with gps in our cars is unnecessary intrusion and can easily lead to misuse by someone in government. We have seen an agency of the government in the last few years targeting particular groups of individuals for extra scrutiny and harassment.
The irony here is that in many if the states not currently requiring annual vehicle inspections (I live in one of them, SC), requiring owners to get their car inspected would probably be viewed by many as more tyrannical than the actual data collection to determine miles driven.
At the heart of the matter isn't so much taxation by mile driven, but appropriate (read: fair) allocation of collected monies. I may put 25K miles/year on my vehicle, but how many miles in my state .vs. other states?
If such a system is implemented by state, we have the same issue... Should I pay state X taxes on miles driven in other states?
Its one of the big issues with the current federal tax on gasoline, in that states usually get more (less) than the tax collected in allocation of road funds.
Like most issues, a simple "mileage based" tax sounds easy enough, until one starts digging into it deeply.
How about something like this --- there are two mileage taxes - one federal, one state (just like gas taxes now). The federal tax goes into a fund to be shared across all states, while the state tax is used by the local DOT for road work.
The federal gas tax is currently 18.4 cents per gallon. With the average vehicle getting 25MPG, driving 15,000 miles a year results in a gas tax of about $110 for the year. Reversing the math, those 15,000 miles would have to be taxed at about .007 per mile to get the same $110.
I think you can have mileage trackers without GPS.
One advantage of the gas tax is that the monies are collected with each fuel purchase transaction. Can a mileage tax be collected as transparently?
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2024 Kia Sportage Hybrid SX Prestige
Basing it on the state your car is registered in makes the most sense. I would say the the vast majority does the vast majority of their miles in their home states. What driving is done out of state is offset by others coming into your state. In my job, I drive all over New England but live in MA. Someone else doing the same job may live in NH and cover the same area. My mileage in NH offsets his in MA.
Of course, all states would have to drop the gas tax and go to mileage taxes. It wouldn't be fair if I had a mileage tax in MA but paid gas taxes on NH fuel purchases.
There isn't a simple answer. If we keep gas taxes as they are and levy a separate "road tax" on electric cars, it would be considered unfair. If you implement a "mileage tax" and collect data via yearly inspections and via transponders, people find it intrusive.
IMHO, no.
They could do it under an honesty policy on sales/use tax on out of state purchases here in MA. On our tax returns we are asked to list those. I doubt very few people list that tv they bought in NH and brought home to MA. But if you don't list it you are technically guilty of tax evasion.
Fuel tax would seem to be the most efficient way to collect the tax and send it to government. Presumably, it is done by each operator of a gas/fuel station at certain periods. Weekly, monthly? Wonder if anybody knows. Anyway, it is paygo and drivers easily pay each time they buy fuel.
Fuel tax avoids government intrusion and possible snooping into our lives. With a gps tracking or odo reading by a government agency, how long before some politicians in States or DC say that there is a certain amount of max miles per year per vehicle that is normal and customary. Say 10,000. Anything beyond that is wasteful, harms the environment and must be taxed EXTRA.
Mileage tracking devices or manual odo readings require extra government systems, workers and inefficiencies. If the billing is annually, then car owners have to come up with a payment annually. More government (costs) to administer an accounting office to collect payments, go after people who are late in paying.
We could enact a law that will enact a penalty that if politicians mis-spend our tax dollars they will be put to a slow torturous death.
Either that, or they are just greedy corrupt politicians that'll benefit from it.
The gas tax is much simpler. It would also be much simpler to just take away "hybrid car" incentives and say "That's your gas tax, since you don't use much gas." Or, they could charge a yearly fee for registering annual licenses for hybrid/electric cars.
All much simpler than some ridiculous mileage based fee.
Why bother speeding then?
My '06 Audi A3 has Direct Injection and a Turbo and over 105,000 miles, and aside from doing 2 induction/fuel injector cleanings at about $150 a pop, it's not an issue.
I was out on the road yesterday, thinking how my grandfather drove on the same road 50 years ago, with the same speed limit.
Surely you don't mean to insinuate that Ford did Turbo on the cheap!
_________________________
People drive at a speed that is comfortable and safe to them, regardless of what the speed limit is. The speed limit might alter a small percentage of drivers that pay deep attention to them, thereby bringing the average speed of traffic down a tad (no one wants to be an extreme out-lier).
The Solomon curves shows that going slower than average speed gets very unsafe, and going much faster than average can start to get unsafe too.
I suppose people do it so they can legally use their cell phone? You shouldn't be on your cell phone while driving. If you are pulled over, you are free to do whatever safely.
It's funny that a gas tax, or compensating tax on non internal combustion vehicles, is still the most efficient system. I shudder to think of all the departments with 17 levels of management that would be created for GPS tracking issues.
Of course, they still need to make sure that is consistent across all models and lines, CR reported the S4 was not as reliable as other models.
I can see the cost of non-functional speedos going up drastically!
I think you will find that non-emergency use of breakdown lanes on controlled access highways (where tolls are found) is illegal in most states.
Again - I ask for real proof of toll booth ticket times being used to enforce speed limits and issue speeding violations.
Saying you can't recall or remember seems to be a workable defense, at least for Politicians.
Yep. When submitting a MA tax return, it says under the signature line that what you are submitting is the truth. If you lie on the question about out of state purchase brought into MA, you are committing tax evasion.
Unless of course the country can agree on a sound scientific engineering principle of setting speed limits at the 85th percentile, rather than an arbitrary slow speed limit used for maximizing revenues for the government and insurance companies.
I know many feel recalls aren't a quality issue, but like a minor problem, they usually involve an unscheduled visit to the dealer...particularly with today's extended service intervals.
How many Audi's were recalled though, didn't you argue that the quantity recalled should be weighed when considering recalls a problem?
All I know is Audi reimbursed me nearly $700 for the induction control module issues I had (and extended the warranty to 7 years or 120,000 miles). That went a long way towards my new order, along with the 1,000 dollar loyalty rebate.
Acura had a $1,500 conquest rebate, if that was doubled, it would have been more effective.
He provided an anecdotal story of someone surviving a horrific roll over accident because they were ejected from the vehicle. Had they been in the vehicle in the chair strapped by the seat belt, they surely would have been dead.
How he could reason this one type of accident in a million takes away the other 999,999 possibilities of an accident where seat belts could help is lost upon me.
He also is a motorcycle driver and thinks baseball cap style helmets are just as good as full face and head protection.
I think a recall on an "8" series Audi is a little different than a recall on a low-price, high-volume Cruze or Focus, though.
I remember when fewer than 5K Caddy SRX's were recalled for a fire hazard. A photo of one on fire--the same photo--was posted on the old GM forum by the same guy every bit of ten times--perhaps more. Just sayin'.
Pretty soon we'll all be driving V8 RWD coupes doing burnouts the whole way.
Maybe that's not so bad, LOL.
I wonder why they started not recommending cars with a Poor when it was Toyota who scored poorly. The Audi A4 got the same score earlier yet they didn't feel compelled to do that. Are they picking on Toyota again?
Remember when the Lexus GX skidded they put a "Do Not Buy" stamp on it and it made headline news. The Grand Cherokee "hopped and skidded sideways" in their tests and they gave Jeep another model year to revise the stability control program.
I think they were cutting Chrysler slack because they were in bankruptcy at the time.
Nonetheless, it does seem like they've had it out for Toyota.
Sure Lexus and Toyota score #1 and #2 but notice that's objective survey results. They have no choice but to report those.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECS_%28speed_camera%29
Someone always gets short shrift...
Regarding 2 other subjects others brought up...
Auto inspections: SC required annual auto inspections up until about 15 years ago, at which time the legislature changed the law, allowing the practice to expire. The inspections were done only at privately owned licensed auto repair locations, and the fee was regulated to something in the single-digit dollar range, so it was impossible to do the mandated checks/verifications and break even, much less make a profit. Predictably, no shops would do auto inspections (but a few would simply sell you the decal with no inspection). No SC politician was willing to lose votes by raising the fee to a decent amount... Therefore, no more inspections.
Out-of-state purchases reporting: SC also has a line item on the state income tax return where you are "supposed" to report out of state/Internet/tax free purchases, and remit the corresponding tax amount... Its voluntary, and from what I remember reading about it, extremely few SC citizens "make" any out of state/Internet/tax free purchases... As one might expect. That's why state department revenue agencies are pushing so hard for Internet sales tax reporting and collection.
Along those lines, here's an interesting post from our mechanic friend out in Pennsylvania.
I was bumped from behind about a year ago by a woman in an old Taurus who said, "I guess I should've had my brakes looked at since the brake light stays on". Duh!
I think it could be both a safety and emissions check, and be extended to be every 3 years rather than every other year.
It seems if the State is going to mandate something, then they are going to have to mandate businesses only charge a certain price (and tie it to inflation to keep it current).
You must mean this one where the guy survived due to the advanced safety features of the corvette.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e611e6fdf5
I'm with you on this. We've certainly had enough of that elsewhere recently. Even my brain-dead illustrious senator Feinstein is finally coming around.
I heard a good idea. Every year the budget is not balanced, Congress doesn't accrue that year's seniority toward their retirements.
lol